The URL can be used to link to this page

2018-09-20Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting September 20, 2018. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of September 20, 2018, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Acting Chairman Jessica Perreault. Members Present: Commissioner Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Gregory Wilson, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli and Commissioner Lisa Holland. Members Absent: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Steven Yearsley and Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald. Others Present: Charlene Way, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Josh Beach and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X____ Lisa Holland _______ Steven Yearsley __X___ Gregory Wilson _______ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Jessica Perreault ___X___ Bill Cassinelli _______ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman Perreault: 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 September 20th, 2018. Let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Perreault: Thank you very much. Next is the adoption of the agenda. The first item on the agenda. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda, please? Cassinelli: So moved. Wilson: Second. Perreault: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law for Fire Station No. 6 H2018-0083 by Meridian Fire Department, Located at 1435 W. Overland Rd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 61 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 2 of 67 Perreault: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have one item, the Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law for Fire Station No. 6, H-2018-0083, by Meridian Fire Department. Can I get a motion -- Cassinelli: Madam Chair, make a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Wilson: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Perreault: Okay. At this time we are going to explain the public hearing process. 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 -- for the 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. If they are speaking for a larger group, like a homeowner's association, 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 will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council, approval or denial. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing Continued from September 6, 2018 for EEG Office Building (H-2018-0081) by Chad Slichter, Located at 551 SW 5th Ave. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 12,825 square foot office/storage building on 0.993 acres of land in an L-O zoning district Perreault: Okay. Let's begin with the staff report. Oh, we are continuing. That's right. Okay. We will open public hearing -- the public hearing for -- that was continued from September 6th for EEG Office Building, H-2018-0081 and we will open that for the purpose of continuing it until October 4th. Can I get a motion for continuance? Wilson: Madam Chair? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 62 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 3 of 67 Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move we continue H-2018-0081 to the date of October 4th, 2018. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to continue EEG Office Building, H-2018- 0081 to the date of October 4th, 2018. All those in favor? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES THREE ABSENT. B. Public Hearing for Healthy Balance Pharmacy (H-2018-0086) by Daniel A. Schwalbe Inc., Located at 2424 E. Gala Ct. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through pharmacy within 300 feet on an existing drive-through establishment on 0.772 of an acre of land in a C-G zoning district Perreault: Okay. Now we will open the public hearing for Healthy Balance Pharmacy, H- 2018-0086. Beach: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, as you said, this is an application for -- it's called Healthy Balance Pharmacy. It's an application for a conditional use permit. You can see here on the zoning map, the property is zoned C-G. The site consists of approximately 7.77 of an acre of land, zoned C-G, located at 2424 East Gala Court. To the north is Overland Road and vacant commercial property, also zoned C-G. To the east is a drive-thru coffee shop zoned C-G. To the south is a multi-tenant office building and, excuse me, zoned C-G and to the west is also a multi-tenant office building, zoned L-O. In 2006 the subject property was granted annexation and zoning with R-15 and C- G zoning districts. A development agreement was approved with the annexation. A preliminary plat was -- was approved concurrently with that annexation with 64 single family detached residential lots, 24 alley-loaded attached single family residential lots, nine multi-family residential lots, 25 common lots and 32 commercial lots on approximately 77.66 acres. So, a large development. Also back in 2006 the property received final approval for Gramercy Subdivision No. -- No. 1, which consisted of 50 residential building lots, 32 building -- commercial building lots, one city park lot and 21 common lots on 62.01 acres. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed use regional. The applicant is proposing to construct a 4,364 square foot, two story pharmacy with associated drive-thru per the recorded plat, direct lot access to Overland Road was not granted to this parcel. However, there is reciprocal cross-access in place for this parcel to access Gala Street to the south, Wells Avenue to the east, and use the right-in only access from Overland Road. Staff's analysis of the proposed development includes the internal site and landscape improvements. A new site circulation of the drive-thru and adjacent properties. I failed to mention the reason for the application for a conditional use permit is because it is within 300 feet of an existing drive- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 63 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 4 of 67 thru, which is the coffee shop next door. The applicant's -- in the staff report we require that the applicant provide us a cross-access agreement. They have since done that, so that -- that -- that requirement has been eliminated. We have that information. The UDC requires conditional use permit if the drive-thru is within, as I said, 300 feet of an existing drive-thru. There are some specific use standards set forth in UDC 11-4-3-11 for drive- thru establishments that the applicant shall comply with. The applicant is showing several parking stalls that could be impacted by a drive-thru lane. Parking stalls here on -- on the east side of the project. Staff is requiring that those be labeled employee parking only in order to reduce the possibility of conflict in the drive-thru lane. Staff has reviewed the submitted site plan and requires the necessary provisions prior to submission of a certificate of zoning compliance. We required that the applicant provide some landscaping, so you can see in the previous iteration of this plan. There was no landscaping in this location here, so that this was all kind of pass-through parking stalls and it made staff nervous as far as circulation through the parking lot on creating conflict. So, he asked the applicant to provide some landscaping there, which they have done. Based on the overall square footage of the building, which I said is about 4,300 square feet, nine parking spaces are required and the applicant is providing 25 parking stalls. It meets that requirement. There was an existing 25 foot wide landscape buffer along Overland Road, which meets the requirement for a buffer along an arterial roadway, was constructed with the subdivision. In their landscape plan they are showing a pedestrian access out to the sidewalk along Overland Road for pedestrian connectivity and these are the conceptual elevations provided by the applicant for the structure. They appear to meet design review standards. We will review that with a certificate of zoning compliance for the site improvements and administrative design review application for the structure prior to issuing a building permit. Did receive no written testimony. Staff is recommending approval of the project with conditions. Staff feels that the use fits well with the surrounding area and surrounding medical offices along this section of Overland Road and, again, are recommending approval. Perreault: Thank you. Do the Commissioners have any questions for staff? Would the applicant, please, come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Higgins: My name is Tyler Higgins. I didn't pass the first test. Sorry. 315 East Elm Street, Caldwell, Idaho, is our current pharmacy location business. I have been a pharmacist for 15 years. Pharmacy owner for nine years in our current location. We fill about 300 prescriptions a day and we are a hybrid type pharmacy. In other words, we do traditional retail community pharmacy and also compounding pharmacy. So, we create prescriptions from scratch, basically, so -- but through different provisions. We have had a need to expand our filling abilities for compounding, so we needed to search for another location and in searching through the valley that seemed to be the -- the best spot we could find. So, this is the spot we have. There is a lot of medical offices and also residential area that could have a need. There are currently two other independent pharmacies located in Meridian, but those are north of the freeway and so we would be the first one in Meridian south of the freeway. There is a couple other chain pharmacies that side. There is Rite Aid and also there is a W algreens on Overland and also a Walmart, but they are more than a mile away. So, it's a good spot and we are just here Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 64 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 5 of 67 to get the approval on the drive-thru. We have created a means so that there are two windows for ease of drop off and pick up and if a car wanted to say just drop off and go and there was a car in front of them, there is a -- there is an extra lane for them to pull out of the drive-thru there and so they can go ahead and circle around. Typically our busiest times for pharmacy are going to be mid morning and mid afternoon is kind of when people are going to doctors, seeing them, and, then, going off to fill their prescriptions and so coffee shops are typically busy more in the morning, people going to work, so we are -- we are planning on them not -- the drive-thru is not really overlapping a whole lot is our guess for the peak hours. So, was there anything specifically I can answer as far as questions that I haven't covered? Perreault: Commissioners, do you have any questions for the applicant? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: One quick question. Are you in agreement with everything in the staff report as they have identified it with the -- the employee parking here at the top of that drive-thru? Higgins: Yes. We did plan on putting the employee parking on the side there where the drive-thru is on the -- I guess the east side of the building and we did originally not put a -- on the south end of the parking lot a -- I guess an architectural landscape there. We were approached by the south owner of the building, who is now -- we have also pictures that we brought. There is a lot of cars actually parking in our -- our lot right now and he did approach us saying that he didn't have enough parking in his spaces there and so he asked if he could actually continue parking there, which is another reason why I wanted to create as much parking as we could. So, we thought for ease it might be easier just to not have the architectural buffer there. So, I'm not sure if that's still a possibility in this meeting if we can get that approval or not, but we thought it may be easier for them to -- to park there. We are at the end of a road, I guess you would say, between the two of us. His office building is more of -- not a lot of traffic of customers coming in and out he says. They are mostly employee parking. So there is not a lot of traffic on his side of the lot, the south side of the lot. But, anyway, that's -- that's what we would like if we could get that. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: So, are you saying that the -- the parking that you're putting in you're -- you're happy to offer that up to your neighbor to the south to park in your stalls? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 65 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 6 of 67 Higgins: Yeah. For a -- for a lease price. But, yeah, we are -- we are happy to offer that as long as we have enough space for our patients. Cassinelli: So, you feel, then, with what you have in the front of the building and, then, a couple on the side before it becomes employee parking -- I guess -- so, not that extra parking to the south, but the -- what's adjacent to the building is adequate for -- Higgins: Yeah. And it could change over time. Typically pharmacies, when they first open, they are not very busy. It takes time to -- to grow clientele I guess you would say. Over time we may need to use more of that. So, you know, I didn't promise them that we could, but I said at first we could look at trying to accommodate spaces for his employees. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Perreault: And the main entrance is there on the southeast corner? It's hard to tell from this -- Higgins: Yes. Southeast corner. Perreault: Okay. And to the building as well? Higgins: Yes. Southeast corner there is a door kind of on the corner -- southeast corner. Perreault: Okay. Higgins: That's the entrance door. The main entrance door. Perreault: Okay. Higgins: And there is an employee door on the south side -- more the southwest area. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I have another question. Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Is there a -- is there a curb or anything between what will be the drive-thru lane where that employee parking is and, then, the coffee shop? Higgins: There is a -- there is a buffer, there like a -- Cassinelli: Okay. Higgins: -- architectural buffer. Cassinelli: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 66 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 7 of 67 Higgins: Yeah. Cassinelli: So, there is those two -- that traffic can't get -- Higgins: No. Cassinelli: It's separate. Higgins: It's separate. Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you. Higgins: They are separate. Yeah. Perreault: I think the idea of having the landscape buffer there on the south side is to just help prohibit folks from driving across that curb -- Higgins: Right. Perreault: -- just as a -- you know -- Higgins: Safety -- Perreault: Yeah. Higgins: Okay. Perreault: Yeah. There definitely is a purpose for it beyond just looking nice. Higgins: Okay. Perreault: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you very much. At this time we will take public testimony. Is anybody signed up? Way: Madam Chair, there is no one signed up to testify. Perreault: Okay. Is there anyone here who would like to testify? Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I move we close the public hearing for Item H-2018-0086, Healthy Balance Pharmacy. Holland: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 67 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 8 of 67 Perreault: We have -- it has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I -- I don't know how much traffic would -- would stack up at a pharmacy with a drive-thru. There is a Walgreens near my house and I don't think it's ever been more than about three cars. I don't think that's going to be an issue. There is a separation -- clear separation between -- and that's what we are really looking at is the -- is the drive- thru with -- within 300 feet of another one. I don't think it's an issue with the one next door. He's got way more parking than is required. I'm happy. Wilson: It meets your threshold. Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: As someone who lives in that part of town I think this is a good fit for that area. I mean I think the staff report said it -- and I'm glad that these services are starting to migrate south of the freeway. So, I'm supportive of it. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I tend to agree and I understand the applicant's requests to not have a landscape buffer, but I think it's nice to provide some extra safety between the two, so you don't just have cars kind of roaming through that curb area. I don't see any other concerns either. Perreault: Great. Yeah. I agree. I think this is a really nice use for that location and I think it promotes pedestrian access to this, too. There is a lot of apartment buildings on the south side. You know, there is -- there is people who work in offices all over there that can walk to this location on their lunch hour. It's -- it's a good location I think for this use, so -- all right. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2018-0086 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 20th, 2018, with no modifications. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 68 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 9 of 67 Wilson: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to approve application number H-2018-0086. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Burlingame Subdivision (H-2018-0079) by Yuriy Mukha, Located at NW Corner of West Cherry Lane and N Black Cat Rd. 1. Request: Rezone of property from R-4 (18.994 acres) to R-8; and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 74 single-family residential building lots and 14 common lots on 18.994 acres of land in a proposed R-8 zoning district; and, 3. Request: Modify an existing Development Agreement to allow for additional residential and common lots, to allow for R-8 zoning and to change certain other provisions of the agreement Perreault: All right. Let's move on to the next application, which is for the public hearing of Burlingame Subdivision, H-2018-0079. Beach: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, this is an application for a rezone for a preliminary plat and for a development agreement modification. The site consists of approximately 18.994 acres of land, which is currently zoned R-4, located to the northeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road. An aerial shot here of kind of what we are looking at. So, this is the -- this is the area I kind of outlined here. Back in -- so, again, the site consists of 18, almost 19 acres. To the north is a single family residential subdivision of Turnberry Crossing, which is zoned R-4. To the south there is a single family residential property zoned RUT in Ada county, as well as West Cherry Lane. To the east are two church buildings, zoned L-O and a single family residence and daycares, zoned RUT within Ada county. And to the west are single family residences zoned RUT also within Ada county. Back in 2017 a development agreement modification was approved that replaced the previously approved concept plan and allowed for up to 60 single family residential lots and concurrently a preliminary plat was approved. It allowed, again, for up to 60 single family lots, specifically R-4 is what was designated at that time. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is low density residential. So, this is the previous plat that was approved back in 2017 and, again, on the -- on the right-hand side here is just kind of a blow up version, because it's kind of hard to see what's going on with all the line work here. So, not -- not terribly different as far as layout is concerned. Some -- some changes that -- that -- that were made to improve the project. So, we have to start out with the applicant has applied to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 69 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 10 of 67 rezone the property from R-4 to R-8 and the rezone is desired by the applicant to align with his vision to market the property to retirees and empty nesters. The applicant believes that with the rezone to R-8 and the reduced dimensional standards the project will now be much easier to market to their target demographic. The R-8 zoning district is an allowable zoning designation within the LDR or low density residential Comprehensive Plan designation and the proposed density is appropriate if a step up is approved by Council and that's something that they can ask for, to go one step in -- in density and, then, that's what they have asked for. Next a development agreement modification -- as I said, this property was -- is currently governed by a development agreement that was approved with the Burlingame Subdivision back in 2017. Again, because the applicant's vision for the property does not match what was approved and required with the previous development, the applicant has applied to modify the existing development agreement to update the development plan and building elevations. The previously approved plan included 60 single family residential lots and seven common lots with an R-4 designation, which had a density of 4.43 dwelling units per acre and -- and about 1.89 acres of open space. The previous iteration did not require a step up in density per the Comprehensive Plan, because the density was aligned with the requirements of the low density residential designation. The new plan consists of 74 residential lots and 14 common lots and has 2.26 acres of open space and has a density of 4.98 dwelling units per acre, which requires the step up in density. The new development agreement should -- should include the proposed development plan and any changes required in building elevation included as attached exhibits. So, by way of explanation, this entire parcel, with the inclusion of this area indicated by my mouse here, was included in the development agreement, but this parcel was not included in the plat. So, there are some requirements on that plat from the development agreement that are -- it's a little bit funky, so I will just kind of explain that a little bit here. They did a property boundary adjustment to exclude that parcel from the plat, but because it was in the development agreement there are some specific requirements for that parcel that we would like to -- to keep in the development agreement. So, as I said, the home was split and it was still part of the recorded development agreement. Staff has reviewed the recorded development agreement and finds that even though it's not part of the plat as required, in the recorded development agreement, that the home should be required to hook up to city services immediately, close the existing access to Cherry Lane, extend a ten foot multi-use pathway along the frontage, provide a 25 foot landscape buffer in accord with UDC and take access from the proposed West Montgomery Way and shall abandon direct access to Cherry Lane prior to the city's signature on the first final plat. Next a preliminary plat is proposed, again, consisting of 74 building lots, 14 common lots and about 18.9 acres of land and what they are asking for is an R-8 the zoning district, proposed to develop in three phases and it's a little difficult to see here, but the phase one would be approximately -- the north boundary would be where my mouse is and wrap down to Cherry Lane. The second phase would start where my mouse is and kind of follow this line here. The second phase would connect with Turnberry Crossing and, then, the third phase is this -- this area indicated by my -- by my mouse. You can kind of see the dashed line there. The average lot size in the development is 7,152 square feet. The minimum is 5,600 square feet, which meets the UDC standards. Lots in the proposed subdivision are required to comply with the dimensional standards in the R-8 zoning district and as well as the block length Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 70 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 11 of 67 standards, which they do. The subject property is currently developed with two existing residences. Both of the homes have an access from a 25 foot wide private access easement to Black Cat Road, which is currently indicated by my mouse here. There is an easement between both of the church properties out to Black Cat, which will be eliminated as an access point, since the one home that will be remaining in this location will be accessed internally and the other home will be removed. For the development the applicant is proposing to construct a new public street access to Cherry Lane and extend O'Connor Avenue into the site from the north. Two stub streets are proposed, one along the west boundary -- so a stub street approximately in this location to the west and a stub street in this location to the east and staff is generally supportive of the proposed street system. ACHD has submitted comments and conditions back to the city for this project and they have not required any significant changes to the -- to the plat. Street buffer landscape, again, is required to be provided as set forth in the UDC. The applicant is proposing a 25 foot landscape buffer and, as I said, even though this parcel is not part of the plat, a 25 foot landscape buffer was required with the previous development agreement and we are going to require that that stay that way and that it be landscaped according to the UDC. The pathways masterplan depicts a regional pathway on the site along the north side of Cherry Lane and another section of the ten foot regional pathway along the north side of the property adjacent to the Settlers Canal. So, I'm going to go to the landscape plan here. You can kind of see the ten foot multi-use pathway that will be required along Cherry Lane and there is also a pathway that's required along the south side of the Settlers Canal, so it will be in an easement or wrap behind the lots on the west side of the LDS church and eventually our -- our plan is to have that go along the easement out to Black Cat, but those -- that would be something that we can't require right now, because neither church is part of the application, so the thought is that eventually when those -- one or the other come in for some improvements on their site we will require a multi-use pathway at that time eventually out to Black Cat. And because this -- this is an access road for the irrigation district -- the Settlers Irrigation District, they -- the irrigation district has allowed the applicant to pave that, instead of having it be dirt or gravel, so it can be a dual purpose multi-use pathway and an access road to access their irrigation facilities. The applicant is also proposing to construct several micro paths within the development as part of the internal pathway system and the proposed micro path must be five feet in width and landscaped in accord with the UDC. As I said, there are existing irrigation easements along the north and a portion of the east boundary of the project. During the project review meeting with the other city departments concerns were raised that this area could be unsafe due to the lack of visibility. In discussing this with the applicant it was determined that the Settlers Irrigation District, as I said, needs this area to remain open so they have access to their facility. The applicant is proposing two common driveways, Lot 20, Block 5, and Lot 13, Block 3. All common driveways should comply with the standards set forth in the UDC. A detached sidewalk shall be constructed along the entire frontage of West Cherry Lane. With that I received one -- one comment from Jeanette O'Brian with concerns about overcrowded schools and congested roads. These are some of the -- not the landscape plan, these are conceptual building elevations for this subdivision. These are the -- I believe the exact same elevations are proposed with the previous project and just a comparison quickly on the -- the landscaping and open space. With the previous project 1.89 acres or ten percent Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 71 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 12 of 67 of the project was proposed with one amenity. This project is proposing 2.26 or 11.9 percent open space and they have -- are proposing two sections of multi-use pathway, but they are also proposing a play structure, a gazebo, and some internal pathways. With that staff is recommending approval on the project. The project is comparable to the subdivision to the north, though, obviously, the lot sizes aren't -- aren't quite as big as the subdivision to the north, but staff feels that with the increased open space, better design and layout of the subdivision and better amenities, that it would be a better fit than the previous project. So, we are recommending approval. Stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you. Any questions? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Josh, just one clarification question. On access points into this neighborhood, they are going to take away the private drive on Cherry Lane, but that -- the Cherry Lane is going to be the major access point for the neighborhood; is that correct? Beach: Right. So, the main -- the main access point in -- with the first phase will be off of Cherry Lane and, as I said, there is an existing home here and they -- I believe the applicant has an exhibit showing how they are going to -- you can kind of see where my mouse is here where an access easement is for that parcel, so they won't have access to Cherry Lane. Holland: Thank you. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Josh, what -- out of curiosity what happened with the previous project that we approved last year? Beach: You can ask the applicant. Cassinelli: Same applicant? Beach: Same applicant. Same property owner. Cassinelli: Okay. And, then, also a couple other questions on the pathway system. The access right now off of Black Cat between the -- I think -- does that go between the two churches? Is that right? Beach: It's essentially on the property line. Correct. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 72 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 13 of 67 Cassinelli: Okay. And is it -- it says one or both of the churches. They -- that's their property. Beach: Yeah. The easement crosses both -- both of their -- Cassinelli: So, access to a future pathway and stuff, that's going to come -- Beach: We can't require that currently, but, as I said, when -- when either or both of those properties come in to redevelop at some point we will -- we will get that pathway. Cassinelli: Okay. Beach: You can still use it. It's still -- the easement is still in place. Cassinelli: So, folks can still walk on that if they want to? Beach: So, it -- the easement is there for public access. Cassinelli: Okay. I remember -- I remember this last time and I remember the pathways were -- that -- that we talked a lot about that and, then, on the access for Settlers Irrigation along the east boundary -- yeah. Is that -- that is -- that is -- that is their drive and pathway? Is that a combination of both? Beach: Correct. So, you can ask the applicant. W e have discussed that a little bit, so -- the irrigation district has allowed them to pave it wider -- a wider pathway. I can't remember -- 14 feet, maybe, that they need in order to get their vehicle back there, but we also required that there be landscaping on either side, so they will -- they will have to -- they will have to be a little bit wider than what we typically get, which is just 20 feet. Cassinelli: Okay. Beach: Ten foot, five feet on either side of landscaping. Cassinelli: Okay. All right. Thank you. Perreault; Okay. Would the applicant come forward. McKay: Thank you, Madam Chairman, Members of the Commission. I'm Becky McKay with Engineering Solutions. Business address 1029 North Rosario in Meridian. Glad to be here tonight. I'm representing Yuriy Mukha, who is the applicant on this particular project. As -- Josh can you -- oh, there. As Josh indicated, this particular property is just located west of Black Cat, north of Cherry Lane. As you can see Turnberry Subdivision, which is zoned R-4 to the north. To the east we have the LDS Church and the Seventh- Day Adventist Church, which are zoned L-O. We have some RUT parcels to the south of us, to the west of us, and, then, kind of kitty corner to us we do have an R-8 designation. This kind of gives you an aerial photo of the property. It's basically a consolidation of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 73 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 14 of 67 multiple parcels. That's why you have three homes on the property. There was an existing home right here at Cherry Lane with the garage oriented to the south, an existing house right here in the midsection, and, then, another one over on the east side and these homes took access off of a cross-access easement that went out to Black Cat Road in between the two church properties. A little bit of history on these properties. This property has kind of been hanging around for 12 years. It first came through the city as Incline Village, as Josh indicated, back in 2006. That's when the property was annexed and zoned R-4. It was approved for a preliminary plat. Construction plans were prepared, final plat was prepared, submitted to the city. They obtained all their necessary approvals, but, obviously, then, the recession hit and the property was not developed. So, it kind of languished over time. Yuriy picked the property up, he went ahead, as Josh stated, did a one time split for this existing home right here on Cherry Lane and, then, he brought this project through in 2017. They came before you and the City Council with an R-4 designation that was already previously approved and had 60 lots. There were some issues that they struggled with, pathways, providing adequate easement for the Settlers Irrigation District. Some of the key issues that were mentioned in the staff report was the amount of open space that was provided. The Council -- or the Commission was -- was not very pleased with the amount of open space, they -- they -- their concern was that the open space and the amenities were not distributed evenly throughout the subdivision. So, it was approved and shortly after it was approved Yuriy came to me and he said, you know, I have this approved development, I have got a development agreement modification they want me to sign, but I -- I really don't think that this is the best use on the property and the best layout and I have talked to builders and -- and, basically, they are telling me that, you know, they -- they think that something better could be designed on this property. So, he went ahead, signed that development agreement modification on my recommendation and, then, we started looking at the project and looking at this particular layout and trying to figure out, you know, based on the concerns the Commission had, even though it was approved, the concern staff had, the concerns the neighbors had, what can we do to change it. So, in -- in looking at this project my recommendation was that they just -- they just retain one home on the property here, because this is, obviously, the nicest home, eliminate the home on the easterly side, which, then, allowed us to bring that street through. The -- the project with just the cul- de-sacs wasn't really neighborhood friendly. They had only allocated 30 feet for the -- there is two laterals here, the Safford Lateral, which is Nampa-Meridian and, then, the Settlers Southern Canal, which is under Settlers Irrigation District and they had only allocated 30 feet. In my conversations with Settlers Mack indicated that they needed about 45. They also -- the Safford is -- or not the Safford. I'm sorry. The Settlers is piped through -- along the east side here and they had easements into the lots. Well, I -- I really do not like having irrigation district easements in private lots. It just -- you're just asking for conflict between the future homeowners and the irrigation district. So, my recommendation to Yuriy was, you know, we create separate lots. This is a separate 30 foot wide lot here. This is a separate 45 foot wide lot here. None of the buildable lots are encumbered by the irrigation easements. In talking with Mack I said, you know, they want a multi-use pathway to come up and, then, go westward for future extension and I said, you know, would you object to that. He indicated to me, no, you know, we would work with you. So, typically what happens, instead of us doing just the ten foot wide multi-use Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 74 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 15 of 67 pathway, we do a 14 foot wide multi-use pathway and it basically serves for a dual purpose. It's a maintenance road and it is traffic rated, so that the irrigation district ditch riders can drive on it. There are some existing trees all along that pipeline and, then, as you can see all along here. The irrigation district indicated we know that there is trees there. We are not going to let you plant any more trees. We will allow you to do turf and shrubs and your pathway with a license agreement, but we won't allow any trees to encroach within our easement and so when we took -- took a look at this, we got rid of those -- those dead end cul-de-sacs and we created kind of a loop street and one of the things that was contentious is they had a pond back here and the residents of Turnberry were very concerned about, obviously, mosquitoes, the aesthetics of the pond. So, my recommendation was we need to have an irrigation pond to store the 24 hour water right. This is served by -- I believe it's the McKinney Lateral that comes through and -- and there is a head gate right here and, then, there is a ditch that kind of traverses the property and goes -- and provides water to the south along the south side. So, my recommendation was -- we put a lined pond here and we store the 24 hour water right, so that we can meet our peak demand. Obviously, that also be aesthetically pleasing at the entrance. As far as our amenity, that we create a nice tot lot here where we could put playground equipment, a gazebo, and, then, we have a five foot micro path that kind of comes down here that connects everything together. This particular lot here is a common lot that's primarily designed for storm drainage and when we started working on this we, basically, ended up with approximately 74 lots. In talking with staff they said, you know, we are open to the fact that you want to step up from R-4 to R-8, but, obviously, we want to see, one, a superior concept, two, more amenities, three, a better distribution of your open space. So -- so, those were our goals and that's -- that's pretty much what Yuriy and I worked with throughout the last few months. Yuriy is kind of thinking that, you know, this is going to kind of appeal to, you know, the more, you know, empty nester type people, seniors, but what we found in some of our other communities they want playgrounds, because their grandkids come and visit. So, they like -- you know, like gazebos, they like pathways, but they still want playgrounds, which -- which I found that -- you know, I guess I never thought of it from that perspective, but I have had that comment made multiple times. What's before you now -- these lots range in size from 5,600 square feet all the way up to -- this particular lot here with the existing home, detached garage, is 34,000 square feet. But, really, the important thing is these average lot sizes are 7,152 square feet. So, we are trying to provide a variety of -- you know, they are 55 by 102 feet in depth and 55 by 150 feet in depth. So, a little bit of variety. The density that we are proposing -- our net density is 3.9 acres -- or unit -- dwelling units per acre. What was previously approved was 3.16. When we had our neighborhood meeting we did get turnout from the Turnberry residence. Obviously, we will be connecting to their stub street here. There is a bridge that will have to be constructed. There is a trust fund at ACHD for 50 percent of this vehicular bridge structure, but that was done in the '90s and so, obviously, costs have escalated over the last how many jillion years it seems like. So, you know, that was one thing that we had to take into consideration is the economic viability of this development and the 60 lots, you know, in looking at the cost for construction, it just was not going to be able to, you know, make economic sense and that's kind of the feedback that Yuriy received from other builders and developers that he consulted. Our total eligible open space, as Josh indicated, went up. We have 2.26 acres of open space that went up Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 75 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 16 of 67 basically a half acre. The initial open space was 1.89, roughly ten percent. We are pushing 11.9, almost 12 percent open space. So, we did increase that and I think that's important, obviously, if you're increasing the number of units and the density that your open space and your amenities go up. On the irrigation, I did -- was contacted by Mr. Klauer, who lives to the south, and I wanted -- I told him that I would go on the record that we would make sure that the irrigation water that he is entitled to and is assessed for will be pipe to him, because he has not been receiving his water just due to the property, you know, overgrown ditches and so forth. So, we will work closely with him to make sure that that's rectified. As far as the utilities are concerned, the sewer is located right here, right between the two churches. We will extend that offsite sewer. The Public Works Department has indicated that capacity exists to service these 74 lots. One of their primary concerns was the sewer depth, because in the initial plan with the cul-de-sacs, the sewer was, basically, coming out of the ground right about in here. Where we eliminated that existing home, looped the street through, then, that allowed us to -- we have adequate cover clear down to here and we will connect this existing home right here to central sewer, central water and, then, we will stub the sewer to this parcel here. As far as this cul-de-sac -- or the stub streets are concerned, I did consult with this property owner. I initially had the stub street located further north. He asked that we move it south, which I did. I guess they are looking at the possibility of constructing a Montessori School on the property. The Fire Department made a comment about this common drive as far as the length cannot exceed 150 feet without a -- without a turnaround. Basically, the common drive will terminate at this lot right here. The only reason I show it coming down is because this is a sewer line that will sewer this property back into this project. We will extend an eight inch water line from Turnberry and, then, make a connection to the existing 12 inch water main that's in Cherry Lane. So, therefore, we will loop that water system and meet all fire flow requirements. As far as this pocket park, we have -- we have 14,211 square feet and that is -- that is kind of our active use pocket park here. To give you kind of a size of what this is, this is about 26,000 square feet. This is going to be passive. One of the comments in the previous Commission hearing was they didn't want to see kids playing right, you know, at the entrance along this arterial and this collector roadway entrance and so, obviously, we have moved all of the active amenities internally within the development. So, this is just basically passive, just to, you know, curb appeal. We have an island. We have landscaping along the east side and, then, we have landscaping along the existing home. So, I kind of went through, you know, the gazebo, the playground, we are retaining -- we are retraining as many of those existing spruce trees as we can. They are, obviously, a benefit to our project. I will wrap up. Lastly, this is the existing home. The staff is asking us to provide in the development agreement a 25 foot landscape buffer, which we can provide that. ACHD is allowing us to put your ten foot multi-use pathway within the right of way. We just want the Commission to be cognizant of the fact that the driveway does have to encroach into that 25 feet, because that existing garage is oriented to the south. We are creating an access internally within our -- at our collector roadway for access to the home and eliminating their direct lot access to Cherry Lane. Do you have any questions that I could answer? Perreault: Any questions? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 76 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 17 of 67 McKay: Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I do have a question for you. Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: The -- I had it and I lost it. Now I got it back. The pond -- since that's -- that's the irrigation storage, essentially, that's going to go -- is that going to go dry during the winter? McKay: The groundwater out here is -- we have been monitoring it and so there is some high ground water because this is the low point. So, we haven't decided -- we usually do when we go into design, whether that's going to be a wet pond and get into that groundwater, or whether we line them. If we get into the groundwater typically it enlarges the pond. We have to have that safety shelf and so it's all going to depend on -- if we have enough room to do that or whether we just line it. If it's lined, then, yes, in the winter it would go dry. In the irrigation season it would be full. It would be -- basically they have a -- you know, a float on them, so that it's allowing that water to go in. We have to aerate that pond, so we usually have a subsurface aerator or maybe a surface aerator that kind of like is a little fountain, so that it does serve as an amenity during those irrigation months. But, you're correct, in the winter if its lined, it is a dry pond. Cassinelli: Thank you. Perreault: Becky, can you show us on the landscape plan where the entrance is to the house there in the southeast corner? Is that going to come right in on the west side of the -- McKay: It's right there. Perreault: So, it -- when they are making a left are they going to -- it's not going to be an issue for them with this center island? McKay: No. As you can see the island terminates right here at the little pink tree. Perreault: There won't be a visual issue if there is trees in that island? McKay: No. Perreault: Okay. McKay: No. Because we have to -- we have to keep that, so -- that vision triangle, so they can safely pull out and, then, exit the subdivision. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 77 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 18 of 67 Perreault: Okay. If there is no more questions for the applicant, we will now take testimony. Do we have anyone signed up? Way: Madam Chair, we have one person signed up who would like to testify, William McEwen. Perreault: Please come forward. State your name and address for the record. McEwen: Hi. My name is William McEwen. I'm at 5120 West Cherry Lane, which is this property right here. Okay. So, you can imagine that this project greatly affects my property and so I do have concerns. I would like to thank Becky, she's been very instrumental in -- in working with me as far as our needs in this project and -- and she's been great to work with. I do have some concerns, however. So, since you know where I live, one of the issues is that the sewer that comes through here -- she already mentioned that because they were able to reroute it they could actually get it to the front of their development. When I say front I mean the south -- the south end right here. The problem is is that the sewer line would be approximately three feet deep and if our property were to hook into that we may be looking at a grinder pump to even hook up into city water -- or to city sore and we are really not that anxious to hook into city sewer anyway. We just don't want to get in a position where we have to buy a grinder pump to do that for future development of our property, unless we can hook into the sewer back here. Can you guys see my mouse right here, where she is running a sewer line? Okay. That was -- that was one of our concerns. We have gone through a nine month study with the CDHC with groundwater out there. Currently it hasn't gotten above six feet, so there isn't a problem with us developing our own sewer system. Secondly, ACHD has already talked to us about vacating our driveway, as you know they do, and we would be in the same boat as the house next door to us on this project and since Becky's moved this -- moved this in here, as long as we have access to that we are in good shape. The fourth point I would like to make is that Cherry Lane, even -- as you can see is not developed past the intersection and there is no -- it's not on the master plan for ACHD to develop that other than a circle in the corner and so they are talking about putting retirees -- retirement people for retirement housing in there, which you guys know requires a lot less traffic in the subdivision. I think that's great, but if you're going to approve the plan -- and that's what they want to do, make sure it's part of the requirements of the neighborhood, is the concern that I have and the last -- the last comment that I have is that I know that there is irrigation pipes buried on the back side of my property, which is the south side of this property, and they start right about here and they go all the way across and I just want to make sure that everybody knows that there is an easement for that, so that I don't lose my irrigation. Other than that I don't have a problem with this project and Becky's been wonderful to work with. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. No one else signed up to testify, would anybody else like to come forward and testify? Donahue: My name is Keri Donahue. I live up in -- off Tournament Drive in Turnberry Crossing, so the north parcel there. I live -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 78 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 19 of 67 Perreault: Please state your address for the record. Donahue: Oh, I'm sorry. 4999 West Tournament Drive, Meridian. Perreault: Thank you. Donahue: My concern, first and foremost, with a lot of my neighbors, is the safety due to traffic -- with the influx of traffic coming from this particular layout versus the last one with only 60 designated parcels. Unfortunately, a lot of the commerce near our area is more toward the northeast. The new developing parts of like Chinden and State Street, there is not a lot of shopping, other than an Albertsons that is on Cherry Lane, until you get clear into Meridian or closer to Eagle Road. So, we feel that there is going to be a large influx of actual traffic that will come into Turnberry Crossing through the connection of O'Connor right here and use our entrance and exit to Black Cat, since there is not going to be any -- any sort of main road access with this to Black Cat Road. So, with that, the initial concerns, children -- we have a lot of small children, families with small children. Our entrance becomes congested in the morning, especially due to bus stops, school kids with flow of cars in and out. So, when -- Becky mentioned the developers meeting. Some of these concerns were addressed -- or brought up. I won't say they were addressed, but, essentially, the reply that we got when asking about what are -- what is ACHD going to do to maintain or help -- whether it's stop signs or potential stop lights to help that flow of traffic through our subdivision, the response that I got was it won't be an issue, because there won't be that much extra traffic. So, we weren't comfortable with that answer by any means. Nothing has been proposed to alleviate that concern. I know that Becky has mentioned that they are planning to promote this as a retirement community of sorts, but unless that's an actual agreement that that is what it has to be, like a 55 and over community, there is -- there is no indication that we are not going to have some sort of major traffic issue, especially when properties to the west are developed and also connecting two places in Turnberry Crossing. That future planning is also going to create a mass amount of influx of traffic through -- to use our connection to Black Cat Road and so thank you for your time. Just wanted to state that. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Is there anyone else here to testify? Becky, would you like to come back forward? McKay: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Becky McKay. Appreciate Mr. McEwen's comments. I try to make an effort to work with the -- with the adjoining property owners and -- and, obviously, try to mitigate what our impact is. As far as -- as far as the sewer is concerned -- Josh, can I get back to that landscape plan? So, as far as the sewer is concerned, Mr. McEwen is correct, when the sewer gets down to this location it has the minimum of three foot of cover. So, as far as sewering of his property, the city of Meridian Public Works has -- has required that we extend the sewer line to here to bring that sewer -- because we have more depth here than we do at this location. We will stub water here. We will stub water here. But the sewer will be stubbed at this location for him. He could do a grinder pump if he were to redevelop his property or he wanted to connect his home. I did have a conversation with the city engineer and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 79 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 20 of 67 talked to Warren about the existing house here, if we could not get a service line over could we do a grinder pump and, then, pressure into the line and he had indicated, yes, we could. But with our redesign we do not need to do that, based on our initial sewer inverts. As far as Mr. McEwen, you know, on the irrigation, we will coordinate with the adjoining property owners, like I -- like I told you I'm -- you know, I have had conversations -- multiple conversations with the property owner to the south. We will protect any existing irrigation facilities. I indicated that this is served by the McKinney -- it's the Stewart Lateral that serves everybody out here and that head gate is here. So, I worked with Settlers Irrigation District, Mack Myers, making sure that we are protecting or piping all of the irrigation and drainage water for the adjoining properties and, obviously, enhancing the irrigation system that we have out here now for this development. Ms. Donahue, she did attend my neighborhood meeting at my office. Her primary concern was, obviously, traffic and the -- the fact that, you know, our primary access is to Cherry Lane. You know, like I said, we are targeting this as 55 and older, but, you know, you can't limit who can live here. We can market it for 55 and older, but -- but we may get some empty nesters, we may get, you know, a single mom with a -- with a child -- who knows. We have to connect to this stub street. That is required by ACHD. If someone were to -- up in this northern section you are going to get some interconnectivity with the traffic, they may come up and, then, go out to Black Cat through Turnberry, but, likewise, you know, we may get some people that drop through us and come out to Cherry Lane. It's kind of, you know, a little bit of give and take. The interconnectivity is important. It's in the policy manual at ACHD. It's in your Comprehensive Plan, your ordinance. So, we really don't have any choice but to make that connection. If this were a straight connection and this really promoted cut-through traffic, I would be far more concerned, but with -- with the design we have we are, obviously, making the most convenient route for our residents to come down to Cherry Lane, the arterial here, and we will be widening Cherry Lane. ACHD is requiring that we dedicate 48 feet of right of way for the existing home. That's not part of the plat and for the plat. There is no compensation for that. We will be widening it 17 feet from centerline and, then, installing a ten foot sidewalk along the entire frontage, including the out parcel. So, we will be doing what we can to mitigate for our impact on the transportation system and, in addition, all of the impact fees that will be paid to ACHD to help, obviously, with future upgrades in this area for the existing traffic that we are creating. We are creating about 699 vehicle trips per day. The additional 14 lots that we are proposing is about 133 additional trips or approximately a 19 percent increase. So, it's pretty minimal. Capacity does exist. ACHD indicated everything is operating at a better -- a level of service better than E and that there is capacity on the network and they have recommended approval. Thank you. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Becky, just one more question. So, on the north side of the property where you have got to construct the bridge over to the other neighborhood up there -- McKay: Yes. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 80 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 21 of 67 Holland: -- is there a slight incline in that that's going to naturally slow traffic as they go over that bridge or is it going to be a flat bridge over -- McKay: That's going to depend -- what we have to provide is two feet of freeboard over each waterway, so sometimes we will go with -- with a pipe or sometimes we will go ahead and do a concrete box structure, so where we are crossing two facilities under two different jurisdictions -- I don't want to speculate. Typically there is a little bit of a rise, because of that two free to free board and, then, we have to match in right here. I can't really come in steep, because I can't send drainage their way. I have to take the drainage back south onto our site. But -- but, typically, you know, we -- it will be -- usually the bridges are kind of a traffic calming measure, you know, there is -- there is walk -- there is sidewalk, railing, you know, you can decorate them, make them, you know, aesthetically pleasing. So, I -- yeah, I don't see the people just whipping through there, no. Holland: Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Okay. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2018-0079. Cassinelli: So moved. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I guess I will -- I will start. I remember -- I remember the first time I went through it and -- I don't remember everything. I do remember we spent a lot of time. I remember there was a lot going on with the pathways and whatnot. What struck my -- when I first looked at this what -- what kind of hit me -- Josh, do you have the future land use map you can pull up real quick? Beach: Not real quick, but I got -- Cassinelli: Okay. If you're -- what -- what struck me is -- I will look at it here and kind of talk to it. When you look north of the freeway with the future land use map there is an overwhelming majority in this area that is -- that's R-4 -- or, excuse me, R-8, that's medium density. Very little -- very little low density. So, I -- I mean it was -- we went through this, we approved it as R-4, I want to protect the low density that's -- that's in this area. Again, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 81 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 22 of 67 it's pretty limited, real heavy medium density, and there is a lot of places to do -- to do the R-8 in this area of Meridian and there is not much of the R-4 left. I -- I don't want to -- we approved it as R-4. We approved the project. I don't like to see that increase. I don't think there is any guarantee of -- of keeping it to R-55 unless you -- you know, unless you design the houses as such. But that's what we saw here is -- this is the same houses going on smaller lots, increasing the density. I mean I -- yes, I like, you know, more, amenities, slightly more open space. It's not a lot to -- talking a half an acre. But -- but what really -- what really hits me is the -- is there is very little -- very little low density R-4 in that area. Most of it's R-8. I don't want to see what little we have go to R-8. That's -- that's really where I -- where I stand on this and we -- and we approved it as R-4. It was -- it was going to work last year and, you know, why it doesn't work now I don't know, but -- but it was going to work then. Perreault: Any other, thoughts, comments? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland I -- you know, I agree that it's -- it's tough when there is not a lot of R-4 possibilities left in the community as far as how we can develop some of it. At the same time I think the applicant did a pretty decent job of trying to make sure we still had an increase in open space, some better pathways going through it, trying to work with the -- the neighbors in putting together a good project. I don't see a lot of concerns in the way that this is laid out, except for the increase in density, because I agree with you, it's tough when there is not a lot of R-4 still available when you look at what's kind of around it and what's developing and what's selling really quickly in the market. There is -- there is a market for the R-8. So, I guess I'm kind of torn between both. I don't see any challenges with this development the way that it's laid out. I think they did a nice job developing the streetscape, putting in some open space, putting in some nice features and increasing some of those amenities. Yeah, those are my thoughts for now. Cassinelli: I guess can I answer that a little bit, in my opinion. The development is fine in somewhere where it's -- that's already zoned R-8. They are looking for -- they are looking for the step up, for the change in zoning, and, again, I just see -- when you look at that there is so little R-4 in that area and there is plenty of R-8. There is plenty of other places to put this development and we went through it and approved it at the R-4 -- I want to see us keep what R-4 is out there. There is just -- there is not much when you look at -- at that area of Meridian and, you know, I would just -- I would hate to lose it. There was a -- you know, there is other R-4s that have gone in and we just -- we just dealt with one it went through -- it went through Council this week. I don't know what -- I don't know what the outcome of that was, I didn't -- I didn't see, but that was an R-4 in the middle of R-8. So, it will work. You know, they had a builder team to put together an R-4 project that worked out there. I think they can make it work here and I -- that -- I just don't want to see us lose what little R-4 we have. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 82 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 23 of 67 Perreault: Okay. So, I wanted to speak to -- I think she might have left, but I wanted to speak to the neighbor in Turnberry Crossing. An application that recently came before us only had one main access and we had a member of the fire department and the police department here chatting with us about safety and safety with public services and so when you don't -- when you only have one access, especially that doesn't have a light and you have a traffic jam there or an accident there, then -- then there -- there aren't other options for emergency vehicles to come into the development, so that's another reason why they need that connectivity to the north. So, I just wanted to -- to -- no. It's -- I'm sorry. It's a closed hearing, so we can't take anymore testimony. When I first looked at this application I was thinking along the lines of Commissioner Cassinelli and was concerned about that increase in density. I still have that concern, but I do think that it is laid out as well as it could be laid out for the shape of the lot that's there. I think that -- that the applicant has -- has thought through as much as they can think through in regard to what the staff has asked of them and what -- what the neighbors have asked of them. So, this is a tough one, because I can definitely see concerns on both sides. So, if there is nothing else to discuss regarding the specifics -- Cassinelli: There is one more opinion down there. Wilson: Yeah. Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: And I was -- I appreciate everybody kind of weighing in. I was kind of curious. But, really, your stance kind of a little -- I mean I think it's really well thought out. I think, obviously, the applicant was very thoughtful in their presentation. I think the open space -- it's kind of interesting, you say it's only half an acre and it went to 15 to 20 percent increase. That's fairly significant in my book. So, I mean I think it's really well developed. There is an interconnectivity look at -- again, the Comprehensive Plan is -- I mean it's a guide, you know, I mean it's -- it's theory kind of running into kind of the reality of the way things are going to develop and so before us we have a pretty gosh darn good proposal that I think checks a lot of boxes, that isn't deviates -- doesn't deviate too far from what we approved in 2017 and I do remember you, Bill, asking a lot of questions about interconnectivity and -- and -- and, you know, open space and I think what we have here is -- it's a compromise piece, but overall I like it. I think it's good. Perreault: We had a lot of conversation about that pond up in that northwest corner and in the end I don't think anybody was very comfortable with that location, so to see that move down in the front I think is a really good compromise. Wilson: I mean I feel like we are kind of -- we're kind of nitpicking when we have something that's a lot better than what came in 2017, but now it's like, well, it's not R-4. Well, it's like, okay, I can see where you're coming from, but, again -- Cassinelli: I'd like to see -- I'd like to see the changes applied, but keep it R-4, the pond and that -- you know, I think better pathway through there, but still keep it at that. I have Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 83 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 24 of 67 got a pretty strong opinion about when I look at the -- I look at the map here and I see the majority of that area -- overwhelming majority is -- is -- is R-8 there. Very little R-4. And I think, you know, when -- when you look 20 years down the road or something, to see this entire part of Meridian with thousands and thousands of rooftops, we are going to be -- you know, are we going to look back and say I wish we would have had a little bit more -- you know, less density in some areas than others. That's just what I see. Perreault: So, I don't have the specifics on this, but I do drive past this every single day and across the way you have got the golf course and you have got larger lots there. If you come down Black Cat you have got a fairly large -- two good size subdivisions with RV garages and whatnot just south of Cherry Lane and, then, the neighborhood in the southeast corner of that -- I'm thinking that's probably R-4 as well. It's pretty close if it's not, so -- is there any way to pull that up, Josh, and actually look at it? I know you were working on that. What's -- what's existing, not just what the comp plan has. Beach: So, just by way of explanation, the yellow is R-4. So, that is -- the bulk of the area is R-4 currently. R-8 is this kind of orange color. So, there is small pockets of R-8 spread throughout and this darker orange is R-15. So, the majority of the areas you can see on the map here is -- is currently zoned R-4. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Are we at the point where we can make a motion? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: You know, I still identify with -- with your comments and, you know, we want to make sure that we -- we take the Comprehensive Plan and we take the tools that are given to us as a city to evaluate and -- and really weigh where the future of this community is. Looking at this map, you know, there is -- there is a lot of R-4 there. There is a lot of density growing throughout the whole valley. I just -- I think that they have done the best that they can with -- with the piece that they have of trying to make it a really nice R-8 project and adding some of those additional amenities. So, with that I'm going to make a motion. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of -- to City Council of file number H-2018-0079 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 20th, 2018, with no modifications. Wilson: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded. All of those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Cassinelli: Nay. Perreault: It's my understanding of three votes makes the motion carry. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 84 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 25 of 67 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT. D. Public Hearing for Hill's Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility (H-2018-0087) by Horizon Tower/Verizon Wireless C/O Powder River Development Services, Inc, Located at the southeast corner of E. Amity Rd. and S. Eagle Rd 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a wireless communication facility in and R-8 zoning district Perreault: Okay. So, we are going to open the next public hearing just for the purpose of continuing for Hill Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility, H-2018-0087 by Horizon Tower Verizon Wireless. It has been requested by the applicant to continue to an undetermined date at this time. Can I get a motion? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: I move we -- sorry. I move we postpone the public hearing for Hills Century Farm Wireless Communications Facility, H-2018-0087 to a date in the future as determined by Planning staff and the applicant. Wilson: Second. Holland: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to continue to a date -- an undetermined date. All those in favor say aye. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing for Mountain View High School Addition (H2018- 0089) by Hummel Architects, Located at 2000 S. Millennium Way 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 25,204 square foot addition to the existing high school on 54.99 acres of land in the R-4 zoning district Perreault: Next we will open the public hearing for Mountain View High School Edition, H-2018-0089. Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, the next application before you is a request for a conditional use permit. This site consists of 55 acres of land, zoned R-4, located at 2000 South Millennium Way. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north are offices and multi-family residential uses, zoned L-O. To the south are single family Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 85 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 26 of 67 residential uses and a city park, zoned R-4. To the east is vacant, undeveloped commercial land, multi-family residential and future single family residential, zoned C-G and R-15. And to the west is a church and single family residential uses, zoned R-8, R- 4 and R-R in Ada county. In 2001 approval was granted for the construction of the high school on this site. Subsequent modular classrooms have been approved since then. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is civic. A conditional use permit is requested for a 25,204 square foot addition to the existing high school. The addition is proposed within a landscaped common area located on the south side of the building adjacent to the cafeteria. The expansion area consists of a two story classroom wing, consisting of 22,600 square feet, which will provide an additional 16 classrooms with support facilities, reducing the need for portable classrooms and reducing the student count in existing classrooms. The remaining 2,600 square feet will be utilized to expand the existing cafeteria to better serve the growing student population. When the high school was originally constructed education institutions were allowed as a principal permitted use in the R-4 zoning district. Since that time the UDC has been amended and now requires conditional use approval. The proposed edition is subject to the specific use standards listed in the UDC for education institutions. The proposal complies with these standards. There are a total of 1,223 existing parking spaces on the site. Five hundred and fifty are required by the UDC based on the total square footage of the existing structure and the addition, which in 274,928 square feet. The area where the addition is proposed will not encroach over any of the existing parking spaces. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown for the proposed addition that are consistent with the existing high school facade and materials. Written testimony has been received from Jacob Rivard, Hummel Architects. He is in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the report. Staff will stand for any questions. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Sonya, so they are not going to be losing any parking spaces; is that correct? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, no, they will not be. Cassinelli: Thank you. Perreault: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Rivard: My name is Jacob Rivard with Hummel Architects, 2785 Bogus Basin Road, Boise, Idaho. 83702. Sonya did a great job going through everything. I don't -- I don't have anything to add to that, but if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 86 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 27 of 67 Perreault: I do have a question. How -- so, I'm assuming this is for the intent of increasing student population. Rivard: Correct. As the city has grown, of course, you know, the school's needs have increased as well and we need to add a little bit more population. So, yes, we are going to be increasing the school's population density a little bit. However, the big part of this actually has helped reduce the portable classrooms and bring the students from the outside -- from the west side of the school to inside and we will go from there and increasing safety as well. Perreault: What's the estimated increase in student population? Rivard: I believe it's currently at around 2,100 and that should only increase about a couple hundred, but that's -- they are thinking about for the future use. They are not thinking about the current. It all depends on who moves into the area. Perreault: Okay. So, this is not intended to be a large addition that increases the student population significantly. Rivard: No. This is mainly to help reduce overcrowding that is currently occurring at the moment and to help reduce the need for those portable classrooms that are on the west side. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: So, will -- is the plan to remove some of the portables? Rivard: All the portables will be no longer in use. Cassinelli: Okay. Perreault: Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Rivard: Thank you. Perreault: Do we have anyone in here to testify? Way: At this time, no. Perreault: Is there anyone in the audience that would like to testify? Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 87 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 28 of 67 Perreault: I move we close the public hearing for Mountain View High School, file H- 2018-0089. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2018-0089. All those in favor. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Wilson: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: It seems pretty straightforward to me. I mean the fact of the matter is these schools -- I mean they -- class size has just increased, so this seems to me to be a reasonable shift away from portables. Gives Mountain View a little bit more capacity, but mostly just to account for an already over -- you know, a very populated high school. I'm supportive of it. Holland: Madam Chair, I tend to agree as well. I think adding the extra 16 classrooms and expanding the -- the cafeteria will help take kids out of portables and much rather see the kids in one building, because it's a lot easier to manage safety and help keep everybody in the same building. So, I don't see any concerns. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Well, Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: There is a certain level of nostalgia with portable buildings. I don't know. But on that I guess I will go ahead and throw out a motion there. After considering all staff, applicant, public testimony I move to approve -- straight approval on a CUP; is that right? Okay. Approve file number H-2018-0089 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 20th, 2018. Wilson: Second. Perreault: It's been moved and seconded for approval of H-2018-0089. All those in favor. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. F. Public Hearing for Verado West ( H-2018-0085) by DevCo Development LLC, Located at 3090 N. Locust Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 88 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 29 of 67 Grove Rd. 1. Request: Modification to the Existing Development Agreement for Verado Subdivision to include the subject property in the agreement; 2. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 19.44 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district; and 3. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 132 building lots and 18 common lots on 17.35 acres of land in an R-15 zoning district Perreault: Next we will move on to the public hearing for Verado West, H-2018-0085 by DevCo Development. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The next applications before you are a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. There is also a request for a development agreement modification, but that does not require Commission action, only City Council. This site consists of 17.35 acres of land, zoned R- 15, located at the southeast corner of North Locust Grove Road and East Ustick Road at 3090 North Locust Grove. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north is East Ustick Road and single family residential properties, zoned R-4. To the west is North Locust Grove Road and single family residential properties, zoned R-8. To the south are also single family residential, zoned R-8. And to the east is rural residential parcels, zoned RUT in Ada county and future single family residential uses in the Verado East Subdivision, zoned R-15. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight units per acre. The applicant is proposing an amendment to the existing development agreement for the Verado Subdivision to include the subject property in the agreement. The first two phases of Verado exist to the east of this site. This application does not require Commission action, only City Council. Annexation and zoning of 19.44 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district is requested. The proposed gross density of the development is 7.6 units per acre, consistent with and at the high end of the density desired in the medium density residential future land use map designation. The applicant is requesting the R-15 district specifically for the three foot wide side yard setbacks and not for density purposes. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown that consists of 132 building lots and 18 common lots on 17.35 acres of land in the proposed R-15 district. The subdivision is proposed to develop in two phases, starting at the east end of the property. The minimum property size of their proposed building lots is 3,081 square feet, with an average lot size of 3,573 square feet. Access to the development is proposed from the east through Verado Subdivision and from the south through Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. No direct access is proposed via Ustick or Locust Grove Roads. All streets within the development are proposed to be public, although reduced street sections, 27 feet wide, are proposed for Laughridge Avenue, Ring Neck Street, Stormy Drive and Summerbrook Avenue, the loop road, which is basically -- if you can see my pointer here, this loop right around here. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 89 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 30 of 67 This will only allow parking on one side of the street, on the inner side of the loop. The UDC requires a minimum of ten percent qualified open space and one site amenity is provided. The applicant is proposing ten percent or 1.73 acres of qualified open space, consisting of internal common area, a micro path and half of the street buffers along adjacent arterial streets. A 6,500 square foot dog park with a seating area and segment of the city's multi-use pathway system is proposed adjacent to the South Sough at the southeast corner of the development as amenities and that is this area right down in here. If you can see my pointer, the small dog park is right here and, then, the multi-use pathway runs here along the corner of the property. A mix of single family residential detached and attached homes, but mostly attached are proposed along the north and west boundaries of the site adjacent to Ustick and Locust Grove Roads, both arterial streets. Detached homes are proposed internal to the development. The attached homes will be single level and are designed to serve mature empty nesters. Detached homes are proposed to be two stories in height and range in size from 1,377 to 1,850 square feet. Those adjacent to the arterial streets will be single story in height. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for future homes in this development. Building materials consist of horizontal and vertical siding with stone and veneer accents. The attached units are required to comply with the design standards listed in the architectural standards manual. Staff does have some concerns on this application and has discussed it with the applicant. Along the south boundary of the site where the red arrows -- or the red lines are indicated, there is not an adequate transition in lot sizes to existing lots. Staff is recommending more comparable lot sizes are provided along this boundary. So, I also -- staff visited the site today of the first Verado development to the east of this site and just took some photos of the homes that have been constructed in that development. So, if you take a look at this bottom corner picture here -- this is the rear of some of the homes along the multi-use pathway in that development to the east. So, that is the -- basically the view from the existing homes in Chamberlain Estates of how the applicant's proposed. This one does have a common area through here, but the rest of these would be more similar to what they would be looking at. Secondly, during the project review meeting with city staff several concerns were raised with the number of narrow lots and the impact that it has to on-street parking, which is less due to the number of driveways in close proximity. As you can see here, this demonstrates that if you -- note the -- the parking pads here and just the tiny little landscape areas in between. It doesn't allow for any on-street parking next to these lots where the -- the detached homes are proposed. The ACHD staff report -- we just got the final report in today. They have requested that the city ensure adequate parking is provided on site as on-street parking is restricted. There is no on-street and that means off-street, basically. There is no on-site parking proposed in this development past experience has shown a lack of reduced -- lack of or reduced on- street parking has created problems with visitors parking in restricted areas that, then, block travel lanes needed for emergency access and, then, they also park in adjacent neighborhoods overflowing. So, that has been an issue for Fire Department that they have noted. The narrow lots also limit the variation in housing types and limits the homes being constructed on the lots from having varied setbacks and building setbacks within the development to articulate and break up the front wall planes of structures visible from interior streets. You can see here from the picture there is -- they are pretty alike in the -- in appearance from the street. All homes are constructed with the same setback with Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 90 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 31 of 67 a garage dominated design that diminishes community character. The applicant is requesting that this development be combined with the previous phases to construct much of the same housing types. The Commission should determine if more variation in lot sizes is needed in this area to provide more housing diversity throughout the entire Verado development. Lastly, while the proposed open space meets the minimum standards, it's not ideal as it's all located at the east end of the subdivision at the entrance to the development. You can see here on the -- well, you can see here that it's located in these two areas. Staff is recommending it's relocated -- specifically this area right here is relocated further to the west to be more central and accessible to all residents. This could be achieved by switching the locations, the configuration of Blocks 3 and 4 or 5, which is these two blocks -- well, this is the block right here. Switching the configuration of this with one of these two blocks and losing two of the building lots, which would result in a through common area. So, for example, this could be removed and create more of a through common area here that would be more open and accessible to all residents within the development, rather than just those on the east end of the development. Further, due to the small lot sizes proposed in this development, staff is recommending a minimum of an additional 8,000 square feet or .18 of an acre and this is based on removal of those two lots right there, roughly. A common area is provided, along with an additional site amenity, such as a gazebo, covered picnic area with picnic tables, or sports courts or other comparable amenity. Staff has requested the applicant submit an updated plan prior to the Commission meeting showing the requested change. However, the applicant opted not to and is requesting approval of the open space and site amenities as proposed. Written testimony was received from Conger Management Group, the applicant. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in Exhibit B of the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you. Any -- any questions for staff? Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I got lots of questions tonight. Sonya, how come there is -- there is no access out to -- Locust Grove would be difficult, but Ustick. Was that such -- the development or was that ACHD? Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, our UDC restricts access to arterial streets, such as Ustick Road and Locust Grove Road -- Cassinelli: Uh-huh. Allen: -- and whereas access was already available from local streets, that's where the applicant proposed it. Cassinelli: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 91 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 32 of 67 Allen: Staff is -- Cassinelli: And, then, another question I had. You kind of were touching on the -- the parking and looking at that. In the -- in the other phases -- I'm not seeing any mailboxes. Are there -- do they have the -- kind of the common mailbox locations? Because, obviously, putting a mailbox and between the houses, that really messes with -- with -- even if you could squeeze one car in there -- Allen: Yes. They have -- if you look in this picture right here in the earlier phases, Commissioner Cassinelli, there is a little common group mailbox thing there. Cassinelli: Okay. All right. Thank you. Perreault: Sonya -- oh. Were you finished? Cassinelli: Yeah. Perreault: Okay. Sonya, was there conversation with the applicant about putting in some single level in between the two stories to give some variety to the roof line and the -- you know, the backs of the houses looking so similar, which is a concern for staff. Is that a possibility? Allen: Chairman, I'm not sure. The applicant could answer that question. I know single level was proposed along the perimeter of the development adjacent to the arterial streets for sure -- Perreault: Okay. Allen: -- and I think there might have been a mix internal, but I'm not positive about that. Perreault: Okay. Oh, okay. Thank you. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Sonya, could you possibly read for us what the written comments were from -- from Conger Management Group? I couldn't seem to find that in the -- Allen: Yes. It was received and entered into the record -- do you have it accessible, Char? If you will give me just a moment I will find that here. Perreault: I'm sorry. Audience members, could we keep it just a little quiet, because we do have a lot of microphones on and they pick up. Okay. Thank you. The hearing is being recorded. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 92 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 33 of 67 Allen: Would you like me to read it in its entirety, Chairman? Perreault: How long is it? Allen: It's not too long. Perreault: Okay. Allen: To Whom It May Concern. Conger Management Group would like to express its support of the Verado West neighborhood application. Verado West will be a great addition to the City of Meridian for the following reasons: Verado West will provide a quality housing product at a price that is well below the median home price for new construction in the Meridian area. Verado West will create jobs and support the construction industry in the area and Verado West will add to the City of Meridian's tax base on a property that has been designated as in-fill. The investment in municipal services and roadways to serve this property has already been made. The utility connection fees and roadway impact fees that this development will generate will help to pay for that infrastructure. Conger Management Group thanks you for your consideration of this matter. Should you have any further questions, please, contact -- Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Are there anymore questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant, please, come forward. Conger: Let's see, Sonya, can you put mine up for me, please? Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Jim Conger, 4824 West Fairview Avenue. Yeah. So, a little -- little shocked here. We are getting a few things at 6:00 o'clock that we hadn't seen in the staff report or heard anything out of staff, so I guess starting out, understanding a few things aesthetically, architecturally, late notice, we are doing our best to meet all of your code requirements as far as the City of Meridian goes, while bringing you an affordable, quality housing product to the city. Night in and night out we are here, you're here, we are seeing three and a half homes per acre over and over and over again and there is a place for that, I totally agree. Not everywhere do we want the cookie cutter, three and a half lots per acre. However, if you're interested in a fresh, innovative, quality housing product, well, that's what we are about and that's what this property is about at this location of Locust Grove and Ustick. We are not your typical R-4, R-8, three unit per acre subdivision specifically here. We thought we heard Meridian is interested in innovative product. I have been on lots of -- I'm on lots of code boards, I'm on every -- I'm on the comp plan board. We are the housing product between a fourplex apartment project and your three and a half lot per acre normal subdivision that you get in -- that you get in here night in, night out. We are that bridge between the two. Without us you get the fourplex project in certain corners, which is this is one of those corners that we are competing with fourplex buyers on this property in particular and it should be noted with all our innovations we meet and exceed code on everything. We aren't asking for a waiver, we are not asking for a favor, we are not asking for anything. We are asking to meet code, go through code, not get last minute items at 6:00 o'clock. Quick, moving -- moving on, just a -- I want to quickly run through your comp plan and your zoning codes, just to make sure everybody Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 93 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 34 of 67 is on the same page. We had a question earlier and I just want to make sure we are all there. I will first talk -- take a moment to walk through your city's comp plan and, then, the zone. So, the comp plan identifies the land use and it actually regulates the range of densities allowed by the city. We are not asking for a step up to get the density in the project you have. We have been in front of you numerous times asking for steps up for good reasons to step up. This property already has a comp plan that supports the project that's in front of you today. There is no step up being asked for. The comp plan dictates the density. The zoning plan now, moving on, designates -- so, the R-15 we are asking for is the dimensional standards. It's your setbacks. It's your frontage. It's your lot size. R-15 is a terrible name. In fact, you will see us again October 15th or 17th or 18th, somewhere in there. We will be in front of you, as we have requested to the city to change the zoning names, so we no longer have to go to neighborhood meetings, we no longer have to come in front of you and City Council and talk about R-15 like it's 15 units to the acre, because it's got nothing to do with 15 units to the acre, so -- so, again, zoning code is all about the type and -- and -- and everything you already know, so I'm not going to bore you any further with -- with codes. But we are grateful to be in front of you tonight to present our vision for the Verado West Community. What you see tonight is -- is a result of nine months worth of work on this particular project with your city planning staff, nine months, and the various review agencies to include Fire Department, numerous meetings, Police Department, Public Works, irrigation district, numerous meetings, and Ada County Highway District, several meetings. Not -- not a big transportation issue here. As well as our own design team. It's been a collaborative process and we are darn proud of what we have got in front of you tonight. Our neighborhood -- our neighborhood is located, as we said, at the southeast corner of Ustick and Locust Grove. This is an ideal type of project, because the entire perimeter road is already installed. All the arterial is in. The sidewalks are in. The streets are in. We will be using the existing entrance of ours from Ustick that's in the green area. The highway district and your City of Meridian code requests minimal access to arterials. This is a location where we are doing -- and a continuation of Verado one, we are happy to go through our neighborhood, because we are proud of our neighborhood into that corner area and so we are satisfying the highway district and Meridian by not doing another entry to Ustick. We are also tying on to your water main and connecting it. We are tying onto the existing sewer that's already stubbed to this property in two locations. Every reason why this has a good comp plan designation, as well as a good continuation of our neighborhood. With the popularity of our Verado housing product in your city, that's -- that's definitely bustling, we have sold out phase one, we are starting our homes of phase two in October, which is in a couple weeks. The foundations before cold weather. And we are lucky enough and fortunate enough to work with the adjacent land owner in what we are now calling Verado West, to be able to buy that property, which allows us to bring and expand our existing Verado community, as you can see on the slide, from our green area, expanding into what we are calling Verado West. Verado is a continuation of our platform from other communities we have with this product and price point in Meridian. What we offer is a well thought through, high quality housing product. I work with one builder, Black Rock Homes. All the product, all the architecture, all the land planning and the neighborhood network is all thought through with the team that's going to the end result, which is to the end user. We offer a distinct variety of housing from your typical Meridian Subdivision. I continue to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 94 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 35 of 67 allude to that. We are close to goods in this location and services and that the people want and need. They can walk, bike, take a short commute to entertainment, shopping, work or food, whether a restaurant or grocery store. That is why the comp plan is so good right here. We are in the middle of everything. The efficient lot sizes to accommodate homes, as Sonya indicated, that range from 1,350 to 1,900 square feet with price -- price points of 240 to 280 thousand dollars. For those reasons we are able to compete against the apartment project. I continue to say that. That is very important. We are a perfect bridge between that three and a half lot per acre and the apartments as you get close to busy roads, like Ustick and Locust Grove, on a very busy corner, you cannot continue to put three units per acre and different type of product in that busy environment. Verado is set up in such a way that our HOA maintains all our homeowners yards. This does several things. It ensures that all the yards are well maintained all the time. It ensures all the grass clippings and up in our landscapers yard in a mulching environment, instead of in the dump. But, most importantly, allows our owners to spend their free time enjoying their family and doing whatever they do when they are not doing yard work, because I don't care for yard work either. It's very important to us that we don't sell to investors. This is a for sale for owner product. Our owners live in homes. We sell and that becomes very important to the fabric of our communities, as the neighbors take time to get to know and actually rely on one another. There is always a place for people who need and want to rent. It's just not in our owner-occupied communities. The Verado amenity package, which I will go into next, is as amazing as our housing product. The integrating the Verado West with our original Verado community allows the owners and our west owners to have full access to all the open space and amenities in the original Verado community and vice-versa, including the new, which in the new Verado West will be an active play park, small dog dog park. Staff keeps calling it a small dog park. It is a small dog dog park. It's specifically that. And, actually, is requested by all of our existing residents in the first Verado. I never thought I would build a dog park in my life. It is the number one item that came out of our interviews with all our existing homeowners, including -- so, included in Verado West will be the new small dog dog park, active play park, and the park shade structure that Sonya alluded to that she added. Verado at full build out will consist of over five acres of landscaped open space, two separate neighborhood parks that you can see that I put in the red highlight and -- and, for the record, we are 700 feet from the west boundary. Your code's block lengths for road stubs are 700 feet. So, if my park, which is 700 feet from the last house to the west, is too far for someone to walk, then, your code has a block length issue between streets. So, to even come up with -- and what we did is we have -- and we will go into the regional pathway and all the reasons why our park is where it's at. But it's centrally located -- basically we have a third, a third and a third is where the two parks are located. We have also built -- by the time this project is done 2,000 feet of your city's regional pathway, which is in the red line all the way along the Finch Lateral. That's no small feat. That is actually now almost ready to be partially used in a loop environment, because our stuff on our east boundary goes -- goes to nowhere. Next our amenity package. Our amenity package is off the charts. I mean we have fenced child safety around our tot lots. We don't -- this isn't our first neighborhood. We -- we -- with our tighter density and our efficient homesites and lots, we put in a better than normal amenity package. We have got the play structure. We have the climbing dome. We have the swing sets. We have the basketball court. We have a concrete track Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 95 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 36 of 67 that's been specifically designed to go around that green area, that is for the kids on their trike and their big wheels and everything else. We see it. That isn't accidentally a border for the grass, it's purposefully put in place. We have seating benches. We have active open park space for soccer and throwing a ball, which is in our new park. We have a park shade structure that Sonya added. We have a small dog dog park to meet all our current residents' needs. We have numerous passive landscape end caps to provide visual happiness as you drive through the community. So, both projects combined is a total of 36 acres. With the list in front of you, we have well over seven different amenities. Code requires two. So, to hear us barely getting by with minimums is beyond comprehension. I -- it's actually irritating. We originally had a concern with city staff placing a condition to add the park shade structure and add one more amenity to this. We are dropping our concern and we are going to accept that condition. We actually think it's going to be a good addition over in that active ball area and soccer area. So, we are -- we have got no problem with that and we will add it to our already boisterous amenity and open space package. I would like to know -- this isn't the first time we are in front of you. Most or all of our projects exceed code minimums and this projects is no example. So, to say we meet code is basically not right. So, we do have five issues -- four issues -- five issues I will go through quickly. I'm running out of time, because I went on an original rant. Transition to the south boundary is our -- is our first one. On our entire boundary we have 22 lots to 13. We have a ratio of 1.7 to one. We believe that, you know, your staff is saying we are not comparable or like sized. Your core doesn't say you must be comparable or like sized on the boundary. We are the transition that ultimately has to get to the busy Ustick Road. We see our adjacent owner-occupied homes as being just the right location with transition towards the busy Ustick Road. You will hear tonight that we would like some single level versus two level. These are two story homes at this location. Homes next to us may be single level, can always be remodeled a two story, but they are going to be two -- two story homes. You make the lots bigger, they are still going to be a bigger two story home. So -- so, we are the right transition to get to the density needed to -- to be that product that competes. Planning will move to -- staff is wanting to pipe the Finch Lateral. Your staff is calling it the South Slough. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District is actually the jurisdiction who is in charge of this. They're calling -- it's the Finch Lateral. It's a delivery ditch. So, we want to pipe it. Your staff is saying don't pipe it. We are requesting that you over -- override that. If you look at the Finch Lateral upstream, which is the picture on the right, if I leave it open I have got to put the chain link, because Nampa-Meridian won't let you not have chain link next to a delivery ditch. It's not a slough, it's a delivery ditch. But you look at our beautiful Movado project at Five Mile Creek where we built a regional pathway for the city, we didn't have to do the chain link, because that is a creek that needs preserved. So, we don't need to preserve the Finch Lateral, you won't get to see it or even get near it anyhow. Quickly, going into more open space. We have 10.2 percent on this phase. We have more than that combined at 12 percent. I just put clouds around everything that is our open space. Again, when you combine us all together we have got five acres of landscape space. We exceed code. We don't need more open space and we don't need our HOA to have to maintain more open space. We -- we have ample. Relocate the local park. This isn't a park, for crying out loud. This is -- as you can see in the bottom, this is a focal park -- focal point. When you drive in -- I don't want to put two homes there and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 96 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 37 of 67 put headlights in their window. This is a focal park. This isn't an active park. We have active -- but we have two active parks. We have a regional greenbelt. This is passive space, which is hard to understand for staff, but this is passive space and I think we are almost there. In closing, we have worked continuously with staff. We respectfully request the modification of those five items. Delete the condition 1-1-C, which is a lot transition. Delete the condition of the Finch Lateral. I think I have showed you plenty of reasons why that is going to be a better environment if it's piped. We have 10.2 percent open space. We have 12 and a half combined. We will exceed. Delete relocate the interior -- if you do nothing else for me at least don't make us move and put lots where I have got to put cars driving right by and putting lights in the front window. It makes no sense. And, then, the -- construct all arterial. This is actually a development agreement item, so, actually, the final item may not -- may not matter to P&Z. That is to do our phase two landscaping of Locust Grove when we do phase two. With that I will stand for any questions. Perreault: Thank you. Commissioners, are there any questions for the applicant? Cassinelli: I have a couple. Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Thank you for your passion. Conger: I love it. Cassinelli: I have -- you alluded to something a couple times, so I'm going to kind of ask a question. It may come off a little odd. How do you guarantee it's going to be a small dog dog park? Conger: Well, Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, you are absolutely right. I am not certain what small dog is, but if you have a 108 pound dog, you are going to be pretty limited in there. But you are correct, you could have a bigger dog and we are not going to kick them out. Cassinelli: Okay. Conger: But mostly small dogs. Cassinelli: You went through -- I just had to get that question answered. Conger: That's fair. Cassinelli: Because you covered it a couple times. The Finch Lateral, you -- you went through that pretty quickly. You want to do -- you want to do something similar to Five Mile Creek -- to what you did on the Five Mile Creek, what -- go over that again if you could. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 97 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 38 of 67 Conger: Yes. No. Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, no, we are proposing to pipe. So, I want to pipe this corner and there is two reasons. I have been working with Nampa- Meridian Irrigation District for over nine months on this as well. You were coming up and leaving -- so, that red circle is coming up and, then, making a 90 degree turn and going off our property. So, there is a high likelihood -- if I were to leave this open I -- that corners -- once we start putting more homes and everything around it, then, the irrigation district doesn't like these 90 degree corners, because it's no longer a pasture where they can go fix them when they erode way. So, our plan is to pipe that irrigation ditch not a creek that needs preserved, and run it, basically, underneath and you can see the visual below, is the regional pathway and this ditch will be piped, you know, beside the regional pathway. That way we are able to have a fun environment, coming -- the regional pathway is going to come into our open park. Yes, it's private, but very enjoyable, wide open space and comfortable and, then, move through the property. So, we want to tile the ditch and it is the Finch Lateral. The city's identifying it as the South Slough that needs preserved, but we need to tile that ditch in that location. Cassinelli: Okay. Conger: Thank you. Cassinelli: And, then, one more question. You were talking about the -- you referenced owner occupied homes in there and this wasn't investment. Are you planning on putting something in the HOA that limits that? I don't even -- I don't even know legally what can be done with that. I'm looking to you, because -- because you probably know, but -- so, you stressed that point. What -- how are you planning on -- Conger: Well, Madam Chair -- Cassinelli: -- dealing with that one. Conger: -- Commissioner Cassinelli, that is a wonderful question and we are very passionate about that. Our legal firm, Givens Pursley, we have worked through in our previous developments and do have restrictions within the law of renting. Obviously, if it's a relative you can have rentals and, you know, our real estate contracts have a box that they physically have to check and initial that says they are not an investor. We also -- our sales professionals, when they interview every buyer -- but, of course, we have one or two always slip through. I would be lying if we -- if we didn't. In that case our CC&Rs also regulate no rental signs. So, that is in the CC&Rs and there are other restrictions within the law of no Airbnb and things of that nature. That gets a little -- a little finer scale of the law, but they are in our HOAs and we are passionate about it. Cassinelli: Okay. Conger: CC&Rs, not -- Cassinelli: Yeah. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 98 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 39 of 67 Perreault: I think what Commissioner Cassinelli is asking is can you explicitly say you can't have more than a certain percentage of renters in an area. I think that's what -- what his question is. Cassinelli: Yeah. That -- yes. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Can you address that? Can you -- are you -- do you have a number in the CC&Rs, then, of what can be -- or what cannot be owner occupied? Conger: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, no, we don't have a percentage. We -- we have some pretty strict rules that makes it pretty difficult to rent homes. Cassinelli: So, you are going to eliminate as much as legally you can. Conger: That is correct. That is correct. Allen: Madam Chair? Excuse me. I would like to make a clarification on the record for the applicant. I did speak with him earlier about this, but I just wanted the Commission to be aware that the conceptual elevations submitted by the applicant do show overhanging eaves here and it's -- it's my understanding from the applicant that they will not be constructing eaves in all areas on all homes. So, I just would like that addressed and, then, also for you to be aware that the elevations included do not necessarily represent that. So, if you have one -- feelings one way or the other I would like it noted on the -- on the record, please. Perreault: Thank you, Sonya. While on that topic would you like to give us an idea which homes -- are the two stories going to have -- not have eaves? Can you speak to that, please? Conger: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, so I don't know -- you know, we went through this at length at our last project, which was this same product, which was called O'Berg and it was here with Mr. Yearsley and what we worked through and understood, you know, every -- you know, again, one builder Black Rock Homes -- every facet of the home has been to a design purpose through their architect and through -- through their sales team and the eaves are no different. What -- what ends up happening is there are eaves in the front of the house, they go back about 25 feet, but because of fire code those eaves are expensive. So, we are talking about money, which you're never supposed to talk about, it's approximately 2,200 dollars from -- so, we put eaves in the first 25 feet -- 20 feet of the home. Every home is a little bit different and, then, from that point backwards we do not. Our buyers -- we have actually taken buyers and walked them through fronts of homes and backs of homes. So, our elevations are strong from the front. We do not put eaves down and find that value. We are working desperately hard to get a product that gets under the medium price that fits in these areas where we compete with that nasty looking fourplex product and it takes every bit of working through Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 99 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 40 of 67 meeting code and -- and -- and, then, dealing with the fire code and everything else to get a product that we can bring to market and give these Meridian buyers. We are talking about -- and I hear we don't have diversity in our neighborhood. I have 120 homes or 130 homes. I am in an area of a sea of three units per acre. We are the diversity of product. You're not at -- we have two home products in less than 30 acres and actually -- actually, we have four home products, because we had the homes in the back. So, we are the diversity of product. To be able to just draw a small little circle on a big map of Meridian and say we are not diverse is no way to look at planning or even regional planning or any type of planning. Perreault: So, would it be safe to say that the single levels that run along Ustick on the north side, the -- essentially duplexes, those will likely have the eaves, but the two stories won't? Conger: No. Madam Chair, the -- all the housing product does not have eaves past the 25 foot. Perreault: All of them. Conger: They are on this side. Perreault: On the sides. Conger: They do in the rear. No. We worked very hard -- I am not as passionate -- Black Rock -- my partner Black Rock Homes is as passionate. We do single level homes against our arterials, because we don't like driving down arterials and seeing those nasty two stories with the aluminum foil in the windows and everything that comes with those. So, we have gone out of the way to take care of our internal buyers. We have gone out of the way as a public benefit to try to make the arterial aesthetically pleasing and we have a lot of things to mesh together. To start picking a few flies out of the ointment is -- is awful difficult at the pulpit for sure. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: One more question for you is about some of the parking concerns. Conger: Yes. Holland: That that loop is a little bit narrower than a traditional road would be. Could you explain a little bit on what the intention was with the small road and only parking on one side of it? Conger: Yes, Madam Chair, Commissioner Holland, I would love to, and I will start out with a clarification of staff -- is we are not requesting reduced widths. This is now a typical Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 100 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 41 of 67 standard. There is a 27 foot standard and a 33 foot standard. So, these -- these aren't a waiver, these aren't this and they -- and it's not that for sure. So, we definitely have done 27 foot roadways in all our other neighborhoods. This one is a local street. So, typically, you have ACHD constantly working now -- and if you have met a handful of their commissioners -- to get their roads narrower for maintenance over the next hundred years, nobody is doing wide roads and getting to ACHD unless you have specific traffic counts that force you to. So, if I go in with wide roads I don't get through the commission at ACHD. Now, you will see my end caps in the -- in the center area, if I am smart enough to run this mouse. So, I have parking on all the end caps. So, I have no parking on the side of the homes, which there wasn't a lot of parking either way. So, I have -- I don't know where it went. I have -- either -- either way. That's -- that's why, I'm in yours, sorry about that. So, talking about those end caps. So, what -- what we have first and foremost is we have four parking -- four parking spots in every house. We have two garages and we have two parking outside of the garage, which is required by code. I'm not giving you anything extra. We know that. But the code is there because that's the amount of parking needed for a house. Why are we -- this isn't a fourplex, I'm not at 14 units per acre, I am seven. I mean what -- so, I have got the four spots and, then, we have parking along the side of our roads against that landscaped area, which again -- and then -- I don't know. We have been in our neighborhoods -- we have finished Solterra. We have finished Sovi. We are done with one phase of the Movado that's -- that's actually done forever and, then, we are moving across the creek that you saw earlier. We have gone and stayed in our neighborhoods after hours and watched functions. Sure, possibly a Superbowl party is going to be an issue, but I suspect that's an issue in -- in my own neighborhood. So, parking on one side of the street, having 27 foot wide streets is responsible and it's the way of the future and that's not asking for a reduction. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I -- in looking at the -- at the map that's up here, I think what -- you know, when you look at it you see the parks, the green space are up front. I get what you're -- I get where you're at. I wouldn't want -- you know, if I was living up front there I wouldn't want headlights coming in that -- that access. When you look at it -- because when you look at it -- when you take the whole picture, it's -- it's a little different. There is still nothing on -- on the -- the west end over there by Locust Grove. Have you -- I'm just -- in looking at this and I'm just thinking -- I'm thinking out loud. You have got the end caps there. What if you were to eliminate maybe one of the end caps on each of those blocks and put a pathway -- stuck it down the middle. Put a pathway down the middle. Instead of clumping everything together, you're breaking it up a little bit. Conger: Oh. Cassinelli: It's the matter of -- I think what -- see, what -- I think what's going on is in seeing that green space it's all together up front. The end caps don't really -- because of the way they are don't really appear to be the green space. If they were in the middle and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 101 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 42 of 67 broke up some of those lots -- the one straight down the center from east to west from that park. Does that -- does that make sense. Conger: Boy, it's killing me. So, I will jump in here, Madam Chair and Commissioner Cassinelli. So, that block length is 240 feet. That block length is nothing. So, as far as breaking up homes -- or breaking it up for pedestrian, I mean block lengths are 700 feet or a thousand feet for pedestrian. So, we are at 240. We are not even 25 percent of your pedestrian length -- block length in the code. So, I'm not trying to be a minimalist here, but we don't need more places in the center. We need landscaping on -- on the ends to help shield once everything grows up. You're looking at photos of a brand new development and three years is different and six years it's much different, but those are better suited to have -- and I said little -- little pockets of happiness when you're driving by them is definitely what the land plan and planners are after, trying to break up a 240 foot length -- block length is -- is -- is not -- not -- not certainly anything. What -- and we aren't at the end. I guess I keep trying to -- to come back and make it even easier with -- with this one is -- is we have got the residents in the west that are coming -- not only to the park, but to the regional pathway and, again, the center one is not a park, it's a viewing pleasure. When I have had a real rough day at work and I'm coming home and I get to look at a couple things visually pleasing, instead of the front -- in somebody's window. So, I got the park in the third, I have got that third coming and, then, they are getting into the regional pathway. They are going across that regional pathway, my tot lot and everything and that amazing amenities that I put in phase one is at the other third point, I go all the way to the right side of your screen with my O'Berg, we picked up the five acres at the end and that one got approved a couple months ago. So, what we have is a -- is -- is we were able to finish this little in-fill area, bring them all into a regional pathway, two amazing park systems that we did centrally locate. I mean it is centrally located and it's 700 feet. Your employees to this building have to walk 510 feet from the farthest parking spot. That's almost more criminal to me than someone pulling into a park at 700 feet. I mean you walk further at Walmart than you will to get to this park. I mean it is logistically there for a reason and that's because it's the third part and it's part of the regional pathway coming out. We combined the two. Moving and trying to migrate that to the west doesn't give our residents any advantage. In fact, I think you're taking away from combining and making something super special than making a couple normal ho-hum things. Perreault: Mr. Conger, how -- how are we going to keep people from parking on the side of the street where -- where they are not supposed to? Obviously, it would make sense that they wouldn't, because there is driveways that are dividing it up such that they are not supposed to, but they might. So, is there -- other than it just being prohibitive because there is not enough space in between the driveway, is there another -- signage? Is there anything else that can be done to make it clear that parking is not permitted there? Conger: No. That's a wonderful question, Madam Chair. So -- so, the answer to that is, yes, it is restricted by signage and those signs are every 75 feet. So, we have signage and, then, why -- and the other luxury I have with -- with my builder partner is these homes aren't sold until they are -- until they are built. These aren't custom homes. So, nobody's out there buying a home site and -- and not understanding what they are buying into. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 102 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 43 of 67 These homes are finished and usually five or six at a time down a row. They are sold. So, someone buying this house it's actually already built, the environments already there, they are seeing the no parking, they are seeing the parking and they fully understand it. Now, we are in this development. We have been in this development for two years to date. We will be in at another three and a half years. Our sales agents are on site, it's an onsite office. They educate. If someone is parking, then, we educate and half the time we educate our own subcontractors while we are temporarily building. But -- but we do that as well. Perreault: So, you mentioned that you don't think that the density on the south side in relationship to the south neighborhood is a concern. You said you had a 1.7 to one ratio, but the looks of it -- now, I know this -- this isn't to scale, but it looks a lot more dense than that and you have the two stories. Do you have anything additional to add in that regard? Conger: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, certainly. I can -- I can go into it even -- even further. So, we -- we take a lot of time in our original designs of what -- this isn't the first time we have been in front of anybody, whether it be Commission or Council, talking about transition to neighbors. So, if you look at the big homes on the corner, you can see in the bottom left and, then, in the middle and, then, the bottom right, those homes are built sideways. I actually get to look at their trailers. Their RVs and their trailers. We are not complaining that they don't have CC&Rs that prohibit it and the side of their building. So, those are immediately taken away, because I have got one home living up to their backyard. I have got the other home that's staring directly into their RVs. The other one is a little wider lot, it's got a storage shed, that lives to them. We have several homes that are the blue and the -- and the yellow are about two to one in that range. We have one that could be two and a quarter. If you took half a lot out and added another quarter of a lot in, about two and a quarter. So, as far as a transition, what, go ahead and remove one lot and, then, now I just build a wider two story home? I mean there is no gain. At least we have breaks between the homes and we are the transition. Again, I have the -- the task to get density to transition to major arterial and, then, still come back to the neighbor group. We have done this transition before. This is a healthy transition. Now, certainly neighbors would rather have the ranch. We know that. I respect that. Everybody would rather have the ranch, except -- except, you know, the guy buying the property, of course. So, we have worked hard to be a decent transition. I don't know where losing one lot makes the transition any less enjoyable for the neighbors. Perrault: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Conger: Okay. Thank you guys. Perreault: At this time we will now take public testimony. Way: Madam Chair, we have six people signed up for testimony. Perreault: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 103 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 44 of 67 Way: The first person is Michael Simpson. Simpson: Thank you for listening to my testimony. Perreault: Please state your name and address for the record. Simpson: I'm Michael Simpson. 1918 East Kamay. I live on the house that the -- what is it, the Finch Lateral curves around and so I have a -- I had a few concerns here. One is is their plan to do the routing of the irrigation through there, because it -- the lateral goes underneath the road. One of my -- one of my concerns is that they make the piping too large that it -- whether it will do -- if it will push -- because, you know, you have a high density of houses out there, if -- you know, say it rains an inch of rain in say an hour, that water has got to go somewhere and if it all sort of comes out that pipe it will back up and it will flood my house. So, that -- that's a big concern I have there. Another thing is -- is the -- the no -- no entrance to the West -- Verado West Subdivision and -- and I guess I don't understand why they can't put an entrance -- especially maybe if they made the entrance way to -- way to the east or something, because I see that the Summerwind across the street has a -- has an entrance and so I guess that that's an ACHD issue. I guess there might not be any way of getting around it, though. I guess the concern to me is is, you know, traffic between about 3:00 o'clock and 7:00 o'clock, trying to get out from our Chamberlain Estates Subdivision, it's -- it's -- it's pretty much congested there. So, really, you only have one entrance into the subdivision and you're putting 132 homes, that's -- you know, if you think, okay, well, I got four people per household, that's -- that's 500 people that -- that, basically, you have that Verado entrance needs to serve and it's already congested. So, how are you -- you know, if you have to have emergency services how are you going to serve those people? I mean I'm very concerned about the safety of the community and how well these -- you know, these new subdivisions -- you know, I just -- I don't want to see anybody get hurt. I guess another issue I have is -- so, I would be -- the dog park -- the proposed dog park would be in back of my house and I noticed that they took the path right up to the edge of the -- the sides of the lateral, so -- or -- but, basically, the -- it looks like they got a path and, then, it would go on to what would be private property, because that -- you know, you have the sides of the lateral there, which I believe is owned by the Meridian-Nampa Irrigation District and so -- so -- especially if you have water coming out of, you know, one -- one pipe that's coming out of there and, then, it's going into another pipe, it may make that area really -- maybe -- maybe the water would go through there very rapidly, so I would definitely want to make sure that -- that there is kind of a fence, so that, basically, you know, small kids when they like go out of the park area and, then, go right down to the -- right -- right into the lateral. And another thing that I'm kind of concerned about is it just -- you know, them getting in there and playing in that -- that water or something like that. I just -- I think it needs to be fenced off and I don't think, you know, having a trail go to the end of there just would encourage people to kind of cut across out onto the street, trespass over that area, potentially disturb the neighbors. Perreault: Okay. I'm sorry, sir, we only can give everyone three minutes just for time sake. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 104 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 45 of 67 Simpson: Okay. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you so much. Way: Next person we have Chris Catherman. Catherman: Good evening. Chris Catherman, 1838 East Kamay. The subdivision he is doing is a very beautiful one. There is a lot of concerns with all of us in Chamberlain Estates. Ours is -- I'm right there on Kamay and I'm going to have two and kind of a quarter homes -- two story homes behind us and we had talked to Jim before at the meeting and asked if, you know, for the folks on Kamay if they couldn't have the one story homes behind us. Our subdivision has been there for 20 plus years. We are well established. It would just be nice if we could be granted the one story homes on there and I know that's a couple of lots he would lose, but it -- it gives us a little bit of privacy and it would work really well for all of us there on Kamay on those seven houses they are going to have that butted up to us. So, I would appreciate some real serious consideration on your part to maybe amend the plan. So, thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Way: Madam Chair, Paul Nielson. Perreault: Okay. Nielson: Hi. I'm Paul Nielson. 1812 East Kamay Drive, Meridian. If you could put the map up showing the color coding of the homes and the lots. My lot borders -- or backs up to the -- the new development. It's the one that's had the different colors for the existing homeowners. From looking at that map my house would back up to about two and a half or more of these new homes and -- yes. Thank you. Mine is the -- does this mouse work on here? Mine is this property here. So, to me that looks like more than two and a half new lots. My concern is -- is looking out my back window and seeing a two story wall behind my home. In talking to Mr. Conger when he had a neighborhood meeting -- and he can correct me if I'm wrong -- my understanding is those homes would be 15 feet from my property line. So, I will look out my windows, look up and there will be a house or houses. Also from my understanding in that meeting the homes are six feet apart. That's how far six feet is. So, what I would really like to see is single level homes along there. It transitions from mostly single level homes in our neighborhood to there and, then, across the street in the development to the two story homes. I'm not opposed to the development. When I bought my home 20 years ago -- I am an original homeowner there. I knew at some point it would be developed. I'm surprised it lasted 20 years before it got developed, but, like I say, I'm just very concerned about looking out and seeing a wall of homes. Mr. Conger also stated that around the perimeter on Locust Grove and Ustick they put single level homes, because he says they don't want people driving down the streets looking up at a nasty two-story home with aluminum foil in their windows. Well, I appreciate that for the development. He has to think of the people will be buying the homes, but for the people that are already living next to the new development, how about Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 105 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 46 of 67 a little consideration for us. So, now I will be someone who lived there for 20 years, have to look out at a nasty two story home with tin foil in it's windows, because -- also with them -- those -- those homes being two stories, if they plant a tree in their backyard it's going to take 20 years for it to provide shade to those windows and those windows are facing south. So, in the summer months they are going to get direct sunlight. I know, because my home faces south. I get it on the front side of my house. So, I know what it's going to do so. What I would like to see is them switch to single level homes along the border between Chamberlain Estates and their development, so it's not like we have to look out our back doors and see a wall, because that's what I see. Yeah, I'm not crazy about the density of it, but that's life, you know. Meridian is growing like a weed. That's not -- that's not going to stop. But, like I say, just looking at a wall is not good. I have considered planting hops to make my own -- thank you for your time. Perreault: Thank you so much. Way: Madam Chair, Chuck Catherman. C.Catherman: My name is Chuck Catherman. I live at 1838 East Kamay. Right next door to Paul who was just up here before me. I have the same concerns as Paul. Looking out our back windows, we look up -- straight up and we are going to see these houses, which you saw pictures of there and they are not that all appealing from the back and we have to look at that every day and they are looking right down into our backyards. Alls we are asking is the same thing that staff was asking, just put one story houses on that side of the street between us and their next street and just -- and I have to agree with the lady that was up here, too. She said we got two houses looking down into our backyard all the time and so those people driving down Ustick, you know, they will see it on their way to work and they are on their way home, they will see the one story houses and they will think, well, that's pretty cool, but we have to look at it all the time. So, that's our only concern. The rest of the subdivision is great. We like it. We just don't want to look at two story houses, three of them, behind our house. Thank you. Perreault: Thank you. Way: Madam Chair, Megan Izzo. I'm sure I butchered that. I'm sorry. Izzo: Hi. I'm Megan Izzo. I live at 1958 East Kamay, so just down a couple -- across from that park area. Perreault: If you would speak directly into the microphone. Izzo: Sorry. Of course. Across from that park area. And going -- all of those. I feel like I'm lucky, because I have that little bit of green space behind me, but the rest of these houses -- I mean we have been watching this development go up and they are so close together and they are going to be so close to us and I also have concerns about that -- the entrance and all of the cars coming through our neighborhood. I have a four year old Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 106 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 47 of 67 and I'm just really worried about the amount of traffic with that high density coming through just those two spots. So, thank you. Way: And I have Will Dilmore. Dilmore: Hi. Will Dilmore. 5854 North Rosepoint Place in Boise. I'm actually the onsite real estate agent that was being talked about. I have 25 years of experience selling real estate in the valley here just in Boise. I have been working with this builder and development crew for going on about 18 years. I have been working these on-site communities that have been referenced here for the last four years. Solterra being one of them. That was a community very very similar to this. Same product. Same demographics. Immediately adjacent to Packard Estates to the south of where Verado is. Same two story product that backs up to the existing Packard Estate homes. Worked great. It's all built out. It's easily seen by everybody now. They can drive through there. Solterra was a great transition from Packard Estates to Fairview Boulevard, just like Verado is from Packard Estates to the north, as well as Chamberlain to Ustick. In regards to parking -- so, again, we have been at Solterra, sold that out. We have been at Sovi, sold that out. Been at Verado now for 12 months and have sold that portion. We are not having any issues. No homeowners complaints about parking. Again, you have got the two car stalls for the garage. Two cars for the driveway. There has literally been no issues for parking, emergency vehicle access in and out. I have heard a number of comments about the amount of traffic that Verado brings into and maybe through the surrounding communities. We actually take more traffic through Verado out to Ustick from Packard and Chamberlain than we put back to their traffic. We have been actually trying to figure out how to slow that traffic down from surrounding neighborhoods actually coming through Verado. So, it's -- it's nice to have multiple ingress-egresses, like the City of Meridian does, and so it -- you know, it disperses traffic. But we get actually more traffic through Verado than we actually put through those communities and that's just from daily experience being on site demographic wise this product -- we have got mid 20s all the way to 80 plus for demographics. Single level and two stories. We have the singles. We have got divorced parents. We have got the moms, the dads that are retired that want to be closer to family now. So, in terms of the demographics and what this product is offering has been awesome in terms of demand, Solterra was expected to be a 36 month project. Sold out in 24 months. Sovi was expected to be an 18 month project, sold out in less than 12 months. The first phase -- first two phases of Verado was expected to be 24, it's now 18 on that. So, for whatever it's worth. Perreault: Thank you. Way: Nobody else, Madam Chair. Perreault: Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to come forward and speak? Please come forward. State your name and address for the record. T.Simpson: Thekla Simpson. 1918 East Kamay Drive. I think this is an example of just because you can build this many houses in one area, doesn't mean you should, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 107 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 48 of 67 especially considering -- I have seen what this density looks like right next to me. I'm here to tell you there is absolutely no personality to these houses. When you can't even have eaves that go all the way back on a house to make it look decent, I have a real problem with it. We live in a community where we send Costco back to redesign itself, yet we are handed houses that look like this and I would just like to see way more personality, at least make them look unique or something, and, as I said, the density is ridiculous. You drive through there -- no space. None. If there was ever a fire I -- I actually trembled to think about how many houses would go up. So, that is where I stand. Just give these people the same consideration you did Costco. That's all I ask. Perreault: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. Conger: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I can be fairly fast. Sonya, can I put my presentation back on, please. Thank you. So, I will quickly go through all estate lots, safe transition for last. I will quickly go through the Finch Lateral. I did need to say one more -- one more item on that. Inside that circle area I think I alluded to it -- it's a half acre of land. It will still count as my open space, because you have passive and active. We are trying to make it a more active park. I would still have a half active park if we don't ditch it, but, again, pipe -- I mean pipe it -- piping it certainly is going to avoid the upper right-hand corner of the chain link and no one getting to enjoy over a half acre of real estate and -- and a regional pathway that's -- that's -- it's really not that comfortable. The open space. I'm not going to go back into that. W e have got a tremendous amount of open space. We would sure appreciate you just capping it at 10.2 and modifying that condition. Relocate the interior open space. I don't think I can do a better job than I have already done. I would hope that we don't have to put homes in that intersection and put lights in the window. So, we would like to delete that condition on open space. The -- the -- allow us to -- to landscape Locust Grove with phase two is the last item. Again, I guess that's the development agreement and only required by City Council. So, coming back to lots and size transition, you know, this is very difficult for me, because of all our time -- and we do a lot of neighborhood meetings, you know, it was a small group at our neighborhood meeting, probably half of what's here. Super nice people. Super enjoyable neighborhood meeting. Talking to them before the hearing and talking to them now, I actually am conflicted, because I -- I really like them and they are a little bit different set of neighbors than we normally run across. Extremely considerate and -- and -- and -- and -- and methodical, but we don't, you know, single level restrict homes. That's not something the city typically does. That's not something we typically do. The homes that are across from us are single level today. I actually ten years ago had a single level house that I remodeled into two story. There is nothing to say those won't be a two story in two years from now. However, since I am the developer and we get to do whatever I want to do, if we were to be successful on everything else on this screen, we would limit ourselves to single level homes against our neighbors to the south. But that would mean let me pipe the Finch. I'm at 10.2 percent, instead of 11. I don't want to relocate that park. That's not good planning and -- and that's really the only four items we are talking about. And, then, we would impose, through the development agreement, to single level. I'm not trying to be pompous and ignorant. I think that would be a great trade off and these are super good neighbors I will have to admit and we don't get to say that every Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 108 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 49 of 67 day. So, it's kind of fun to say that. So, with that I would love any further questions and -- and I would definitely do the unthinkable of restrictions to single level, which you don't see every day. Perreault: Commissioners, do you have any questions for the applicant? Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: Since the first round of questions last time was about the small dog dog park, I will start with that one again. Do you -- are there going to be any set hours on the -- the dog park, since there was a concern addressed about having the dog park in the backyard of some of those folks? Conger: Yes. Madam Chair, Commissioner Holland, actually, I just had a discussion with -- with Black Rock Homes and I meant to bring that up. They are the one -- the driver between the sales professional -- you heard from Will Dilmore and all the interviews and Black Rock. So, we will have time rules on it and it actually -- and they have seen it in another city, it actually has -- there is a restriction on the size of dog and it actually has a portal that will be -- that we will end up building in, because in a dog park you have that initial gate that, then, goes to the second gate, it will actually have a portal of some sort that I will end up having to build once I understand how to do it, that will restrict the size of that dog, so it will have times and it will have a size restriction. Holland: One follow-up question to that. Do you have any other comments about -- I'm not familiar enough about how drainage ditches work when you pipe them versus unpipe them. When -- if there is any flooding concerns, can you address that a little bit for us, too, of the comments that were made earlier about the worries of flooding? Conger: No. Madam Chair, Commissioner Holland, that is, yeah, good -- good follow up. So, our -- our piping plans, which have actually already been through the first round of reviews, which is the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. So, again, first and foremost, this is the Finch Lateral, which is a delivery ditch, but all laterals over the last 40 years when developers were able to put some drainage in -- our storm drain does not go into this property. So, what we have done is we have taken a previous farm that used to drain when it rained all of its property into the drain ditch, to now that -- maybe the regional pathway could fight it -- if it got rained on would find a little bit of water in there, but the entire -- basically now 36 acres that used to go into that ditch will no longer go in that ditch. So, we have nothing but minimized it. But the engineers -- not only my engineer that stamps the plans, but the engineers -- and it's actually a separate consulting firm that Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District let's me pay for them to review the plans, assures that that doesn't occur. So, it's a zero issue. Holland: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 109 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 50 of 67 Perreault: Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Conger: Exited. Thank you. Perreault: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Wilson: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move to close the public hearing on H-2018-0085. Holland: Second. Cassinelli: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Verado West, H-2018-0085. All those in favor. None opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Perreault: Who would like to start? Cassinelli: I can start with one quick comment. I -- I am not opposed to piping the Finch drainage. I will just say that. I think that actually would make a better space there in that corner. So, that -- that's where I stand on that issue. That's all I wanted to say right now. Holland: Madam Chair, may I ask a question of staff? Perreault: Yes. Holland: On their request for a site specific condition Item 1.1.6 where they ask for the minimum of 10.2 percent, do we have a legal obligation that they have to be at the 11 percent with code? Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Holland, no, the minimum code requirement is ten percent. Holland: Thank you. Allen: And I would like to just clarify on the issue of the South Slough. The Public Works Department did state that that is considered to be a natural waterway and as such it is required to be open and not be piped. There is no provision for a waiver of that requirement. Further, city code does -- in regard to fencing, city code states that fencing along all natural waterways, such as that, shall not prevent access to the waterway in Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 110 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 51 of 67 limited circumstances and in the interest of public safety larger open water systems may require fencing as determined by City Council, director, and/or the Public Works director. Cassinelli: So, that has to be left open and fenced. Allen: Has to be left open. Yes. It is not necessarily as stated by the applicant, required to be fenced with a chain link fence. So, it is -- it is -- again, it states fencing along natural waterways shall not prevent access to the waterway, so -- in limited circumstances, if we are worried about public safety, we could require fencing, but it could be wrought iron or, you know, some other type of fencing like that. Wilson: Madam Chair? Perreault: Mr. Wilson. Wilson: I guess we are just going to kind of tick this off. I mean I think when -- when you're dealing with Kamay -- I mean I like the idea, I think single level -- I think that that's reasonable. For me that's kind of a minimum I think. I think we -- we heard from the residents. I think we have kind of gone through that, so that would be something I would -- if we were going to approve I want to see that. And also just -- I mean we don't have any choice, but I think I prefer not piping it. I mean, you know, it's the character of the community. I live in an area -- you know, some of these neighborhoods have these irrigation and natural running ditches. I think it's something unique to Idaho and -- and to Meridian and kind of our irrigated agriculture heritage and so I think that I like that there, whether it's fenced or not. I think it's up for discussion. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commission Cassinelli. Cassinelli: I definitely agree with Commissioner W ilson as far as the single level homes. It sounds like the developer was okay with that, if they got everything else. Something else that I don't know that that's going to happen with the ditch. One thing that I looked up, because I didn't -- I didn't hear it when we went through the report -- is ACHD -- their -- their -- their traffic studies are showing 1,246 trips per day through this. Is that -- is that accurate? Is that -- is that the -- the entire development or just Verado West; do you know, Sonya? Allen: Chairman -- Cassinelli: What I saw on the application was -- Allen: Commissioner, I don't have the report in front of me. Cassinelli: Okay. That's what I -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 111 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 52 of 67 Allen: I believe that report is just for this development. Cassinelli: Okay. Not -- not -- not in its entirety. That is a lot to funnel out through -- I mean you split that up, 600 out -- you know, going out to Locust Grove through the one neighborhood, another 600 going out to Ustick through the other, that's a -- that's a lot without having another access and so I guess the question would be -- that -- that's something I wanted to bring up. Allen: If I may -- Cassinelli: And asked about an access to Ustick, the subdivision -- and I don't know the name of it -- to the north has an access there. Obviously, you wouldn't want to have one directly opposite, but what is the limitation going out to Ustick? Can there not be another -- Allen: Chairman, Commissioner, just to go backwards on your question initially. The applicant did confirm that the ACHD report -- what -- that was for -- the traffic count was for the overall Verado development. So, the Verado to the east that's not part of this application -- he is stating that was included in that. I don't have it in front of me, but that's -- that's what -- Cassinelli: So, that number is all -- all three phases? Two, Three and West or whatever it is. Allen: Yeah. Perreault: That makes sense. I mean if you have 130 homes and there is two cars each, 260 cars, that would be four trips a day per car at 1,246, so -- Cassinelli: And I will just -- I will just say it was traffic findings for -- this development is estimated to generate 1,246 additional vehicle trips per day, 132 additional vehicle trips per hour in the p.m. peak. So, it -- I was just reading that part. Perreault: Is that the traffic study from the original Verado or -- Cassinelli: Uh-huh. It says -- on the ACHD report it says Verado -- it says MVP 18022. It's this file number, Verado West. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: It does not say the entire thing. So, they are -- they are showing 1,246 just for this. I don't -- it does seem high. Perreault: It does seem high. Cassinelli: Very high. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 112 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 53 of 67 Perreault: Yeah. That seems very high. Cassinelli: I would like to get clarification on that I guess. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I would let you know that ACHD did reach out to staff and asked us about another access point to either Locust Grove or Ustick Road. I communicated back to Austin -- Austin Miller at ACHD and told him that the city ordinance did not justify -- prohibited access to those particular roadways. If you look at the traffic study that was presented, I don't think -- the applicant didn't have to submit a full traffic study, it was an abbreviated traffic study to analyze those two stub streets that are to this particular property. So, as they did that they had to analyze the existing approaches from Locust Grove and Ustick and see how that would disperse through the development. So, everything that's -- the way the roads are currently designed is below capacity based on what I'm hearing from the applicant. So, again, the abbreviated traffic study showed that having no access to those roads could still funnel the traffic through the surrounding developments and include the additional trips created by this particular development. So, don't -- don't get caught up on that too much. But staff was -- my recommendation or my response back to ACHD is that we did not support access to either one of those roadways as part of this development and that's something that we communicated to the applicant at the pre-application meeting as well. Perreault: And correct me if I'm wrong, but the development to the north in Summerfield was built in the '90s and Ustick was just a two lane road at that time. So, that's likely why that was not an arterial, which is why they allowed access off of it, so -- Cassinelli: Yeah. Parsons: And just for further clarification on that, too, is if another -- based on my communications with Austin at ACHD, where they wanted the approach to go did not meet offsets for ACHD's policy, so they would have to grant a waiver to allow one of those access points and I don't think that's a wise decision in this particular case. I think we -- we stand with the way it is now and have the ped connections out to those arterial roadways and let the local streets funnel out the traffic through the surrounding neighborhoods. Perreault: Okay. Commissioner Holland, do you have -- Holland: I can jump in, Madam Chair. You know, going through some of the positives and some of the challenges, I really appreciate that the applicant has added some amenities that may not be traditional in other neighborhoods. I hate doing yard work and I think it's always a nice feature when they cover some of the maintenance of yard work and I think that that was mentioned by the applicant, that that might be something as part of this -- this facility as one of the amenities. I appreciate the -- the large park that's in there and when you look at the list of conditions that the applicant requested I don't have a huge concern with leaving that park where it is on that first block on the right side for the suggestion that he made when you're driving into the neighborhood there is a lot of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 113 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 54 of 67 headlights coming in there. I think that does help deflect some of it. It's not really necessarily a park for hanging out as much as it is a park for kind of deflecting some of that extra traffic impact. So, I'm okay with that condition. There is a lot of things to look at here. I think looking at the challenges that all the neighbors have come forward and expressed, I would much rather see single level homes on that southern portion as it connects to that neighborhood nearby. I just think it's tough to put two story homes right in the backyard of people, especially when you have got more than one neighbor sharing your fence line. Just a few more comments to add, so -- Wilson: Can staff pull up those -- those conditions again? I know -- on the developer's presentation. And I think we have gotten through all of them, those comments, and I'm just making sure. Perreault: So, I have a question regarding the open space percentages. The applicant had said that there is a total open space percentage of 13.5. That's including the first two phases. We can't really consider those, because we don't know that the DA agreement is going to include the Verado West; is that right? That's the assumption that the DA agreement -- that is going to cover all three if we look at -- if we -- if we look at common area open space for all of them, can we do that? Is that a consideration we can make? Do you understand my question? Allen: I'm sorry, I didn't quite understand your question. Perreault: Okay. Allen: They are requesting to amend the development agreement to include it all in one agreement. Perreault: But that's City Council's decision and we don't know what their decision will be. Allen: Yes. It's their decision. The conditions of approval in this staff report are only for this development. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, question for staff. Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Sonya, when you were looking at the condition to relocate the park, were you looking at it -- I brought this up in the -- in my statement to the applicant. Were you looking -- you're looking at it from the standpoint of this division -- this section only, the Verado West to where it's all on one side. Were you looking at it -- is that -- is that how you're seeing it or are you looking at it as the entire development? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 114 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 55 of 67 Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, either way. There is -- there is nothing on the west end of the development area. So, you have got your -- you've got your area over here to the east. You have got this area. There is just nothing over in this area. Cassinelli: To be Devil's advocate on that, too, there is nothing on the -- on the -- the southeast either. Allen: It's certainly up to -- up to the Commission. Perreault: On that note, though, these lots look -- appear from the drawing to probably be larger and probably have larger backyards, whereas when you have the density, they just don't have that space within their own properties, so -- Holland: Madam Chair, one other comment is if you count the number of houses that you would have to walk -- not that that's a good scale of measurement, but in the south one it's about 11 houses to get from the west end of the development over to where the park is, if you're looking on that road. Perreault: Check them out from the -- the houses that backup to Locust Grove? Holland: Yeah. Perreault: Okay. Sonya, can you clarify for us the requirement to have all -- the arterial landscape buffer all completed in the first phase? Is that something we need to consider or is that just part of the DA agreement? Allen: Madam Chair, Commission, that's something that the Mayor and Council has typically liked with the first phase of development, but that's something that you can certainly make a recommendation on -- Perreault: Okay. Allen: -- if you disagree with the provision. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Something I'm just seeing here that I guess it didn't -- didn't stand out to me. Sonya, on the perimeter of this -- both along Locust Grove and Orchard there is a -- there is a setback there, but there is not -- in the -- in the first phase further to the east and next to that other parcel. Do you see what I'm -- I'm looking at there? Allen: Are you looking at the -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 115 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 56 of 67 Cassinelli: What is -- Allen: -- this area here? Cassinelli: Yeah. Well, the -- I'm looking at all -- the perimeter of Verado West along Locust Grove and -- and Ustick. There is a landscape buffer, but, then, what's out beyond that? Allen: I'm not sure what you're referencing. This was kind of copy and pasted in here, so I'm not sure if that's what you're looking at, the difference between the two or -- Cassinelli: Oh, I see. Now, I'm -- yeah. When you said -- that's actually going -- it's kind of overlapping -- Allen: It is. Yeah. Cassinelli: It's -- it's sticking out into Ustick. Okay. All right. It looked like there was -- it looked like there was additional -- an additional buffer from that image. Allen: It looks a little better there I think. It looks a little more of the same. Cassinelli: Yeah. Allen: I believe it's the minimum -- I believe -- Cassinelli: Okay. Allen: -- it's the same buffer either way you look at it. Cassinelli: Okay. Yeah. Now -- now it -- that's a little -- a little more clear. Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Just want to -- there is a few things that concern me on this. I would like to get clarification from -- from ACHD. I don't -- and I don't know. I'm kind of leaning towards maybe we -- I hate -- I hate continuing things, because I hate having them come back, but I'm thinking that maybe continuing this to -- to see the single level going in on the backside for a better transition to include this Kamay Street there. I would like clarification from ACHD on the traffic count. Is that the entire Verado project or just -- or just this one? And maybe seeing an alternative plan to get some -- to get some of that open space moved to the -- moved to the western edge. Anybody else -- Wilson: I think I'm -- Madam Chair, I think like Commissioner Holland, I'm fine with the way it is. So, I'm open to recommending approval with the single family. I mean I think we have gotten to kind of a place where -- I mean I agree, I -- we had someone talk about I guess the Costco test. You know, really, I think we can be -- we can scrutinize these a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 116 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 57 of 67 little more carefully. I mean the demand is there, we are growing like gangbusters, we can scrutinize these and I really do think we have -- we have scrutinized these and we have really whittled down kind of where we are at and we have listened to the residents and, you know, I think the real sticking point was the single -- that -- those single level homes. I think there is some heartburn about the density and, obviously, you're alluding to the traffic, but I just don't see the -- the -- you know, the necessity for -- for, you know, getting that ACHD report. I think we have the information we have now and I don't think our decision is radically going to change, we are just going to have a little more information, because I think -- I think the ACHD report is going to come under what we are talking about and we are going to be -- we are going to approve it in two weeks or four weeks. So, I think we -- I think we have a decision and I'm -- I'm ready to -- to make a motion. Perreault: I am curious Commissioners thoughts on the three foot setbacks and the no eaves on the sides of the homes. You know, I -- we all came on the Commission at the same time, except for Greg and I don't know if you were here when the original Verado was approved, but -- but, you know, that was -- it's in front of us now. That was their decision. You know, we may decide differently and I think that's okay, that's why we are here, and so I'm just, you know, curious, it's -- I can understand how the thought would be, well, it was approved once, why would we not do it again. But, you know, the city is -- we are seeing -- Wilson: Higher scrutiny. Costco test. Perreault: So, does anybody have any specific thoughts to share on that? Cassinelli: I will weigh in on that I guess. I -- I don't like it, but I get what they are trying to do. They are trying to build a -- a project that -- that's priced in there. I think they could go a higher price and sell them in there, too, because you look around and, you know, it -- all around the area and in the -- in the neighboring subdivisions and the homes are -- you know, I think they can get it. I mean the -- the end of the day it comes down to, you know, can they sell the project and -- and make money on it. I mean that's -- that's -- that's what it's about. But I also get that they are trying to make a project that's a little bit more affordable. Everything is -- you know, as we know, I mean, you know, prices are going, you know, through the roof, they are going -- they are going nuts. So, I -- I do like the -- I'm never crazy about the density. I am not a high density guy. I'm not wild about it. But they are trying to make up -- I get that they are trying to make a project that's -- that's going to fit in that price point. I don't like the no eaves. I don't. But to get that to fit and to make kind of a price point I get it. I'm okay with it. I'm okay with the three foot setbacks to -- to put that in there. That's not -- you know, my biggest concern I guess is that -- is -- I read it, ACHD is saying 1,246 in this -- you know, for 132 homes. I don't know if that number is right, but I would like to get clarification on it and I definitely -- definitely want to see the single level if they are going with that lot count that -- if that lot count is going to stay the same with that transition. Anyway, that's my comments on the eaves. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 117 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 58 of 67 Holland: Madam Chair, I think we all agree that the -- the biggest concern with some of the setbacks and having the three feet was with having the two story on that south side. If you make all those single story I have less of a concern of the three foot, because you have got at least a little more visual angle for some of those residents that are sharing that fence line. I can see both sides of it and it's tough, because I -- I like the look of eaves a lot better. I think it helps make the houses look a little more diverse. It helps to make them look a little more complete, but at the same time I also appreciate that the developer has worked to try and create a product that's not just a multi-family project. You know, when you're trying to figure out how to put some higher density in there and give them a diversity of product, it's not a huge area and they have a mix of single and two story instead of having some of those fourplexes or eightplexes in there. I guess I'm not set one way or another on it. I see both sides of it. I would push for eaves, but I don't think I would deny it not having the eaves. Wilson: I think if Bill is okay with eaves and setback, we better make a motion -- Cassinelli: But I'm not okay with the traffic count. Parsons: So, Commissioner Cassinelli, I found ACHD's staff report and you are correct, it does say that they anticipate this development generating 1,246 trips. So, I just wanted to provide that clarification. Cassinelli: I don't know if that's -- I don't -- I don't know if that's -- that's right or wrong. It seems really high. Wilson: It's remarkable, because everyone's critical of ACHD the other way and now they are like overcompensating it seems like. I mean I don't get the methodology there at all. Parsons: Well, they all -- they all use the same trip generation manual. So, hopefully, they are all working off the same page when they are analyzing these trips and traffic through these developments. Perreault: Who wants to make a motion? Wilson: I think -- I might need a little help. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2018-0085 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 20th, 2018, with the following modification -- well, no. Let's see. I mean the single -- the single level, that's part of the condition. That's part of the condition -- let me look here. So, I guess -- Cassinelli: Plus lot size. Wilson: The lot size. Cassinelli: Not the house. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 118 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 59 of 67 Wilson: Lot size transition. Cassinelli: We can condition it for single level? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, yes, you can. Part of that development agreement you could add that as a provision to do that and lose lots. But I think for staff's clarification, we want to know -- when you say single level, do you mean more of attached product, like they show along the Ustick, Locust Grove buffer. I think that's what the applicant is understanding when you say single -- single story or single level. So, they will lose lots, essentially. Perreault: Single level attached. Parsons: Thank you. Wilson: That's 1-1-1C. Parsons: And I guess is that a -- is that something you want in the development agreement as well? Having a recommend provision -- Perreault: Having it attached or having it single level or both? Parsons: Both. That condition. Cassinelli: Wanted the single level, probably, right? You're making the motion. Perreault: Yeah. Wilson: Single level. In the development agreement. Parsons: Thank you. Wilson: I think it could be either. And I think we keep everything as is. Perreault: About keeping that lateral open. Wilson: Yeah. And the open space. Cassinelli: Oh, so it's -- there is not a -- didn't have a choice on that one. Wilson: And we already dealt with the lateral. We already dealt -- it's the only modification I see. And the park. Holland: Modification for the single lot, did we talk about -- Wilson: Have to keep it there. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 119 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 60 of 67 Holland: And, then, the interior park. Wilson: Yes. And, then, to leave recommendation regarding interior park. Holland: We also have the arterial landscape buffer in the first phase. Wilson: I thought were going to leave that. Yeah. That's not us. Perreault: We can -- we can make a recommendation regarding the -- the landscape. We can make a recommendation to City Council, if somebody -- yeah. If you want to include that in your motion you can make -- Cassinelli: What about the relocating of the open space? Wilson: I already did that. Cassinelli: Oh, you did. Perreault: You're making -- to be clear, you're making a motion to delete that recommendation? Wilson: I am. Yeah. Holland: Could I just summarize your motion, make sure I understand it? Wilson: Yeah. Holland: You're making a motion to approve the -- the application to City Council with the condition that they strike item 1.1.1C for lot size transition and change it to say that they are required to be single level. Wilson: Yes. Holland: And that they strike the condition about relocating the interior open space, but everything else remains the same as the staff report? Wilson: Yes. Holland: I will second it. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded -- Verado West, H-2018-0085. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Perreault: Nay. Cassinelli: Nay. Because of ACHD. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 120 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 61 of 67 Perreault: Motion is denied; right? MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. THREE ABSENT. Cassinelli: Shall I -- Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: May I ask your concern? Perreault: My concern is relocating the interior open space. I would like to see that relocated. Holland: Madam Chair? Would you prefer to look at a continuance to consider the -- to see if we could get more information about parking or relocating the park or do you think there is going to be significant enough changes that we are going to be able to make a decision with the -- with that information in the future? Perreault: I really don't think we need a continuance. I think we can get this figured out this evening. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Wilson: I'm not going to -- or Madam Chair? I mean I'm not that hung up on -- I mean I don't know about you, I just thought it was a more streamlined option and I didn't know there was such adamant opposition to it. Perreault: Can I get clarification from staff? So, if this specific site specific condition item 1.1.6 requires 11 percent open space and we say that we are agreeing with the applicant that they only want 10.2, we need to show that as a modification to the conditions. Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, correct. Yes. Perreault: Okay. Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Sonya, I have another -- I have a question regarding the -- the -- that lateral. Whose call is that that has to -- Allen: Oh, it's -- it's clearly depicted on our maps as the South Slough and the Public Works has confirmed that it is the South Slough. In our Comprehensive Plan it is a protected natural waterway. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 121 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 62 of 67 Cassinelli: Okay. Is there any -- is there anybody that -- that can make that change? Allen: No. Cassinelli: Obviously we can't here, but is there somebody else that can make that change that they can go to? The answer is no? Perreault: Is the applicant permitted to apply for a comp plan amendment for that? Okay. Allen: No. Cassinelli: I tried to help you on that one. Perreault: I just wanted to be very clear. Wilson: I think -- I mean I think we have narrowed it down to one thing. I think someone can make a motion and since it was so painful for me to do it, I don't know, someone down there. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Holland. Holland: My only other concern, just thinking back, the comment that he made about headlights going into the neighborhood, is that not a concern for anyone, the way that that comes in? Perreault: So, for me it's not. I'm in real estate and I see this happen frequently and I think that the -- it's two lots and the individuals who are buying that lot know that that's going to be an element, so I -- to me it's the -- it's the enjoyment of the entire neighborhood using a common area versus two homeowners. So, that's -- that's my thought on it. Cassinelli: Sonya, on that note can you pull up the photos again of the -- of the houses? It looks like some of these, if they were -- if it were -- if it were a two story there it's going to be -- the headlights are going to be hitting the garage, for the most part when you look at that. They are not going to be going in the -- in the living room window and I think in every subdivision there is -- there is a street configuration somewhere where houses are getting it. I know in my neighborhood, you know, at the end of every -- at every corner there is a house -- Perreault: In every subdivision. So, to add to that, you know, these are -- with the three foot setbacks and the -- the large homes relative to the lot size, they really don't have a lot of usable space and so I think if you -- if -- if we weren't discussing so much density with detached single family homes -- well, even with attached, I -- you know, I maybe wouldn't -- wouldn't be stuck on that location. But I just think -- because you just don't have a lot of usable space on the -- on the lots themselves with -- I mean the small Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 122 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 63 of 67 setbacks. I really think moving the green space to the west side is -- is important in this particular situation. I understand why you're asking, though, because we want to incentivize -- I get -- I don't know if that's the right word, but the applicant has stated that his preference would be to -- to get his -- the request he has made to the changes in the conditions in order to create the single level homes on the back, but -- Cassinelli: Madam Chair? I'm going to throw out a motion, see -- see what happens here. I'm going to -- I move to continue file number H-2018-0085 -- what's the 4th looking like? Wilson: Do you need a reason? Cassinelli: I will get there. I was looking at the date first -- Wilson: I'm serious. Cassinelli: -- before I went too far. Parsons: As far as hearing applications? Cassinelli: As far -- yeah. Parsons: Yeah. It's not terrible. Cassinelli: It's not terrible? Parsons: But I would caution that if you're going to go the continuance and you get approval on that motion, be very specific as to what you want to see them bring back and just discuss those items at that hearing, not the entire development again. So, if you want to continue this to look at relocation of open space, clarification on ACHD, whether or not they want access to Ustick, for example, if that's something you think you want to see is included as part of the development, that's certainly something you can do -- or piping of the ditch. I mean whatever it is, just be very specific as to what -- what item do you want to address at that next hearing. Cassinelli: Okay. Pogue: And, Commissioner, that the public hearing would be reopened, so that it could be continued for the purpose of hearing whatever the particular issue -- conditions are that you want addressed. Cassinelli: Can you repeat that? Pogue: Yeah. That we would just reopen the public hearing, because it's been closed. So, you're going to be continuing it for the purpose -- whatever you want them to work on and bring back differently. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 123 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 64 of 67 Cassinelli: Do we do that after I make the motion? Pogue: You can or you can do it in the motion. You could do it afterwards. Cassinelli: To reopen it. Pogue: Yes. Cassinelli: To just get feedback from them. Pogue: Yeah. It has to be reopened in order for it to come back for the -- for the additional items. Is that correct? That's what I believe is the correct process. Go ahead with your motion. We will -- we will address that one. Cassinelli: We will address that one? Pogue: Yeah. Cassinelli: All right. I moved to continue file number H-2018-0085 to the hearing date October 4th for the following reasons: I want to -- I want the applicant to come back with a revision of moving the green space to the west and also showing single level homes along the -- heading out to the DA to have single level homes along the south side and I would also like to add in there that I want verification from ACHD on the traffic count. So, if we could go back to them and just ask that, so that City Council is clear when it goes to them. Anything else? That's my motion. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, just for clarification on that, I know you're asking for clarification from ACHD. They have given us a staff report. They verified that number for you. They haven't required another access to any of the arterial roadways. They have concluded that this can function within their acceptable levels of service. I guess is your purpose for getting further clarification -- is that to support an access to a Ustick Road or -- I'm trying to -- I'm trying to understand what the concern is from the Commission on that particular item. Cassinelli: It seems like a really high number for 132 homes. Perreault: Well, that's not a bad thing. I mean is it -- I understand what you're saying, but if we don't realistically think that number is that high then -- then do we really need them to -- I mean do we really need them to comment on it? We are already sitting here thinking that's too high. So, the concern really is if it's too low. Cassinelli: Right. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members -- I can tell you that they had concerns that there wasn't another access out. There traffic engineers didn't ask them to analyze that a little bit more. But, again, my comments back to them were our code supports access from local Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 124 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 65 of 67 roads and not burden the arterial roadways any further. So, it's just some -- I'm just sharing with you the conversation that I had with an ACHD staff member. I have never talked to their traffic engineers. Perreault: Okay. Can I ask as far as the single level homes, are you concerned that they will be different from what is on Ustick? Are you concerned the lot -- the lot sizes are going to be smaller or larger or -- Cassinelli: I just want to make sure that they are going to come back -- I guess I just want to make sure that that's going to be part of it, that they are going to come back and -- and with single family homes along the -- that southern border. Perreault: Okay. But do we need to physically see something that shows they are going to do that or -- are you -- are you looking for them to make adjustments to their visuals, so that we can see it, or are you just wanting confirmation? Cassinelli: I just want confirmation. I just want something -- I guess we don't need to see -- you know, we don't need to see renderings. I just -- that needs to be added into the agreement. I guess that it's going to be single family on the southern border, so that somehow, you know, as they are building they -- we don't get two stories in there. Allen: Madam Chair, excuse me. If that's the direction you're going and you just want to make sure that Council gets that, you can certainly make the recommendation that the applicant revise the plans and submit revised plans to the city ten days prior to the Council hearing. If you want to see it personally then -- Cassinelli: Well, I guess if -- the point of -- the biggest point of continuing it is to -- is to take a look at -- at moving that green -- moving the park and seeing that. Holland: Madam Chair? Perreault: Uh-huh. Cassinelli: But I'm just add -- I would add in the -- you know, that they make the change to the single level. Holland: Commissioner Cassinelli, I think if we asked them to come back with a revised plan of how that would -- the park would look, it's going to look fairly similar with this lot switched with another lot. One of those squares in the middle. I don't think they are going to come back with anything much different than that would be my assumption, so -- Perreault: I also agree that I would like to see it moved, but I am not -- I mean I don't want -- I would prefer not to see it moved to the set of homes directly to the west, but I'm not concerned if they -- you know, as long as it's in the western half where -- where they choose to put it I'm not really that concerned about. I mean I think it will -- I trust that -- that it will go in a location that will service everyone. It doesn't sound like they would put Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 125 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 66 of 67 it on the south side, so -- and probably not on the west, because those lots of larger. My guess is, you know, if we make that request they are going to try to fit it into the two blocks of homes on the west side. Would that be satisfactory if it was roughly the same size and fit into one of those two blocks of homes? Cassinelli: Then I guess I could totally redo the motion and just get an approval without that. In that case, can you put back up that list of -- or Greg, do you want to try the motion again, Greg? Holland: Do you want to officially rescind your other motion? Cassinelli: Yes. I will rescind my motion to continue, since there was no second anyway. Holland: I would be happy to take a stab at making -- Cassinelli: Go for it. Holland: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2018-0085 as presented in a staff report for the hearing date of September 20th, 2018, with the following modifications: That we would strike the Site Specific Condition Item 1.1.1C about lot size transition and make a note that we would ask the applicant to have a single level home on the southern border of the development and that we would -- before the applicant brings this forward to City Council that they would relocate the interior open space as requested by staff and reflect that in their visuals before the City Council meeting. Wilson: Second. That's a good -- that's a good motion. Perreault: You did not modify the requirement for the 11 percent open space? Is that something you intend to do? Holland: Can we have discussion before I put that in the motion? Perreault: I think so. What do you -- Holland: It was my understanding from other Commissioners that that was something that we didn't want to include in the motion originally, to reduce the minimum to the 10.2 percent. Perreault: To leave it at the 11? Okay. Cassinelli: That's a good question to staff on that. Why -- what was your thinking in going from 10.2 to 11? Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, the number that was calculated on was basically based on the removal of these two lots. It was an approximate area. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda October 4, 2018 – Page 126 of 273 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 67 of 67 Perreault: Okay. Allen: It was just to create a more thorough -- through open space and a little larger, since the lots are so small. Perreault: So, staff wanted, essentially, four lots of open space versus two? Wilson: I think we are -- I seconded. I think we are good. Holland: Moved and seconded at this point. Perreault: It's been moved and seconded to approve file 2018-0089 with stated modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Cassinelli: Nay. Perreault: Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT. Perreault: Okay. Wilson: Madam Chair? Perreault: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move that we end this evening's hearing. Holland: Second. Perreault: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for September 20th, 2018. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:26 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED C ISI A, JES ICA PERREAULT - ACTING CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: — &/I- C. JAY COVE:S'- CITY CLERK PQOapTEDA(j � o7 -1; r� z CAVI E '.IDIANs IDAHO �� SEAL �/