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