Loading...
2018-06-06Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting June 6, 2018. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of June 6, 2018, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald, Commissioner Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli and Commissioner Lisa Holland. Members Absent: Commissioner Gregory Wilson. Others Present: Chris Johnson, Andrea Pogue, Josh Beach and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland ___X___ Steven Yearsley _______Gregory Wilson ___X___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Jessica Perreault ___X___ Bill Cassinelli ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: All right. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Is that on? Okay. It didn't sound like it. At this time I would like to call to order the especially scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on June 6 and we will begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda McCarvel: All right. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda and we do have one change. Item 3-C will need to be vacated, so we can allow for proper process as the City Council needs to approve the MDA first before we have it on our Consent Agenda. So, that will be the only change. With that known can we get an adoption of the agenda? Holland: Madam Chair, I will make a motion that we adopt the Consent Agenda with the -- vacating Item C. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. Right? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 2 of 20 Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of May 17, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Village at Meridian Apartments (H-2018-0036) by Brighton Village, LLC Located at the SW Corner of N. Records Way and E. River Valley St. McCarvel: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we now have two items on the Consent Agenda. We have the approval of minutes of May 17th, 2018, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law for the Village at Meridian Apartments. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as -- Fitzgerald: As amended? McCarvel: As amended. Fitzgerald: So moved, Madam Chair. Perreault: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: So, at this time I would like to briefly explain the public hearing process for this evening. We will open each item individually and, then, start with the staff report. The staff will report their findings regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code with the staff's recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present -- hello. 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 to public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet and actually sign-up iPads in the back as you entered for anyone wishing to testify. Any person testifying will come forward and be allowed three minutes. If they are speaking for a larger group, like an HOA, and there is a show of hands to represent that group, they will be given up to ten minutes. After all the testimony has been heard the applicant will be given -- 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 will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council. Item 4: Action Items Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 3 of 20 A. Public Hearing for Keep Subdivision (H-2018-0043) by Jack L. Hammond Located at the SW Corner of E. Lake Hazel Rd. and S. Eagle Rd 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 60.55 Acres of Land (7.07 to R-8 and 53.47 to R-2) to the R-2 and R-8 Zoning Districts, and; 2. Request: A Preliminary Plat Consisting of 59 Single Family Residential Lots, and 10 Common Lots on Approximately 53.47 Acres in the Proposed R-2 and R-8 Zoning Districts McCarvel: So, at this time we would like to open the public hearing for Item H-2018- 0043, Keep Subdivision, and we will begin with the staff report. Beach: Good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. So, as you said, this is called Keep Subdivision. It's both for an annexation and zoning and for a preliminary plat. The site consists of approximately 60.55 acres of land, which is zoned RUT currently, located on the southwest corner of South Eagle and East Lake Hazel Roads. And to the north are single family residential properties in the Diamond Ridge Estates Subdivision, which is zoned RUT in Ada county and undeveloped residential properties zoned RUT also in Ada county. To the east is South Eagle Road and single family residential properties, also zoned RUT in Ada county. To the south is one single family residential property and undeveloped property, zoned RUT in Ada county. And to the west is in one single family residential property zoned RUT in Ada county. This is an annexation, so there is no current history with the city. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is low density residential. As I said the -- the applicant is requesting annexation and zoning. In this case the annexation boundary is a little bit larger than the plat, because we -- on arterial roads we annex in up to the mid point on both of the roads, just so that our boundaries match up and -- it's a long story. So, it's 60.55 acres, both of R-2 -- and the R-2 would be the -- the residential property and the LDS church would be zoned R-8, as churches are not allowed in the R-2 zoning designation. So, the request is for R-8 there. The applicant requests that the church, as I said, be zoned R-8. The church entered into a consent to annex agreement back in 2006 and with this annexation they are making good on their commitment to annex a parcel into the city once the property was contiguous with city limits. The applicant proposes to develop 59 new single family residential detached homes on a plat that is about 53.47 acres. So, 59 building lots, ten common lots on both R-2 and R-8. The gross density for the subdivision is approximately 1.1 dwelling unit per acre. Lots range in size from 22,120 square feet to over 77,000 square feet. An average of about 31,600. The development of the site is required to comply with the dimension standards listed in the UDC for both R-2 and R-8 zoning districts. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and found them to be in compliance. The plat is required to also comply with the block length standards listed in the UDC. Staff has reviewed the proposed plat and in order to ensure compliance with the UDC, the applicant in the staff report says shall provide an emergency access to East Lake Hazel. The plat before you this evening as Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 4 of 20 is revised by the applicant showing an emergency access, as well as a sewer easement out to Lake Hazel to provide emergency access for fire. So, they are complying with -- with the block length standards in the UDC, but also the UDC limits the length of a cul- de-sac. The original plat -- I don't have that here in a slide -- showed a full access road out to Lake Hazel Road. The highway district in their staff report did not allow the applicant to have access directly to Lake Hazel Road, so with that elimination our -- our UDC limits the length of a cul-de-sac to 450 feet. We have a condition in the staff report that the applicant comply with that standard. Don't know exactly how far, but it's approximately a thousand feet from the intersection here to the end of the cul-de-sac. So, it's about double what we would allow for the length of a cul-de-sac to be. There is no way, really, to get around that standard, even with an emergency access or a pathway. The code allows for the block face to -- that requirement to be mitigated by either a road connection or a pathway, but not the cul-de-sac standard. So, we have conditioned the applicant to comply with that. Access is proposed via Hazel Road. The applicant is proposing public roads throughout the development. The applicant's proposal for street sections does not appear to meet the requirements of the highway district, so the original street section shown here on the plat, with swales on the side -- I believe this is modified from what was originally approved. This looks like it would meet ACHD's standards. The original proposal was something that the highway district would not allow, which is why that was in the staff report. A 35 foot landscape buffer is required along Lake Hazel, being considered an entry way corridor, a 25 foot wide landscape buffer is required along Lake Hazel -- or excuse me -- along South Eagle. We have required that on the plat -- and just to correct what I said earlier, the LDS church, the -- the applicant went through a property boundary adjustment to -- they purchased the back half of the LDS Church's property and as part of -- as part of that they did a property boundary adjustment and that has not yet been finalized, so we have a condition in the staff report that says we either receive a final approval from the county showing that that property boundary adjustment has been finalized or that that lot be included in the subdivision. Moving forward with that, technically, we require a 25 foot landscape buffer along the LDS church, because it's being annexed in. I could show you an aerial photograph. We are not real concerned with either the width or the number of trees and vegetation there. The LDS church did a good job of vegetating their frontage. So, they are not real concerned there. As I said, the applicant is also providing -- as part of their open space we allow parkways to count towards open space. As I said, they are providing -- they are providing ten percent open space for the development. We have a section in the UDC that says if you're -- if your minimum lot size is over 16,000 square feet, which theirs is, you're only required to provide five percent open space. They are also providing parkways internally. The landscape plan does -- does a good job of showing a number of trees in parkways they are providing. There is a few slides here to look at with the landscape plan, but there -- there would be a parkway strip and, then, the sidewalk. Most of these trees would be installed, you know, once the homes were built, so there is no issues with construction. The plat has several pedestrian common lots that do not show the required landscaping. This is -- I don't believe I had enough time to put the revised landscape plan I received this afternoon from the applicant in the presentation here, but typically we require, you know, five feet of landscaping on either side of a pathway with trees -- one tree every 35 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 5 of 20 feet and a couple of the pathways didn't -- didn't reflect that. So, we will have to verify that their revised landscape plan meets that standard. Amenities for the subdivision, the applicant -- all development consisting of five acres or more are required to provide - - provide amenities, a minimum of one site amenity for the first five acres and, then, one for every additional 20 acres. With that the applicant would be required to provide four -- as I said, five percent open space -- an extra five percent counts as one. They are providing a gazebo, as well as bike storage, so they would be required to provide one additional site amenity for the subdivision. Sidewalks are proposed along all the public streets. The applicant proposes to construct detached sidewalks throughout the development and along both South Eagle and East Lake Hazel Roads. There is attached sidewalk that exists along the LDS church frontage. City staff is okay not replacing the existing sidewalk with -- with detached sidewalk. The applicant has also provided some conceptual building elevations for the development, which are here. Lastly, because some of the homes that will back up to East Lake Hazel or Eagle Roads, they will be highly visible, staff recommends that the rear or sides of those structures that face that particular road incorporate articulation through changes in material or color, modulation, and architectural elements. Those are things we will review with the individual building permits when they -- when they come through. We have received written testimony from Judy Lewis, who lives relatively close by. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions and I will stand for any questions you have. McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? De Weerd: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Josh, I just wanted to clarify that your -- the access that ACHD denied to Lake Hazel, but you are good with just having it -- if there is an emergency access there that that's okay for breaking up the length of that cul-de-sac; is that correct? Beach: No. McCarvel: No. Beach: No. Cassinelli: Okay. So, to clarify, there is two standards here. One is the block length. So, if you look at -- from that northern cul-de-sac over to the 90 degree turn, a 90 breaks up the block per our definition. So, you're just looking at the measurement between the end of the cul-de-sac and that 90 degree turn. That would be over the -- I think it's a 600 foot limit, but if you have a pedestrian connection you can go up to a thousand feet and that gets them around the one block length issue. The cul-de-sac is a separate section of code that there is no getting around the 450 foot maximum length of a cul-de-sac. So, that the emergency access will help them both with fire's requirement that they -- they are limited to 30 lots unless there is a secondary access Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 6 of 20 for fire, as well as they are running their water utility through there to loop their water per Public Works' requirement. So, it helps them with the block length standard, but not with the cul-de-sac requirement. Does that make sense? Cassinelli: So, what else needs to be -- what else are you requiring on that? I just wanted clarification. Beach: I don't have a specific fix for them. I have spoken with the applicant and said that this is an issue and it might require a complete redesign of their project to make that work. We cannot approve that length of a cul-de-sac. Council can't approve that either. So, before you tonight is a long subdivision that doesn't meet our standards. Cassinelli: Okay. Beach: So, we are recommending approval with the condition that they comply with that standard. Cassinelli: Okay. Beach: However they -- however they do that is really up to them to design. Cassinelli: Thank you. Beach: And just -- sorry. One thing to clarify with that is -- originally we did not know that the access to Lake Hazel was not going to be allowed by the highway district or I don't think we would have gotten to this point. That came to us with their staff report, you know, about a week ago, but we would have -- we would have circled the wagons before now and come up with something else. But they are indicating that they will not allow an access point there. So, that's -- that's why we are kind of in the position we are. If there was an access to Lake Hazel, the cul-de-sac would be under 450 feet based on their previous design. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Josh, where is the gazebo and bike storage location going to be? Because I can't see it on the landscape. Beach: Believe it's on Lot 5 of Block 5 down here where my kind of pointer is there. Fitzgerald: Okay. Beach: The applicant can clarify if I'm incorrect, but I believe that's -- that's the lot there. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 7 of 20 Fitzgerald: And is there any -- if they shifted the access to the west, there was no direction from ACHD that that would be allowed either; right? It's just no. Beach: So, let me -- and I can't speak for ACHD, but I can kind of show you the -- the site here. Maybe. Okay. Fitzgerald: Because we are getting close to a neighborhood that lines up, I would guess, right across the street; right? Beach: So, this is the East Ridge Estates project that was approved last year and their access is about here. Fitzgerald: Okay. Beach: But -- if I can use my Google Earth. This is looking west at the intersection onto Lake Hazel, so there is some -- there is quite a bit of topography as you're coming -- that comes up to the top of a hill and, then, it goes back down. So, there is -- there is -- I think, you know, not knowing exactly what they are thinking, but there is some concern there that there is going to be limited visibility, especially with these driveways here with the East Ridge Estates project and the access point about -- kind of where my pointer is there. That's going to be a seven lane road eventually, so, they are -- I think they are trying to -- Fitzgerald: Makes sense. Thank you. Beach: -- and have it be at North Eagle. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Since you're showing this photo -- and I will ask the applicant the same question, but that 40 foot emergency access appears to be on that steep slope, isn't it, or is that part of -- Beach: That's in this location where I'm -- where I'm pointing here -- Yearsley: Okay. Beach: -- as well. The applicant will have to ensure that that works for them -- Yearsley: Okay. Beach: -- the location, but you're right, there is some -- there is fairly steep slope at that corner, both -- both sides of that corner. Let me get to the -- the intersection and we Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 8 of 20 can look the other way, too. Such that you can't even really see the LDS church back there, because it's fairly steep here. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Follow-up question, Josh. Was -- did anyone ask ACHD if they would be amenable to a right-in, right-out? Beach: In discussion with the applicant today -- they sent me an e-mail, you know, about a half an hour -- 4:30 or so saying that he's reached out to them. They are looking at -- and you can ask the applicant this, too. I will actually let him speak on that. But I believe they have -- they have at least reached out to them to see if there is other options. Yearsley: So, Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: One last question. Josh, I didn’t have a chance to see the ACHD report, but did ACHD identify how they are going to -- if they do a seven lane section, how they are going to deal with that terrain or the differences in the elevation between the upper portion, you know, where that -- there is quite a bit of relief there that they will have to put a retaining wall there or cut that back quite a bit and I didn't know if that was actually identified or talked about. Beach: From what I remember, no. We can -- we can absolutely look. Fitzgerald: We talked about a retaining wall. Yearsley: Okay. Fitzgerald: They put there -- the applicant talked about that. That was in the report. Beach: I can definitely look if you want me to do that while you move on or have other questions. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Beach: It looks like the applicant is proposing a retaining wall there just on their -- Yearsley: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 9 of 20 Beach: -- their corner. I don't know that there are specific plans from the highway district to do anything there yet. I don't think they have got this anywhere near their capital improvements plan, so -- Yearsley: Okay. Beach: -- the engineering wouldn't have been done yet. Yearsley: All right. Thank you. McCarvel: Okay. So, I think at this point we will let the applicant come forward and please state your name and address for the record. Villegas: Commissioners, my name is Victor Villegas. My address is 141 East Carlton Avenue here in Meridian. I'm with the law offices of Borton Lakey representing the applicant today. Am I speaking loud enough? McCarvel: Yeah. You need to stay pretty close to that mic, though. Villegas: Is that better? McCarvel: Yes. Because otherwise they can't hear you back there. Villegas: So, I will probably start with the easy stuff and, then, we are going to get to the hard part, which is the -- we are talking about the ACHD issue. But just to reiterate what staff was talking about, at least in terms of meeting the goals and policies of the comp plan, I'm just going to pick a few things out of the -- out of the report. Your future land use map does designate this area as low density residential, which typically is 3.3 units per acre and what the applicant is proposing here is going to equate to 1.1 dwelling units per acre, well below the 3.3. There -- we will be connecting to city services in this area and we will be providing sidewalk and a generous portion of open space. So, at least as to the area and the policies that -- and the vision of what the city wants to see out there, we believe that we have provided a good product out there. To get to the more important issue that has probably taken up most of the staff discussion with the Commission, that is the access issue. We received ACHD's staff report on Friday, so that caught us by surprise as well, as it did for staff. We asked for full access. They said, no, because of district policy and they are not very clear what it was, but we believe that it is due to the topography and -- and the sight line. There was a question -- I believe it may have come from Commissioner Fitzgerald, but whether we could move that access further to the west. That's the site line issue. You know, when I first looked at it I thought, well, why don't we just kick it over this way and we will -- we will get to the 1,200 feet, but that's -- that's the issue that we are running into right now. So, what we attempted to do after staff recommended the emergency access, we revised the -- the preliminary plat to show the emergency access and, then, we found out yesterday, okay, you meet the block face requirement, but now you don't meet the cul-de-sac requirement. So, we are still working with ACHD. One of the things I do want to bring Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 10 of 20 up is it was a staff recommendation. ACHD has not come out yet and said you can't have this access. One of the things that Commissioner Cassinelli had raised was would ACHD consider a right-in and right-out. I have spoken to my group sitting behind me and they were in contact with ACHD and they at least indicated that that is a possibility and that's all I could represent to you. We don't know anything beyond that. But I am hopeful, I am confident that we can work some out with ACHD once we bring up some of these additional concerns that we brought up to staff with Meridian City Code on this matter. Other than that, I don't see any other stumbling blocks that would cause a denial of this thing or something that we probably can't work out with ACHD at this time. I was going to move onto another point, but I would like to stay on this ACHD point and answer any questions with what I have raised thus far. McCarvel: I think we have asked our questions and I think everybody is kind of in agreement, we are kind of in limbo here until we get some more answers. So, I don't know -- any other further questions? I think until we get answers from ACHD and find out what your proposal is to make accommodations around those recommendations, we are kind of at a standstill here, so -- Villegas: So, the other items, just looking at the staff report, that we would ask the Commissioners to consider removing on the site specific conditions -- there was a recommendation from staff that the applicant provide an additional micro path between Lots 19 and 20 to the west boundary of the church parcel. We have been in contact with the church and the church has requested they do not want that micro path leading out to the church. Their concerns typically are just the pedestrian traffic, vandalism, people walking onto the church property and so -- and we are working with them on that, but that is a condition that the church had requested and it's just something that staff's recommending on that, so we ask that that not be a requirement placed on the applicant. Did I answer your questions on that? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Victor, do you know what number that is? Like one point -- Villegas: Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me. Yes. That is one point -- 1.3, Sub D. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Villegas: On Exhibit -- on Exhibit B, page 20 of the staff report. Fitzgerald: Sorry, Commissioner Yearsley, I didn't mean to cut you off. Beach: I will pull it up here, so you can see what -- let me scroll down. McCarvel: And, Josh, was that Lots 19 and 20 or 15 and 16? Beach: The numbering might be a little different with the revised plat. I don't know. McCarvel: Yeah. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 11 of 20 Beach: But the intent was to have it between the -- McCarvel: Those two big lots right behind the church. Beach: I could go back to -- McCarvel: Yeah. Beach: -- maybe if you're that curious I could show you. And this -- it looks like 15 and 16 now in this this -- McCarvel: Yeah. Beach: -- iteration. So, that was the -- the idea was to have it between those two lots. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Josh, would you be amenable -- I mean I understand the reasoning for the church to not want to have people accessing their property, but are you amenable as staff to that -- is that -- removing that requirement? Beach: The idea was just to accommodate some of the traffic with the understanding that the majority of the people that -- if they are LDS and live in that subdivision they would be going to that chapel. So, I'm not, you know, going to die on my sword if the -- you don't want to do that. McCarvel: It is a convenience based on the residents there may be a member of that church, but who knows. Beach: And I understand that pedestrians go back there and all that stuff, too, so -- McCarvel: Okay. Continue on. Sorry. Villegas: Thank you, besides those two issues that I have addressed, we are amenable to what the staff -- the site specific conditions were for this project. McCarvel: I did have another question then. Do you -- what is your plan for the open space? I know you said a gazebo and a bike rack, but I think your -- they require one more. Do you have a plan for that? Villegas: That might be someone else that can answer that question. I am -- I am not certain. We can bring up the applicant and ask that question, Commissioner McCarvel. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 12 of 20 McCarvel: Okay. Commissioner Yearsley? Yearsley Madam Chair. A couple quick questions. It was kind of hard to see on the landscape plan, so it was my understanding we are providing sidewalk against Lake Hazel and Eagle Road along your property boundary; is that correct? Villegas That is correct. Yearsley: And, then, Josh, will you go to the landscaping plan? Keep going. Keep going. So, this one here. I'm showing that little pathway down to the corner. I think that's going down to the canal; correct? What is -- where is that going to? Beach: Commissioner Yearsley, I think the applicant can talk about this, too, but one of our concerns was that the landscape plan doesn't match with the plat. I don't -- I don't believe that pathway is meant to be where it's shown, because there is -- there is nothing along that pathway and -- Yearsley: Well, that's -- Beach: -- there is no pathway there. There won't be a pathway there. Yearsley: That was my question is why does -- it seems like a pathway to nowhere, so that's -- that was what I was wondering what the -- are we actually putting a pathway along the canal or -- Beach: There is a pathway, but it's on the other side of the canal. Yearsley: Oh. Okay. Villegas: And, Commissioner Yearsley, my folks back there have indicated that that is gone. Yearsley: Okay. Fitzgerald: Mr. Villegas, maybe we could have the applicant -- your client come up and give us some more information about the additional landscaping component. Villegas: Right. Thank you. Langston: Good after -- or good evening. My name is Jarron Langston. Address 9563 West Harness Drive, Boise, Idaho. 83709. In respects to the additional amenity, it's most likely going to be a tot lot or a playground for the children. Again, these are larger lots. A majority of the people will probably have parks in their own backyards, but we have decided to add an additional one. Again, we are neighbors with the new 75 acre regional park, so there will be plethora, but we will have another one is kind of the idea Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 13 of 20 that is not included on our new landscape plan that we have given to Josh. However, we will make sure that that's met as far as the conditions of the application. McCarvel: Okay. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, are you planning to put a retaining wall on that? Langston: Yeah. There will be two retaining walls and we have worked with ACHD -- and, again, it's -- it's tricky just because it's -- in 2026 is when they anticipate to do that - - that improvement, so they don't have a design. They have, obviously, taken a ton of right of way for that, so we are going to be basically pushing that hill back and creating retaining walls and we will have, obviously, a monument sign for the subdivision on that corner, but it will be way -- way outside of what any -- any future development that ACHD is requiring. Yearsley: Okay. McCarvel: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Langston: Thank you. McCarvel: And at this time we will take public testimony and I believe Chris has a list of names there. Johnson: Thank you, Madam Chair. The only person indicating wishing to testify is Susan Karnes. McCarvel And, please, state your name and address for the record. Karnes: Susan Karnes. I reside at 5556 South Graphite Way in Meridian and I'm here representing the Median Southern Rim Coalition, which you may recall is a coalition of representatives from neighborhoods in this part with several hundred members representing their interest -- residents' interests in this part of south Meridian. First and foremost, I want to applaud these developers. They contacted the steering committee of the Meridian Southern Rim Coalition and asked to meet with us before they finalized their plans for this community. They picked our brain about amenities, about the street configuration, about the lot sizes about the existing neighborhood identity and values along the southern rim and proceeded accordingly and we need more developers like that in Meridian, who before they invest in their engineering studies and their applications, try to create a partnership with the residents who already reside in that part of town and so I want to put that on the record and thank them publicly. I want to give you feedback from our membership. Number one, there was overwhelming support for Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 14 of 20 the large lots and this project's density. It meets a dearth of large lot inventory in Meridian, especially in south Meridian. There was some concern expressed by a few of our members that several lots are narrow and would create the appearance of higher density. There was a strong appreciation for the cul-de-sac street configuration. The coalition would support a right-in, right-out entrance on Lake Hazel and, in fact, ACHD approved one for Boise Hunter Sky Mesa application recently for what we consider a more dangerous street configuration. There was strong support for the renderings and the entrance statement as drawn and presented to us and strong approval of the future neighbor that would complement our vision and our existing neighborhoods along the southern rim. So, therefore, I am here this evening to express strong support on behalf of the Meridian Southern Rim Coalition. McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Karnes: Stand for questions. McCarvel: I don't believe so. Karnes: Thank you. McCarvel: I think Chris -- he said that was the only person that indicated they wanted to testify, but is there anyone in the room who would like to? Certainly. Cafferty: I tried to sign in -- McCarvel: Please state your name and address for the record. Cafferty: My name is Danny Cafferty, 3500 East Penny Lane, Meridian, Idaho. McCarvel: Thank you. Cafferty: 83642. I own the property directly to the east of this parcel, about a quarter of a mile of rim. I am pleased to see that these folks are coming with sewer. I had spoken with them in the past and I was opposed to them putting in one acre lots with septic tanks. I would like to know where the sewer access is, where it's going to be ran. If it's coming down Eagle Road I would like to know the location of it, the size of it. The other thing I would like to finalize and make certain is that when that church was issued a building permit, it was stipulated that they agreed to hook up to wet line sewer when it became available and I think that that should be a stipulation. I am not too thrilled living across the street from 3,000 people and a big septic tank and having a well. I don't know how much longer I will live there, but I enjoy it. I have an absolutely wonderful view. I think these people are doing a very good job. I have been in the development business and real estate business for about 45 years, you know, ACHD has got me really concerned about no access on Lake Hazel. If nothing else, I think because the emergency vehicle situation you need to put a knock down gate of some sort or something in there, because it's pretty well known that you have to have an alternate Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 15 of 20 emergency vehicle access when you have a subdivision in excess of a certain amount of lots, which this is. So, I think that that's critical. The other thing -- don't mean to ramble, but Lake Hazel and Eagle Road intersection, I have spoken with ACHD numerous times about it. I have heard estimates from three to five lanes in each direction there. Lake Hazel is planned to be a major thoroughfare from Kuna-Meridian Road over the Cole Road and that intersection is going to be drastically changed. I have heard there is going to be cuts and I have heard there is going to be elevation applied. Fill. So, I don't know what it's going to be. Nobody does at this stage. They haven't come out. But that is going to be a major thoroughfare eventually. Any questions? Thank you. McCarvel: I think Lake Hazel is planned for seven now. Yeah. Okay. Would the applicant like to come back? Langston: Want me to restate my name? McCarvel: Sure. Langston: Okay. Jarron Langston. 9563 West Harness Drive, Boise, Idaho. 83709. Thanks for the comments, Susan. Thank you so much for being here for support. And the gentleman who shared his testimony, thank you as well. We will meet with you afterwards to identify where that sewer would be. It's coming up Eagle Road. We are taking -- we are grading it from -- Yearsley: If you could direct your comments to us. Langston: All right. Century Farms, the sewer will come up south on Eagle Road and to the street -- again, I don't have the plat in front of me, but to the -- to our entrance street is where that will ultimately stop. So, roughly -- yeah. So, basically to the center of that street where our current -- only entrance is. And when we spoke with ACHD it was going to be a five lane -- two lanes with a center median between Locust Grove and Eagle Road. Beyond that I couldn't speak to. Again, to maybe reiterate we are not sure what that will look like. Maybe it will be seven. But they have only asked for right of way for a five lane. Does that answer the questions? Yearsley: Do you know if the church is going to hook up to sewer during -- Langston: Yeah. Part of the development agreement was that they -- when the time came and they were annexed it would connect to sewer. Yeah. McCarvel: And your emergency access does include a knock down -- Langston: Yeah. It will have bollards, yeah, that the fire department is used to. McCarvel: Okay. All right. Any other questions for the applicant? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 16 of 20 Holland: Just one question, Madam Chair. McCarvel: Commissioner Holland. Holland: On the west side of the preliminary plat you have got a street. Is that going to be stubbed to the property that's on the west side of it? Langston: That is correct. Yeah. For future connectivity. Although that homeowner was adamant against it, but we told them we were required to, because one day he may -- will die and the next person might want to develop your property. So, we have provided connectivity. Perreault: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Is there a plan to also put a stub street on the south side? Langston: On the south side is the Farr Lateral, so there is a canal there. The staff -- Perreault: I thought I had read in the staff report that that was a request, but perhaps I didn't -- Langston: I was never notified of a request for a south stub street. Perreault: No? Okay. My apologies. Beach: I mean if they want to put one in there and build a bridge, we are not opposed to it, but we -- that's the -- kind of the thought there is we are -- we are going to get other connectivity further south of that canal, so -- McCarvel: All right. Langston: Thank you. McCarvel: So, at this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item H- 2018-0043? Holland: So moved. Perreault: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item H- 2018-0043. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 17 of 20 McCarvel: I would have to agree in general. I think, you know, we are all -- every time we see the larger lots and quality homes being built, it seems like a no brainer, but I'm questioning whether -- with the amount of moving parts that are involved in this do we want to pass it along with all the requirements or do you want to see it again? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Given the issue with the entrance and the potential redesign, I don't know if I feel comfortable moving this forward at this point in time. Especially if they have to do a redesign. You know, the staff will have to do a reanalysis and I don't think we are doing -- my opinion that we are doing our due diligence by just passing this onto Council and let them deal with -- Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: No. I -- and commend you guys. This is a -- it's a great project. I think it will be an easy slam dunk. We got to figure out what it's going to look like on that north side first. So, it's our job to polish it up for the Council before it gets there and I don't think we are there yet. McCarvel: I guess we should have left it open. I don't know how long -- Josh, in your opinion how long -- is this going to be ready by the 21st or do we need to go out further? So, it depends on the applicant to get it turned around to us. So, you might want to -- McCarvel: Yeah. Okay. At this time could I get a motion to reopen the public hearing for H-2018-0043 in order to speak with the applicant on a continuance date. Fitzgerald: So moved. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to reopen the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Would the applicant, please, come forward. So, given that, we do want to see this again before we send it on to City Council. I don't think there is -- you know, in the -- in general we are in favor of it, but like the commissioner said, we want to see it laid out the way it's going to be before we push it -- kick the can down the road. So, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 18 of 20 what date do you feel comfortable that you would have this ready to give back to staff in order to -- they will need ten days. Beach: Yeah. So, just -- just kind of -- yes, ten days is the minimum we need to review something. McCarvel: Okay. Got a couple of options. June 21st is the next Planning and Zoning Commission. McCarvel: Right. But they would have to have stuff to you by tomorrow. Beach: Correct. McCarvel: So -- Beach: The next date is July 12th. So, we don't have a -- we don't have a first in July, because it's -- McCarvel: We changed it because of the holiday. So, we have got the 12th and 19th; right? Or did we just push that off to the 26th? Okay. So, we have two weeks in a row there. July 12th and July 19th. Langston: Yeah. My only question will be is there -- is the ten day minimum to give staff time to review? My thought is -- but I will have to confer with my engineers, but I'm sure we could have -- well, we are meeting with ACHD tomorrow morning, so we could potentially have an answer to the issue tomorrow and I believe my engineers could redraft what that looks like and how that presented to staff by the end of business tomorrow. That would be my preference. Again, we are trying to get up -- trying to do -- get to some dirt work before the winter comes and so delaying five weeks is a pretty big deal to us. If we can have the opportunity for the 21st of June, that would be my preference. If we don't make that deadline, obviously, the first one available in July would be our second option and so I'd like to have the option to try produce something within 24 hours if I can. McCarvel: Okay. Are you good with that, Josh, since this is one that's pretty much -- Beach: Correct. So, worst case scenario they don't have anything for us within ten days and we just -- it gets continued. McCarvel: Right. Beach: But if he wants the option to be able to do that, I have no problem with that. McCarvel: Okay. All right. Perfect. Thank you. Langston: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 19 of 20 McCarvel: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2018-0043. Holland: So moved. Fitzgerald: Second. McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018-0043. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Unless there is other further comments from our Commissioners, I will make a motion. McCarvel: I think we are ready. Oh. Pogue: Madam Chair, if it's getting continued it doesn't need to be closed. McCarvel: Okay. Make that in your motion that we are reopening and continuing. Fitzgerald: Okay. I can do that. McCarvel: Point of procedure. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I would move we reopen the public hearing and continue file number H-2018-0043 to the hearing date of June 21st to allow the applicant to bring us ACHD's recommendation for road rework and possible reworking of the plat before we make a final decision. Holland: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue Item H-2018-0043. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Who would like to do the honors? Johnson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Oh. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 6, 2018 Page 20 of 20 Johnson: Just one additional item. The July 12th hearing date that we scheduled, the City Council has the room until 5:00 and they actually have the chairs all out for other things. So, it's been recommended by the city clerk's office that we begin that meeting at 6:30 p.m. McCarvel: Okay. Johnson: I wanted to get the feeling from Commissioners if that's okay. Yearsley: Works for me. McCarvel: That's fine. Johnson: Thank you. McCarvel: Anybody want to leave? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I move we adjourn for the evening. Yearsley: Second. Cassinelli: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting for June 6th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:50 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED RAO -NDA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED EU AUCG—; ATTEST: o�Ro � s 4-4 �Jr Cit% of C.—JAY CLES - CITY CLERK `jQ/rE IDu - ►o�Mo s� SI.AL ,c ��1 TRiP'SJ��i