Loading...
2020-06-04 Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting June 4, 2020. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of June 4, 2020, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Commissioner Lisa Holland. Members Present: Commissioner Lisa Holland, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli, Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Nick Grove and Commissioner Patricia Pitzer. Members Absent: Chairman Ryan Fitzgerald. Others Present: Chris Johnson, Adrienne Weatherly, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Joe Dodson, Sonya Allen and Alan Tiefenbach. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X___ Lisa Holland ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel __X___ Andrew Seal ___X___ Nick Grove __X___ Patricia Pitzer ___X___ Bill Cassinelli (6:06 p.m.) ________ Ryan Fitzgerald - Chairman Fitzgerald: All right. Well, with that I'm filling in as chair tonight. My name is Lisa Holland. But good evening, welcome to our Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for April 16th, 2020. We are bringing this to you via Zoom and we are just going to take a couple seconds to explain how it's going to work first. So, on your screen you should see all the Commissioners who are present for the evening's meeting and we also have on the call staff, as well as representatives from the city attorney and our city clerk offices and we also have staff from our Planning Department on the call as well. Everybody else that's on the line are on Zoom as attendees and you can observe the meeting and we can -- we know that you're there, but your ability to talk and be seen will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the hearing you will be unmuted and able to comment. If you have previously sent in a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and the clerk will help you run that presentation. The clerk will also help assist with bringing up slides from another presentation if you need it. So, just please ask. If you just want to tune in to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch the live stream on the city's YouTube channel, which can be accessed at meridiancity.org\\live. And when public testimony has opened the clerk will call the names of those who signed up to testify on the website. You will be unmuted and I will call on you individually to speak. Please state your name and address for the record when it comes time and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. After that time we may open it up for questions for clarification and, then, once done you will be muted and no longer have the ability to speak. Once all those of you who have signed up in advance are called on by any others who wish to testify -- and if you want to speak on a topic you are welcome to press the raise hand button in the zoom app or if you are listening through a cell phone or landline Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 2 of 66 you can press star nine and unmute yourself and, then, wait for your name to be called. If you're listening on multiple devices, like a computer and a phone, please make sure you mute those devices, so we don't have feedback and everyone can hear you clearly. And note that we can't take questions until the public testimony portion. So, if you have a question or a process question during the meeting, please feel free to e-mail the city clerk at meridiancity.org and they can attempt to help you as quickly as possible. So, hopefully, that makes sense and thanks for joining with us, even though it's not the way we are used to doing things, but we are getting more used to it and getting better at it. So, at this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for the hearing date of April -- or sorry. Did I say April 16th originally? I did. I was reading off the script if you couldn't tell. Sorry about that. For the date of June 4th is the date that we are today and we will start with the roll call. Weatherly: Thank you, Chairperson Holland. I'm sorry, I'm starting a little bit confused right now. I just got an e-mail from Bill Cassinelli that says that he is trying to dial, but he is muted as an attendee, so I'm just trying to decipher which attendee he is. Do you want me to try to connect him before I call roll or would you prefer I call roll so you can move on? Holland: No, we can wait for -- for Bill to get tied in here. If he can find you. Weatherly: Go ahead, Chris. Johnson: I was going to say there was a phone caller in, but now there is nobody by phone. So, if he's calling back in I will be watching for that. But there is not -- currently not -- there is nobody by phone at the moment. Seal: I see him as one of the panelists. Johnson: That's Bill Parsons, but -- Seal: Oh. Sorry. Pogue: Is he trying to do audio only? Weatherly: Yeah. He's calling in. I believe he is traveling from out of state right now. He said he would try to call in if he could, which sounds like he's trying to do, but I'm not sure if it's working. I e-mailed him back to see if I could get in touch with him again. Holland: I think we could take role and if we manage to get him on the call we can just state on the record when he joins us if you would like. Or if he tries to call back and we can still wait a minute here. Weatherly: Okay. Thanks for your patience. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 3 of 66 Item 2: Adoption of Agenda Holland: Thank you for that. So, the first item we have on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda, noting that there is just one item that is going to be open for request for continuance and that is public hearing for Teakwood Place, H-2020-0006. They are requesting a continuance to July 16th, so we won't be opening for public testimony tonight on that application, but, otherwise, the agenda sits as stands. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? Seal: So moved. Pitzer: Second. Holland: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda \[Action Item\] A. Approve Minutes of the May 28, 2020, Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Holland: All right. We will move on to the next item, which is the Consent Agenda, which is just the approval of minutes from the May 28th, 2020, Planning and Zoning special meeting. Can I get a motion to approve the Consent Agenda? McCarvel: So moved. Seal: Second. Holland: Okay. We have got a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing Continued From May 7, 2020 for Teakwood Place Subdivision (H-2020-0006) by Hesscomm Corp., Located Approximately ¼ Mile East of S. Eagle Rd., Fronting on E. Victory Road 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 7.35 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district; and, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 4 of 66 2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 28 building lots and 5 common lots. Holland: So, at this time we already kind of walked through a little bit of the public hearing process, so I'm not going to go through that again, but just to summarize briefly, we are going to start with a staff report on each item and, then, we are going to allow the applicant to share for up to 15 minutes on their application and answer questions, give us their presentation. After they are finished we will open up the floor for public testimony. If you would like to testify tonight you are welcome to message the City Clerk's office, so that they have you on that list or raise your hand when it comes to that time and we will let you know when that is and you will have three minutes to address us and, then, we will allow the applicant to close before we deliberate and if there is anyone representing an HOA and we have the ability to -- I don't know that we will have this situation, but if we do have someone here representing a larger group and wants to cede time for several people in the audience, we can give them a little bit longer to speak, but, otherwise, I think we will move on and start with public hearing item for Teakwood Place, H-2020-0006, and at this point the applicant has requested a continuance to July 16th of 2020 and since this is their request it would be up to them to pay for the renoticing requirements for that application, so just noting that. If you would all like to hear from the applicant on why they would like a continuance we could certainly ask for that, but I think they just had a few more things to work through before they are ready to come to us. So, if anyone wants to make a motion to grant that continuance, noting that the applicant would be responsible for any fees with renoticing that would be great. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Move to continue file number H-2020-0006 to the date of July 16th, 2020, per the applicant's request, who will be responsible for all renoticing. Grove: Second. Holland: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. B. Public Hearing for Gracie Fighting Academy (H-2020-0054) by Ia Falo, Located at 149 S. Adkins Way 1. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for an indoor recreation Facility located within an existing building on 1.26 acres of land in the I-L zoning district. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 5 of 66 Holland: So, next we will move on to the public hearing item for Gracie Fighting Academy. Weatherly: Madam Chair? Holland: Oh. Weatherly: Sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. I just wanted to note for the record that Commissioner Cassinelli joined the meeting at 6:06. Holland: Great. Welcome, Commissioner Cassinelli. I think he is there. So, we will move on to Item B, which is public hearing for Gracie Fighting Academy, H-2020-0054, and we will start with the staff report. Dodson: Thank you, Commissioner Holland, Members of the Commission. Can you guys hear me well? Okay. Always got to check with this stuff. All right. Let's start. So, the first item actually being heard tonight is Gracie Fighting Academy. The request before you is for a conditional use permit for an indoor recreation facility located within an existing building and the I-L zoning district. The applicant is proposing to lease a tenant space with an existing -- within an existing building and operate a Jiu Jitsu academy, which if you don't know is a form of grappling martial arts. Staff was provided with their proposed summer schedule that shows the intended hours of operation for this business. According to the schedule a vast majority of the business hours will be during the evening hours, Monday through Friday, between 5:00 and 8:00 p.m. Oh. Really 5:00 and 9:00. Their last class is at 8:00. The schedule also shows some one-on-one training at noon each day as well. The applicant intends to have short Saturday morning hours as well with the last hour, noon to 1:00, being reserved for more of the instruction training. Within this same building there is another martial arts studio, the Dojo. The Dojo received conditional use permit approval and CZC approval in 2011 for this use and related improvements. The CUP approval did not restrict the operational hours beyond those listed within the specific use standards. This business has similar hours of operation on Monday through Thursday and is closed on Fridays, but also has one less class on Tuesday evening. The Dojo also has Saturday morning classes with one hour classes reserved for each age group, juniors, kids, and adults, going from approximately 9:15 a.m. to noon. So, similar hours to this application, but less. These types of uses, you know, indoor recreation facilities, usually have staggered hours of operation that are offset from other nearby industrial or commercial uses, as is the case for this application. Staff does not foresee additional impacts by this tenant in the proposed use, other than additional evening parking being used. The applicant has already received building permit approval for this suite after staff signed off on the certificate of occupancy in error in the recent months. This building does house other commercial users and one light industrial user, an HVAC company. The subject site and existing building provide 49 parking stalls. In addition, all nearby industrial buildings appear to be a smaller scale and house multiple tenants aimed at low impact use. There have been no reported issues of parking at this location. The two other known uses within this building appear to have normal operating hours during the standard work week and show the proposed hours of operation of this application will rarely overlap. The two local streets that abut the site, East Piper Court and South Adkins Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 6 of 66 Way, are at least 35 feet wide, allowing for on-street parking on both sides. Staff has calculated approximately 360 linear feet of street frontage directly abutting the site, so not on both sides, just the ones abutting the site, and those could provide for approximately 15 additional on-street parking spaces. Therefore, staff believes the available on-street parking and existing 42 parking stalls is more than adequate parking for the proposed use and subject site. Due to the fact of the proposed use is within an existing building and no site or exterior building modifications are proposed, a certificate of zoning compliance will not be required and no additional site improvements are going to be required. They were already covered in 2011 with the previous CUP and CZC for the existing indoor recreation facility for the Dojo. So, in short, staff does recommend approval of the proposed conditional use permit pursuant to the conditions in my staff report and I will stand for questions. Thank you. Holland: Thank you. Appreciate it. Any questions for staff? Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Joe, with the staff's error does that mean that they have been operating recently or -- or have they not yet started operations? Dodson: Commissioner Grove, Members of the Commission, as far as I know they have not been operating. I believe they were -- honestly don't know how they got down this path of actually applying for the CUP, I do not remember completely, but the Coronavirus kind of stopped them from opening, but they did do their TI, they have already had approval on that, but from my understanding they have not been operating. They have been waiting for this to go through, so they have been -- they have been good on that front. Grove: Thank you. Holland: Any other questions for staff? Hearing none, do we have the applicant available to speak with us? Johnson: Madam Chair, he is in the meeting room now. I'm unmuting, if it allows me. The applicant is in the room. Holland: Thank you. Appreciate it. Falo: Yes, I am -- Holland: We can hear you. Yeah. If you wouldn't mind just stating your name and address for the record, we would love to hear from you. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 7 of 66 Falo: Sorry. Yes. My name is Ia Falo. My address is 1287 North Stonehenge Way, Meridian. 83642. The facility address is 149 South Atkins Way, Meridian, Idaho, 83642, as well. My main purpose for being here today is the request for the conditional use permit for an indoor recreation facility located within that existing building on 1.26 acres on that land on 149 South Atkins Way. My main purpose is -- first off I'm a business owner and a professional -- professor for jujitsu, which is a martial arts discipline. The main purpose of my business is just providing self defense that does not involve striking, along with fundamental exercises and body movements to keep all my students safe and healthy. I felt that I would fit well in this building and area, because of the nature of my business and what all the other surrounding businesses are providing. For instance, there is a karate school in suite 101 on the building that we are talking about, the 149 Atkins. Also a dance school at 195 Atkins and a CrossFit gym in 345 Atkins as well. All of which are providing personal training and fitness to the community. Our hours of operation, as said before, are predominantly from 5:00 to 9:00 p.m., a time in which most industrial, as well as commercial businesses are closed. Therefore, the traffic produced by our customers will not take place mostly in the nonbusiness hours and will keep the area from being overly congested. Customer parking should be of no concern as there is simple -- there is ample on-site parking provided on the parcel of 149 Atkins. My students and I would also have no problem parking out on the street of South Atkins Way or East Piper Court, given the corner lot nature of the parcel and allow use of the city street to park on. Regarding the City of Meridian's Code, 11-4-3-2, I will be complying and won't cause any issues, because of all my business activities will take place indoors. There is only one other business operating during the time at which I am operating on the same property. There would be more than enough room for everyone to park. With there being two martial arts academies also on this facility operating on this facility, it would bring an influx of prospective propriety to the area. Our main hours of operation are from 5:00 to 9:00 p.m., as stated before, Monday through Friday, and Saturday from 9:00 to noon. The only time the facility would be used other than those hours would be for a private lesson, as said before, at like noon or I accommodate their time frame -- time schedule. Each private lesson will last for one hour and generally scheduled for time of convenience. I would hope that each business would feel that we will, as a business owner, would provide a variety of services that would help the community, as well as each other. A lot of the businesses in the area around add value to each other, since they can be used to improve or help one another's clientele, furthermore bringing more business to each of those surrounding businesses, causing growth and stability. Thank you. Holland: Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant? No questions. Thanks for taking a few minutes to be with us this afternoon or this evening and in sharing with us kind of what you're looking to do there. Falo: Thank you. Holland: Madam Clerk, do we -- do we have anybody else signed in to testify? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 8 of 66 Holland: All right. And I am assuming -- I'm not sure if you have got any other comments you would like to make, Mr. Falo, but certainly if you do you're welcome to make any closing comments you would like before we deliberate. Falo: No, ma'am. Thank you for listening. Holland: All right. Thank you. With that can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Gracie Fighting Academy, H-2020-0054? Pitzer: So moved. Seal: Second. Holland: Got a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: I'll just say, you know, it's -- it is an industrial area, but it's kind of a mixed use flex industrial area that's got a lot more commercial in it than it does industrial, so I don't see any concerns with where they want to put their facility and, you know, there is an indoor soccer stadium close by, there is a lot of other health related activities. It looks like a nice -- nice shop. So, in my mind I don't see any big concerns with it, but certainly opening it up to all of you for discussion. McCarvel: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah, I think this sounds like it's a good fit, especially with the other things that are already there, and I don't have an issue. I would support it. Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I will echo both of you. It seems like a good fit for what is already there and would complement this -- the surrounding area. Holland: Commissioner Seal or Pitzer -- Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Holland: Oh. Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Oh, good. You can hear me. I wasn't sure. Yeah. I'm -- I'm on board, fully support it, don't see any -- any issues. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 9 of 66 Holland: Commissioner Pitzer or Seal, either one of you have a comment or a motion? Pitzer: I'm not opposed to that and I would make a motion if you would like or, Commissioner Seal, would you like to go first? Seal: I have a -- I just echo what everybody else has. So, this seems to be a good fit. Good area. Glad to see more of these things coming into the community. So, if Commissioner Pitzer -- Pitzer wants to make the motion I -- I will move out of the way. Holland: And just one reminder. This is a conditional use permit, so we are the deciding body, so when you make your motion just note that we are giving them approval to move forward. Pitzer: Thank you. Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move we approve file H-2020-0054 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 4th, 2020, without any modification. Seal: Second. Holland: I have got a motion and a second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Great. Hearing none. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Landing South (H-2020-0005) by Jim Jewett, Located at 660 S. Linder Rd. 1. Request: Rezone of 2.43 acres of land from the R-4 to the R- 8 zoning district; and, 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 11 building lots and 2 common lots on 2.27 acres of land in the proposed R -8 zoning district. Holland: We will move on to the public hearing for Landing South, H-2020-0005, and we will begin with staff report. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. The next applications before you are a request for a rezone and a preliminary plat. This site consists of 2.27 acres of land. It's zoned R-4 and it's located at 660 South Linder Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. Single family residential properties surround this site, zoned R-8, and R- 4. This property was annexed in 1994 without the requirement of a development agreement. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight dwelling units per acre. A rezone of 2.43 acres of land is requested from the R-4 to the R-8 zoning district for the development of 14 residential dwelling units, consisting of a mix of single family residential detached and two Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 10 of 66 family duplex dwellings at a gross density of 6.16 units per acre, consistent with the medium density residential future land use designation. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of ten building lots and three common lots on 2.27 acres of land in the proposed R-8 district. The minimum lot size proposed is 4,004 square feet, with an average lot size of 6,305 square feet. Duplexes are proposed adjacent to Linder Road with single family residential detached homes on the eastern portion of the development. Access is proposed via the extension of an existing stub street, South Spoonbill Avenue, from Joshua Street from the north boundary of this site, which ends in a cul-de-sac. Two common driveways are proposed off the cul-de-sac for access as shown on the plat. No access is proposed or approved via Linder Road. There is an existing emergency only access off site to the north via Linder Road. Off-street parking is provided in accord with UDC standards. Two on-street parking spaces, as well as four spaces at the ends of common driveways, for a total of six spaces are available for guest parking, in addition to the parking pads provided on each lot and those spaces are shown as the red dots there before you. Staff is concerned that there may not be adequate on-street parking for guests and area for trash receptacles on trash day. However, the UDC does not have standards for on-street parking. The Kennedy Lateral runs along the north boundary of this site and has been piped. The pathways master plan depicts a ten foot wide multi- use pathway along the frontage of this site adjacent to Linder Road. However, because there is an existing sidewalk that is in good condition in this area, the Parks Department is not requiring it to be constructed at this time and is only requiring an easement for future construction of a pathway. A 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along Linder Road. Because this site is below five acres in size the qualified open space and site amenity standards in the UDC do not apply. An open space exhibit was submitted that depicts .37 of an acre of common open space consisting of the street buffer along Linder Road and the area along the northern boundary where the Kennedy Lateral lies. No amenities are proposed. Wrought iron fencing is proposed to be constructed at the back edge of the street buffer along Linder Road and along the Kennedy Lateral easement. Concept building elevations were submitted for the homes proposed in the development as shown. Single family detached homes are a single story in height with stucco finish and stone veneer accents. Duplexes are two stories in height with a mix of vertical and horizontal siding. The duplex structures are required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. Written testimony has been received from Chris and Candace Johnson and they are requesting Joshua Street is allowed to extend to the west and connect to Linder Road as the permanent access, instead of emergency only, or at the very least that construction traffic is allowed to use this access for development of the subdivision and that a no outlet sign be installed at South Tylee Way where it intersects Waltman Drive to notify drivers the street dead ends to prevent unnecessary traffic on the street. Second, written testimony was received from Jeff Bolen. He is requesting a direct access via Linder Road as well for this development for access to this development and on that note staff did reach out to ACHD to see if an access via Linder Road would be allowed and they said it would not as it does not meet district policies. The site does not have sufficient frontage to meet spacing requirements from Gander Drive to the south and Pintail Drive to the north. With the proposed development factored in traffic volumes on Gander Drive are anticipated to be well below what is allowed on a local street. Kenneth Scott Grapatin submitted written comments. He has concerns Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 11 of 66 pertaining to the continued provision of irrigation water to his property, which currently runs through the north side of the proposed project and accessibility of the ditch for repairs and cleaning. Lastly, Josh Beach, the applicant's representative, submitted comments in response to the staff report. They are in agreement with the report, except for conditions 3-B and 3-C. They request the modification to 3-B to delete the first sentence and add: The applicant shall comply with standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C-5 and prior to City Council should coordinate with the city arborist on mitigation and shall provide planning staff with an updated landscape plan showing caliper inches proposed to be removed and caliper inches replaced. The second portion there, the 50 inch caliper silver Maple on Linder Road is required to be retained on the site and protected during construction. Unless required to be removed by ACHD is proposed to remain. And that exact wording is in your hearing outline. Staff is amenable to this change. And condition number 3-C, they would like that condition deleted, which it -- it requires mitigation calculations to be included on the landscape plan and the calculations table based on the city arborist inspection in accord with UDC standards. A total of 67 caliper inches of trees is required for mitigation and that -- that relates to the aforementioned condition. They were -- I didn't really speak to I guess what they were deleting. That condition required them to provide an additional 67 caliper inches of trees within common areas in accord with UDC standards for mitigation. So, they wanted 3-C deleted. Staff does not recommend deletion of this condition and recommends instead that the specific caliper inches to be mitigated is updated based on the updated mitigation plan to be provided by the applicant before the City Council meeting. Again, that language is in your hearing outline. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. Any questions for staff? No questions from staff. With that -- Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Sorry. I was trying to find my notes. So, yeah, question on the right of way. Is the right of way that is proposed, that includes planning for the expansion of Linder and, then, does that also include the spacing for the -- of a pathway? Allen: Yes. The pathway, Commissioner Grove, Madam Chair, will be located within the street buffer along Linder Road. Grove: When the road is expanded? Allen: Yes. Grove: Okay. Thank you. Holland: Any other questions for staff? Hearing none, I believe Josh is here to represent the applicant. Do we have Josh online? There he is. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 12 of 66 Beach: Should be. Do you see me there maybe? Holland: We do. Hello, sir. How are you? Beach: I'm doing all right. How about yourself? Holland: Doing good. If you wouldn't mind stating your name and address for the record, we would love to hear from you. Beach: You got it. Josh -- excuse me. Josh Beach representing JLJ or Jim Jewett. Business address is 2030 South Washington Avenue, Emmett, Idaho. So, as Sonya mentioned, this is a -- an application for a rezone and for a preliminary plat. It's fairly straightforward. We have -- we have got -- if I can figure out how to move to the next slide here. Johnson: Josh, you might have to accept control first. It says you're waiting. Now it shows you -- you got it. Beach: Hey, there we go. Perfect. Basically, the same slide you just saw from Sonya showing the lot count there. One thing I did want to mention initially is that the -- the thought here was there the -- there are duplexes that are located up against the Linder frontage in that street buffer there and as I was asked or referred to there will be a sidewalk constructed on there when ACHD widens the road and those -- those eight units or those four lots there will have their front doors facing Linder Road to kind of break up that -- that -- that face and to make some -- some visual interest there along Linder Road. Essentially, it's just one giant wall of fencing all the way to -- all the way to Franklin there. So, that was one of the thoughts. One of the other thoughts was that it will increase the likelihood of, you know, those residents utilizing some of the facilities there at the Peregrine Elementary School and/or accessing some of the commercial businesses, both north on Franklin and, then, Ten Mile as that continues to grow and design with construction. If I can move this here again. So, I put in here -- Sonya mentioned that there -- there is not a requirement that we -- we have an open space -- we have open space as the property is under five -- five acres in size. We are proposing -- I think it's around 17 percent has Sonya mentioned. It's the buffer along Linder and, then, there is a -- as well as -- as well as that there was some -- some landscaping along the Kennedy Lateral there on the north side. But, again, no -- no -- no amenity proposed. So, these -- these architectural elevations were in Sonya's presentation. We also are showing you a photo of what that -- what that structure will look like. Those duplexes are very nice quality construction. You can kind of see where the -- where the two doors -- front doors are, instead of right -- kind of to the side a little bit and, then, the other one is straight on with the four panes of glass in there and they are -- they are very attractive and it actually looks like a single family home from the -- from the front, so -- so, that's nice. So, bear with me. And, then, you saw -- yeah. Same -- same elevations that Sonya had there. Sorry, it's got a delay. Ending it for me. Really, the only thing I wanted to mention was this: So, earlier today I sent Sonya an e-mail in response to the staff report and I -- I will only touch it once. Awesome. So, there is a silver maple there as you can see on the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 13 of 66 Linder frontage. We are not proposing to remove that and we will leave that there. I -- I believe that it is likely in the right of way, but we will not be removing that as part of -- as part of our project. And, then, one of the things I wanted to mention was in -- in regards to the specific caliper inches required by the city arborist, is I believe based on his assumption that we will be -- we will be removing all of the trees and so I wanted to make sure that that condition -- there was some flexibility in discussion with -- with him, so that we can come up with what that number is and so I'm comfortable, you know, having the condition in there that we mitigate, because that's -- that's a -- a code requirement, but we are going to try to keep as many of the trees as we can and, you know, obviously, some -- some will have to be removed and, then, we will -- we will work with the city arborist at that point and, you know, come up with that calculation and so, really, I really have no concern with the condition, other than the specific caliper inches that -- that are being requested that we mitigate for, which may not end up being the actual total. With that I guess I don't -- I don't have any other -- any other comments, unless you have any questions for me. Holland: Thanks, Josh. One question I have got. So, surrounding this site you have got some R-8, but also some R-4 densities kind of backed up to it. Did you consider any other layouts that might have a little less density and more towards the R-4 type format? Beach: No. And this is -- mostly because this is -- this is the product type that -- that we have selected here and it fits within the Comprehensive Plan, so I guess I didn't -- didn't have any concerns at least initially with that. You know, there is R-8 directly across Linder from -- from this property and, you know, the proposed density is -- is not -- not significant, you know, we are below six, which is pretty smack in the middle of what would be allowed in that Comprehensive Plan designation, so -- are there other thoughts as the way you're -- you're asking that -- the question there or -- Holland: Yeah. And, you know, we can certainly get into it more when we get into more discussion, but one of my concerns looking at it -- and something that's come up quite frequently when we have Commission meetings is with some of these cul-de-sacs, it gets tough when you have got so many different homes sharing the access for trash collection or for just having cars, you know, coming in and out of tight cul-de-sacs when you have got more than six or seven properties that are tied into it. So, it's always a little bit of a concern. I know this is a tough in-fill piece, because you can't access off of Linder Road directly and ACHD is not going to allow for that. But just was wondering if you had considered some other layouts that might be a little lower density, but bigger -- bigger space product. Beach: For sure. This is not the first layout we have -- we have -- we have -- we have looked at here and we have actually lost -- believe it or not lost one lot already to kind of help with that, but it -- you know, it's -- it's one of the things where it feel like it meets the -- meets code. It's -- it's -- it's the product that we like. It's a product that, you know, what -- it's -- aside from the several duplexes that are there on that west side, the -- all the single family homes match what is constructed, you know, by -- by Mr. Jewett himself on the Nursery Subdivision just -- just north of this. So, it's going to tie in nicely with -- with Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 14 of 66 existing -- existing construction and the neighborhood and, you know, there is on-street parking, but, you know, as you said, that -- we will have to figure out how to make the -- if the concern is the trash receptacles, which -- which I -- is what I'm hearing, that's -- that's something that we can definitely address, you know, with bringing those to the end of the -- end of the common driveway, obviously, so they can be picked up. But that's -- you know, that's once a week and it's for a few hours in the morning. So, I guess -- I guess that's -- that's my response. Holland: Okay. Thanks, Josh. Any other questions for Josh? Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: In -- in looking at the layout was -- have you given any thought into possibly putting a pathway that connects in between -- it looks like Lots 58 and 59, you know, and providing -- Beach: Yeah. Get that -- get that connectivity out to Linder Road. That's the idea. Now, obviously, because the garages are going to be facing internal and the front doors will face out on Linder, we -- we need to be able to get folks to their -- to their front door. So, that -- that's -- you know, functionally for those -- for those units there, as well as, you know, the rest of the neighborhood and, you know, the Nursery Subdivision and on back into Mallard Landing, this, in addition to the -- the emergency access just north and the Nursery Subdivision will help with that pedestrian connectivity a lot, especially once the highway district widens the road and eventually builds a bridge over -- over the freeway. Seal: So, you will be putting a pathway in between Lots 58 and 59? Beach: I believe that is the location, yes. Seal: Okay. It's -- it's not depicted anywhere. And, then, is there going to be a pathway -- some kind of pathway that is in all the -- all this common area that connects everything together as well? Beach: On the north side of -- Seal: Right. Yeah. The north side -- north side and the west side of the subdivision, if there was something that could at least kind of connect that together to make, you know, maybe a walking path or some kind of amenity here. Beach: So, there -- there is a walking path on -- on the north side of the property along the Kennedy Lateral that was constructed with the Nursery Subdivision, so -- so, that's already in place and it's just another, you know, ten feet north of our property boundary, if even that far. And then -- yeah. So, the west side that will -- those residents will have access to their -- to their property from the front door, but a lot of what gets constructed Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 15 of 66 on Linder there, which is going to be up to -- up to the highway district and their timing and widening the road and -- and -- and all of that, if that answers your question, but -- yeah. So, there -- there will be some connectivity on the west and there already is on the north I guess. Seal: I -- okay. I mean my question was I'm -- I look at all these like they have to stand on their own. So, that means saying that it's in another sub doesn't answer that question for me. So, there -- there is probably something in there, but, then, to have to cross over the lateral and go use somebody else's facility, takes them out of what you are proposing here. Beach: Okay. So, I guess practically speaking, in my mind, it does not make any sense to parallel a pathway on -- on both sides of the -- of the ditch and there is -- there is -- obviously, there is -- there is -- Jim Jewett actually has a -- has a comment if somebody wants to turn him on as well, but -- but, yeah, that's -- that's -- that's the idea is -- I understand what you're saying, that, you know, they need to, quote, stand on their own, but I guess that doesn't make any sense to me, so -- Holland: Mr. Clerk, can we -- can we get Jim on? There he is. Hi, Jim. If you wouldn't mind stating your name and address for the record that would be great. And it looks like you're on mute. There you go. Jewett: Good evening, everyone. Jim Jewett. 776 East Riverside Drive, Suite 204, Eagle, Idaho. So, this is a new one for me, these Zoom ones, so I hope I perform okay. Holland: You're doing just fine. Jewett: So -- so, this is a continuation of our existing Landing No. 13, which is to the north. This plat will actually annex to that HOA and be part of that -- part of the common area or part of all of the HOA functions. So, it's -- it's not a standalone. We didn't build the pathway along the Kennedy to not only serve of the current phase, but other phases within Mallard Landing, as well as this space. That's why we have the Mallard Landing logo there, because we are annexing to that subdivision. That subdivision in total is 450 some homes, has pocket parks, has some other recreational amenities to it, so we do have the existing pathway. On our common space along our north boundary it will connect seamlessly into that common area. So, we won't be separated from a fence. The only fence we propose will be from that -- a new common area to our lots. So, it will be a seamless meld into that existing common area. I do believe when ACHD improves Linder Road they will put in the ten foot pathway that will connect to our pathway. So, we will have that in connectivity. I don't think anybody's in favor within those jurisdictions of me building anything now that they would simply just tear down. We will just use the existing sidewalk. We will connect the sidewalk or pathway I'm proposing between the two units that the other Commissioner mentioned, those two lots, we will connect that pathway over to the existing sidewalk and that sidewalk is currently connected to the pathway we built in the -- the Landing No. 13. To answer the other question about lot sizes, you know, we went back and forth with staff on -- on this configuration and we did Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 16 of 66 lose a lot and reconfigured to try to meet everybody's criteria. This is a continuation of the same product we have in The Landing. Same lot size. Same product. There was some concern about parking. We showed those -- those six defined parking spots and -- sorry, my TV came on. We also -- I have also talked with Sonya about -- for the four duplexes providing a trash receptacle instead of cans for those -- those rentals. So, I think that would alleviate the concern about the trash receptacles being put out. We would have one enclosure for those four buildings or eight units. I think I may have addressed all the Commissioners' questions that -- that Josh may not have. If there is anymore I will be happy to answer. Holland: Thank you, Jim. I do have one more question, too. So, on the -- the homes are going to be facing Linder is what it sounds like and it's a wrought iron type fencing, so that's kind of open. Is that what I heard? Jewett: Yeah. So, the -- the thought process there was to give a different streetscape, other than always looking at the back of a house. So, we would put the front of the buildings, which you saw in my existing buildings that shows there and they would have a sidewalk coming from the front door out to the existing sidewalk and future pathway and, then, there would be wrought iron fence with gates at each one of those sidewalks entering the house. So, it's more of a row house look, more of a downtown feel is what we are trying to create. Holland: Okay. My only concern with that -- I like the concept, because I like the look of that, but Linder right here is kind of a sleepy road right now, but at some point in Meridian's future that road is planned to go over the interstate as an overpass and it will become a little bit more like -- probably what Locust Grove looks like today. Do you see any concerns with that as, you know, the road gets widened and developed out? Jewett: Well, certainly. We would have additional concerns with how pedestrians would cross that road and how children would cross that road. Currently right now they cross several times a day for the different classes going on at the elementary school. So, I am assuming that ACHD would address that issue with crosswalks and some signage that will allow for that pedestrian crossing. Our buildings are set back quite a bit, because we have the additional right of way that we are giving to ACHD. Then we have the 25 foot landscape buffer and, then, we have a setback to our buildings. So, we are set back considerably far and we would orientate these people's yards to the side and so the front would just be more of that front appearance like you would see at Harrison Boulevard or some of the things in Boise in the north end you might see. So, I really think that that's just a different concept and they are still there -- they are driving and the parking would be in their garages, which would be accessed from our internal street. So, I think that all of it will come together in cohesion once all the final pieces of ACHD comes together. Holland: Thanks, Jim. Any other questions for the applicant? Grove: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 17 of 66 Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I'm looking at this and I have some of the same concerns that staff mentioned in terms of parking -- off-street parking. Is -- is that something that you are -- have concerns with or going to address more fully? Jewett: So, is that a question for me? Grove: For either you, Jim, or Josh. Not sure who. Jewett: I will go ahead and try. If somebody could pull up the -- the map that shows the parking that would be helpful for me. But Sonya did discuss this with me at both the pre- app and in subsequent conversations that the city is becoming more concerned with on- street parking and so that's why we specifically addressed it and we addressed it by identifying two different parking spots at the end of both common drives that are technically off street, because they are on the common drive, not on the public street and, then, the product with any lot you have a driveway and, then, you have some limited area for on-street parking down the driveway. So, we have identified those in that area. Unfortunately, the rest of the -- the street as -- it has either fire hydrants and/or driveways, which people can't park in front of those, but we have provided, for example, on the duplexes, two parking spots per side, so eight -- four parking slots per lot on those and, then, on any residential lot they would have -- their two behind their garage as well. I think that overall parking can be an issue. I think there has to be some regulation internally within the subdivision and the HOA to eliminate permanent people using that and not just visitors, because the intention is it's for visitors. I think from our point of view it's hard for us to plan for that, not knowing who our -- who are specific buyer will be. We know generally what our buyer would be and that buyer is going to have two trucks -- two vehicles and, generally, if they build their garage -- like my guys sometimes do -- they park outside their garage, which, then, eliminates some visitor parking. I don't know if there is a perfect solution to that. I think we have done the best we can by providing the two per common driveway at each end and the two that are identified in. There, obviously, are additional parking on the next -- our phase to the north. Against our common area there is additional parking there that's not being utilized, but we didn't use it in this calculation, because we are looking at this zone. Currently we don't have a parking problem in our existing phase and we have -- I think just two lots left to build on in that phase. Maybe three. And we have not -- we do have some on-street parking, but we -- it's -- it's mainly because of the construction right now, not the homeowners. So, once the construction gets done, then, we don't have construction trailers and construction vans parked overnight there and it alleviates a problem. Holland: Thanks, Jim. Any other questions? Follow ups? Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 18 of 66 Seal: Just touching on the construction piece of this where there -- there is some curbside there, is there -- I mean would you be willing to build this out to where the construction does come in off Linder Road until, you know, such time as you have to seal that off for the -- the last duplex let's say? Holland: Commissioner Seal -- before you answer that, Jim, I think the ACHD wasn't going to allow them to have that access, unless I was wrong and staff has a different opinion there. Seal: Well, just -- just for the construction piece of it while they are -- before occupancy, I guess, is what I would -- not that I want to provide a way to work around regulation, but I mean that is a really -- that -- to me looking at the concerns of the folks around there, to have all the construction traffic go in and out would be not -- not pleasant. Jewett: So, let me -- and I -- construction related traffic is always an issue in a multi- phase development and we do our best to try to limit that. We try to provide a construction entrance. I really don't see why ACHD would not grant us a construction entrance, specifically when we are building the subdivision and probably temporary during the construction, but I couldn't guarantee that, but until they build Linder Road out I believe they would allow us that construction entrance and I will certainly ask for it and I will do every effort I can to accomplish that. I think it's a wise idea. I do recognize the construction traffic -- whether this homeowner just doesn't always know -- and we always endeavor to try to figure out a way. Holland: And, Sonya, did you have any opinions on that from staff's perspective? Would they be able to have a construction access? Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, that is an ACHD decision. I do think it would be a good idea to certainly pursue that with ACHD. Holland: Thank you. Any other questions before we open up for public testimony? Pitzer: Madam Chair? Jewett: I would -- Holland: Hang on, Jim. Will ask Commissioner Pitzer for her comments first and, then, we will open it back up to you. Pitzer: Thank you, Jim. So, these lots that are fronting Linder, so they have a sidewalk that goes from -- around the building to the front or -- I'm not quite clear on how they access -- or their -- or their company or their guests access their property without going through their garage. Could you help me understand that? Jewett: Yes. So, their front doors would face either directly into Linder or to the side and we are proposing to put a sidewalk down between Lots 58 and 59, so a visitor coming in Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 19 of 66 or somebody that's even not necessarily a visitor, somebody coming to locate them for whatever reason, the address, could -- we would have signage there that they could walk out to the sidewalk and find the front door. If it's a direct guest that they know they are coming, they would park in their driveway and go through their side gate. So, there would be a side gate in their side yard that would lead to the front door as well. It's -- it's a little bit of a twist from what is more prominent in like a north end or more urban area and it's a concept that's well accepted in those areas and I know that the city would like to see more of that urban development and I think that it will be well received here, although it's different, and I do understand that and I do appreciate your question and I hope that I have answered it for you and so we will have the sidewalk, we will have signage identifying so people know how to get there. Pitzer: Okay. So, sorry, follow-up question. So, there is a sidewalk that goes between 58 and 59. Not necessarily a walk path, but a sidewalk. Then it comes to the front of the property and, then, does another sidewalk, then, go to Lots 57 and 60? Jewett: So, the sidewalk would go from the extension there of Spoonbill Avenue and would extend to the sidewalk on Linder Road and, then, each unit would have a sidewalk that would connect from their front door to their front porch to Linder Road. So, along that stretch you would have nine -- to visit you would have nine sidewalks going from the sidewalk on Linder Road to their front porch and, then, one going between Lots 50 -- I think it's 58 and 59 that would access the cul-de-sac. Pitzer: Okay. So yeah. So, there is kind of like alley loaded -- Jewett: Right. Pitzer: Okay. All right. Thank you, Jim. I understand. Thank you for the clarification. Jewett: And I would like to address one more thing on -- on the construction entrance. When we built The Landing No. 13 and we had that emergency access that goes out onto Linder Road, just coming off that cul-de-sac just to the north of this project, we had a lot of people cutting through the subdivision from the existing Mallard Landing going right out of our emergency access, specifically motorcycles, because they could go right through the bollards. So, we successfully stopped that. So, there is that potential problem with a construction entrance that people use is it to cut through. So, we -- we would -- we would certainly gate it and make it secure, so that our superintendents would open it up in the morning and close it in the evening, so that we would not have the cut traffic and I think if I did all that I think I can be very successful in convincing ACHD the merits of that for the construction related entrance. Holland: Thanks, Jim. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 20 of 66 Seal: I had a follow up. And, Jim, thank you for answering the questions and being willing to work with ACHD like that. I really do appreciate -- appreciate that. So, just -- just a question on the pathway as it pertains between 58 and 59, that will change the requirements for the fencing along there -- more a question for staff. Since it's going to be a -- basically a public walkway there is going to have to be privacy fencing in there; is that correct? Allen: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, so let's back up for just a second here. So, if -- right now we don't have a pathway connection between 58 and 59, so if we are going to require a pathway in that location that needs to be in your motion for a change to the plat and the landscape plan and a minimum 15 foot wide common lot needs to be provided in order to provide a five foot pathway or sidewalk and five feet of landscaping on either side. And, yes, there are fencing -- fencing is required to be constructed by the developer. The -- the code doesn't really restrict fencing when it's visible from public streets, though that would be visible from both Spoonbill and Linder Road. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. Did that answer your question? Seal: That did and I just -- like I said in talking through that and them being amenable to it, I just want to make sure that all that was out on the table before we go down that path, make sure that they are -- they are still willing to do that, because it's going to eat up a little bit of landscape in there. Allen: Yeah. Thank you. And if the applicant is in agreement, again, there needs to be conditions in the staff report as I stated. Thank you. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. Seal: Thank you. Holland: Jim, did you have a -- Cassinelli: Madam Chair? Holland: Hang on just one second, Commissioner Cassinelli. Cassinelli: Okay. Jewett: Yeah. I apologize for not sending in a revised plan. This is something we have decided at the last go around on this and it just didn't get into the plan. So, that is my fault and I did not warn Sonya it was coming on that pathway. So, we will make our modifications to the plat before City Council and we totally are acceptable to a condition that that be added. Holland: Thanks, Jim. Commissioner Cassinelli. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 21 of 66 Cassinelli: Yeah. Jim, can you address the -- the size of these units, the square footage? What's -- what's the average? What's the max? Jewett: So, are we referring to the duplexes or the homes? Cassinelli: Yes. Holland: Both I think. Jewett: Both of them. Okay. So, the single family homes range -- we have some product in the 14 to 15 thousand square foot range and we go up to about 18, 19 hundred square foot range without going to a two story and on these lots we didn't feel that we wanted to put any two story product here because of the adjacent neighbors. We wanted to keep it all single level. If we do put a bonus room in, we will do a bonus facing forward only and that would take us up maybe 2,100 square feet. The duplexes are a three bedroom, two and a half bath per side, two story townhouse style and they -- one side is roughly 1,550 square feet and the other side is roughly 1,600 square feet. These are intended to be for the people who want to live in a residential neighborhood, but be a rental and not have ownership. So, that's why our square footage garage side and everything is comparable to our homes, it's just an option other than either home ownership or home renting. Holland: Commissioner Cassinelli, do you have a follow up? Cassinelli: Okay. And -- I do. Based on -- based on the square footage of the -- of the duplexes there is -- you dimension there is four parking spots per side; is that correct? Jewett: There is a two car garage per side and, then, a two -- minimum two car pad per side. Some of them have a little bigger -- Cassinelli: Okay. Jewett: -- pad, because our design is a set back garage. So, one could potentially have four parking spots behind the garage, but they would be stacked. Cassinelli: Okay. Now, I know in a rental -- addressing the parking and that's where I'm going with the square footage, the size of these and parking, renters most likely will fill the garage with -- as a storage unit and park -- park on the pad, but I think there, you know, might be enough. A little concerned there, but thank you for addressing that. Jewett: And I can't touch on that is, again, I think that's an internal management issue that we have been approaching with a lot of our rentals in not allowing that condition. So, if somebody is going to come and live and have two cars and they want to put a lot of stuff in their garage and have both their cars out, we are highly discouraging that. I don't know to the extent that we can require them to park at least one car in the garage, but we are highly discouraging that that be what they do -- is how we are approaching some of the apartments, too, is that people will take our apartments with a garage, put all the junk Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 22 of 66 in the garage and take up extra parking in the parking lot and it's more of a management issue that I think more managers got to get on board about addressing people and how they -- how they store and how they park. Holland: Thanks, Jim. I think it might be good, if the Commissioners don't mind, taking a break from questions to open it up for public testimony and, then, come back for more discussion, if that's all right. Madam Chair, do we -- or, Madam Clerk, do we have any -- anybody signed up to testify? Weatherly: I'm sure we have one person signed in, but did not indicate a wish to testify. Holland: Okay. If anybody would like to testify at this point, if you wouldn't mind just hitting the raise hand button on the attendee panel. It looks like we saw one hand there. And we will bring it in to -- to speak. And we have got about three minutes for you. Ockerman: Madam Chairman? Holland: Yes, we can hear you. If you wouldn't mind stating your name and address for the record that would be great. Ockerman: Sure. Jeanette Ockerman. 2070 West Waltman in Meridian. So, just a few comments about it, probably the same of what everybody else is saying. My concern would be the density, along with the parking. I live west of this and I have noticed, you know, in the denser areas where it's the R-8 the parking seems to like trickle out into other neighborhoods, because there is inadequate room for guest parking and the reality is most people put their stuff in the garage, park in their driveway, and, then, there is no room for anyone else. So, I feel like that is a concern, especially with the duplexes and they are facing Linder Road, that, to me, is encouraging parking out on Linder, which isn't a very good idea for guests and people, because right now Linder is the outlet for all of the subdivisions in that area. So, it is fairly busy. I wouldn't call it a sleeper road, I would call it a fairly busy road for our area. And, then, my other comment was the green space and I can see that you have it around the edges, but there is really no like area for people to be with, you know, their kids to play or dogs or whatever. It's just the outer landscaped area, not a park area. So, those would be my comments for it. Holland: Thanks, Jeanette, we appreciate you being here and being available to ask those questions. Madam Clerk, is -- is there anybody else that's indicated an interest to speak? Weatherly: Madam Chair, at this time I do not see any other hands raised. Holland: Okay. We will wait for just a second. If anybody needs to hit star nine to unmute themselves or raise their hands, we will wait for just a second here to see if there is anyone else that would like to speak. This is when we need Chris's Jeopardy music. Hearing none, we will go back and let the applicant address some of those concerns and continue our discussion. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 23 of 66 Jewett: Thank you, Madam Chair. So, I think we have discussed the parking. I don't know what -- how much more to address that other than what I have already said. As far as the common area, you know, we do have that common area to our north that is adjacent to our existing common area in the previous phase. We did build a pathway that goes to the east that eventually ends at a park or close proximity to the pocket park, which is -- is quite large. People like to walk there all the time, take their dogs, exercise. So, that amenity is there. We do have the elementary that's across the street. I don't really see why anybody would park on Linder Road. There is -- there is a no parking strip on Linder Road. There is just two lane traffic right now. With the widening I'm assuming it will all be marked as no parking and I -- I would see that no different than like a Harrison Boulevard. You don't park in front of your house on Harrison Boulevard, you park in the alley or on the sides. So, I -- I don't see that being an issue. And I think I may have addressed their questions. So, with that I would stand for any additional questions. Holland: And, Jim or Josh, if you want to make any other closing comments you would like to make at this point and, then, we can start deliberating and asking more questions if we have them. Any other comments you would -- either one of you would like to make? Jewett: I'm good, so -- how about you, Josh? Beach: Yeah. I'm set. It sounds great. Holland: Okay. Allen: Madam Chair? Holland: Yes. Sonya. Allen: Excuse me. Staff is a little concerned that if we put the pathway in between those two lots that we were discussing earlier that they could still meet their minimum dimensional standards for the lot size. Each dwelling unit requires 4,000 square feet. Is that going to be an issue, Jim? Jewett: I would have to pull up the plat, but I thought we had some extra square footage yet. I didn't know it was going to be 15 -- the 15 times a hundred and something. I would have to do the calculations if somebody could pull up a plat. I don't have one in front of me. I could do the quick math on it. But, yes, the minimum lot size it would have to be 8,000 square feet and we have -- we have tried to maintain that. Okay. And I can't read those. Sorry. Allen: I just want you to not commit to anything that you can't fulfill, so -- Jewett: So, can anybody read those square footages of those lots for me? I can't read them. Allen: Give me just a second and I will bring that up. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 24 of 66 Jewett: I got it here. So, we have got 8,000, 8,000, 8,300 and 80 -- so, the one that will go down long is at 8,374. So, we have 400 square feet and it's 138 feet long. A hundred and thirty-eight times 15 -- I'm pulling up a calculator. Holland: Nothing like doing the math while you've got 30 people watching you. Jewett: Oh, my gosh. Put me under the spot. That's 2,000 square feet. So, yes, Sonya, you raised a very good point and you wouldn't allow that to be in an easement; correct? You would -- but if it's not -- if it's not a public pathway, if it's just a private pathway for those particular residents, it wouldn't necessarily have to be in a common lot and just in an easement. Allen: Well, it should be in a common area. I doubt private homeowners are going to want folks -- you know, traffic going through their property and did you say -- is there going to be side fences -- side yard fences constructed? Jewett: Oh. Well, yes, we would -- we wouldn't -- yes. We would put fences. But, again, this was to give those residents access to theirs. It necessarily wouldn't be for the other ones, because the other people saw the pathway that we have constructed along the north boundary. It's more of a convenience for those specific guests and/or residents that want to seek their front door from their back door. So, I don't know why it necessarily would have to be a common lot, it could -- it could be an easement and just a concrete sidewalk that would simply have a signage on it with all the addresses. This is something we discussed with the Fire, if you recall, Sonya, by having some identification so that people would know how to reach somebody's front door and so that's where this came from. Holland: So, Jim and Josh, I'm going to just make a couple comments real quick. So, I think there is a couple of things here to me that make me lean towards wanting to continue the application. A couple of those being, one, adjusting the sidewalk and making sure the plat's correct, but for me I'm still a little bit worried about the density in this pocket with the way that it's configured. You know, I -- I understand it's a -- it's a complicated in-fill project. It's on the end of a weird bulb out street that kind of connects in and not something we typically see and I think you have -- you have done a lot of due diligence here in trying to design a nice plan and I'm not opposed to the duplexes, I think it's really nice to have a diversity of product and certainly need more duplexes in the community and I like the way that you're thinking with trying to be innovative in how lots face Linder to kind of make it look more open. I -- I would lean towards -- you know, if it was me designing the site -- and I know I'm not designing the site, this is your project, but I would lean towards wanting to see more of an R-4 type fit here where there may be a few less lots and give more people, you know, a little bit more space between each other in there. Even if you did a duplex style in there around that bulb out -- and I would certainly open it up for the other commissioners to talk about it, too, but I almost wonder if you would be willing to look at a couple other design options and bring it back to us and so with that I'm going to request that the Commission just kind of leave it open for conversation, instead of closing the public hearing for deliberation, so that we might be able to brainstorm and Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 25 of 66 work with you on it a little bit and ask some more questions. So, if you don't mind, Jim and Josh, give us a few minutes and maybe deliberate with each other first and, then, we will open back up to you with some questions, if that's all right. Jewett: Certainly. Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Is it okay if I jump in for a second? Holland: Please do. Grove: Okay. I'm kind of echoing what you said. I -- I would tend to agree that I would like to see a -- a different take on this. I like a lot of the aspects of it. I like the duplex. I like opening onto Linder. I like that look and feel. But I think that it does need to have that path piece and if that's not there and it's going to eat up two thousand square feet like I -- I don't know how that lays out with what's currently on the site plan and I keep going back to the parking street configuration and I have a -- I have a lot of concerns with how that is laid out. I'm not opposed to the -- the density. I could just -- I'm not a fan of how it's laid out and how it's going to function once the product is in. So, I -- I would be in favor of requesting a continuance if -- if the applicant is open to that idea. Holland: Other Commissioners that have comments? I know Commissioner McCarvel and Commissioner Cassinelli, I can't see your faces, so -- Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Commissioner Seal. Seal: Question for staff. I know we have talked about this kind of being a -- you know, another phase of -- of The Landing and my question is -- and I'm -- you probably can't answer this on the spot, but if we have a continuance it would be nice to know if -- if you took the -- the different pieces of this as in phases and you added this into it with the common area, does that still make the entire area of development within standards for open space or would this require more or less or something along those lines? I'm just trying to piece it all together in my -- in my mind as far as how it fits as a project. Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Seal, Commissioners, I -- I do not know that answer off the top of my head. That is something that we could ask the applicant to provide, though, if you decide to continue this project. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Pitzer: Madam Mayor? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 26 of 66 Holland: Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: I -- I don't have a problem with the -- with the -- with the duplexes, but -- but the density overall on -- on this -- on this amount of acres is -- maybe I'm not -- not even seeing it's the density, but the shared drives where you're having one, two, three -- three homes off of each shared drive, the parking with -- I just -- I mean someone's going to come in with a big truck and block one way and someone's trying to get out and I can just see tempers flaring already and the -- I think it needs a different configuration on here. I just see so many issues I'm almost -- I almost don't know where to start, but some of them have been clarified for me, but I still have an issue with that long shared drive and -- and -- and the parking. McCarvel: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner McCarvel. Or was that -- McCarvel: Yeah, I would be support -- Holland: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I would be in favor of continuance and want to see something with just a little more workable configuration. I agree. I think trying to live in this once it's all -- it may -- I -- yeah. Trying to live in it once it's all done I think it's going to be a challenge. Holland: One additional comment I have, too. I -- I really appreciate you working to put in some extra parking stalls, having six extra designated parking stalls, but having them at the end of that kind of private drive -- well, private drives already are hard to get in and out of. I think there could be some challenges with people needing to reverse all the way down the common drive to get back out once they are parked. So, just another thought there to consider for you. Commissioner Cassinelli, did you have comments? Cassinelli: I -- I, too, would be in favor of seeing a little rework and it may require dropping -- even bringing the density down a little bit. Not that I'm super opposed to -- what they have done and in-fill would -- you know, every time we -- we talk about in-fill we know the pain and how difficult it can be. So, you know, you -- you do what you can get as creative as you can, but that said I would -- you know, I would be in favor of a continuance as well. Holland: Okay. Do we have any other specific questions you would like to ask of the applicant from the Commission? You're all pausing. I would just say I don't know, Jim or Josh, if you have any comments on what we have just deliberated on. I would be happy to open up to give you a couple minutes to kind of respond, but I think the -- the sound of the Commission is that we would be leaning towards requesting a continuance to look into a couple of things, one being the pathway between Lots 58 and 59 and seeing how that kind of configures itself. Maybe asking you to reconsider the density. I would ask you to look and see if you could find something a little closer to R-4 or R-6. Maybe just something that would eliminate a couple lots and kind of help with some of the transition Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 27 of 66 issues we are having here. And, then, I know some of the internal circulation was -- was a challenge as well for the Commission. So, would you be open to looking at doing a little bit of reconfiguring and coming back to us? Jewett: So, let me try to address this one at a time. First of all, I have no objection to a continuance. I only ask that we would have clear guidance of what you would like me to do. Now, having said that, the first thing I need to -- R-8 is the only zoning that would allow the duplexes. R-4 would not allow that. That's one of the reasons for asking for the R-8 zoning, because that's the only zoning that would allow those. Secondly, because of how this in-fill is shoehorned in and I'm not allowed access onto Linder Road, there is not a whole lot of different configurations and we have to use common drives. Either that or just have long, skinny lots or just some dysfunctionality in the lots. So, either have -- we are going to have a dysfunctionality somewhere and we worked with staff quite diligently on different aspects. We worked with ACHD. We had a different configuration when we started. ACHD didn't like it. We worked through that and we finally arrived on this configuration, which did lose one lot to suffice that. So, I don't know what we could do internally in design, other than the street we have. So, the next thing is -- is, okay, how do you configure it without the common drives? Then you just end up with longer and skinnier lots, which I don't know if that's more desirable. It just -- it just -- and I don't think losing -- you would not be losing one lot, you would be losing considerable because of that. So, I don't know how to really -- to reconfigure it anymore than we already have without having additional considerations from ACHD with -- an access off of Linder would certainly change things, but that's been already testified that that's just a no go with them. It is an in-fill. It is shoehorned into what -- and these are all comparable to the lots I have that we are driving in from. They are all very comparable to those. So, I don't know. To go to R-4 zoning means I lose the duplexes, then, it changes everything. I -- again, I don't know how to reconfiguration the roads. Private drives are part of the code. They are allowed. We have met all the criteria of them. So, I guess I would ask for some additional insight of exactly -- knowing that additional information -- outside of trying to figure out that pathway connection between 58 and 59, which I will work on and I will get done, I don't know what else -- what other kind of configuration other than just simply changing. Holland: Well -- and I think that that might be what we are asking is that you might consider changing the model you have got here. As much as we like some elements of it, I think it's -- it's a tough -- it's a tough in-fill project on a two -- two and a half acre -- not even two and a half acre site. You know, one thought just looking at the top of mine -- and, again, I'm not an engineer and I'm not a site planner, but, you know, potentially looking at doing -- maybe you have got two sets of duplexes on the top part of the drive in and, then, you put a couple of your home sites on the bottom to round it out a little better. So, you do, you know, four duplex units and two residential units and see if that helps with the bulb out. But I don't know what that looks like until it's sketched out, but that's just a thought. Jewett: Yeah. Trust me when I say we have looked at a lot of different configurations with this over the time we have been working on it -- and I don't know how I could change the -- the road configuration. It would just be changing lots. And, quite frankly, we will Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 28 of 66 just wait if that's going to be the end result. We will wait. We are not in any hurry. So, if it's a matter of just time, I just don't think that financially it makes sense to do anything less than where we are at. We have put a lot of thought into this design. It works. It's -- it's within the code and I think that we have worked beyond the code to try to accomplish some of the concerns that I know the city has and I think we have always worked towards that. So, aside of just saying like lose a common drive and configure the lots, I don't know what else I could -- Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just -- I mean just kind of as food for thought, I look at this as far as the parking and circulation -- and I mean the -- the only thing I can offer is imagine, if you will, because there is, you know, thousands of mobile services that come in and they all come in and they all have a -- you know, a trailer attached to them. Imagine something like that coming into this -- this area and needing to do business in there. It's almost -- to me that almost wouldn't -- wouldn't work or would -- you know, like some of the other Commissioners commented, that -- that's going to cause some heated debate, because they are going to have to park somewhere. So, that's -- yeah. In looking at the circulation of it, I mean people are going to be people and -- and I'm very sympathetic to -- to everything that you guys have to look at and be concerned about here. So, I mean if -- if people use their garages as garages and not for storage and didn't have, you know, their buddies come over and park on the street, it wouldn't be an issue and, unfortunately, we kind of live in -- in those times. But I'm more concerned with, you know, the element of what happens when like a service vehicle needs to come in, you know, even a -- you know, an appliance repair person, something with a trailer, they are -- they are just going to have issues with not only getting in and out, but with parking as well. So -- and -- and I know you asked for clear direction and that's -- that's the clearest direction I can think of is how -- how can you successfully accommodate something like that into this just to make it, you know, a better community overall. And, again, I really like -- I like what you have done for an in- fill project. There is a lot going on in here for a really small space. You know, the fact that you're willing to -- to, you know, work to provide that path to make -- you know, make all of that work is commendable, it just -- you know, again, I'm just thinking about the roadway conditions and the circulation and just, you know, imagine, if you will, somebody coming in there with a service trailer to try and provide some type of service. Hopefully that's helpful. Jewett: It is. Thank you, Commissioner Seal. But -- but I don't know how I can change the road configuration outside of removing the common drive that goes to the east and if I move the common drive I can probably come up with a design that has five lots in it instead of six and they would be a little bit more irregular shape, a little deeper. I mean if that's the direction you want me to go I can certainly go down that path, but if you're asking me to somehow come up with a different configuration for Spoonbill Avenue, I don't know -- I don't know what I would do and that's why I'm looking for the insight. If you want me to create a different circulation pattern on the street, what might that look like. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 29 of 66 Holland: And, Jim, for me I think if you were to remove that access drive that kind of goes to the east with the -- the way those other lots are off of that -- that shared drive there, that would fix a lot of things for me. Again, I would have to see it, but you're probably right, you would have to remove a lot and just make them a little bit more regular shape to fit it in there. That's what I see as just a different configuration if you can and maybe -- maybe lose one or two lots there to see if -- if we can make it feel a little better in here. Allen: Madam Chair? Holland: Yes, Sonya. Allen: If I may, I just wanted to clarify the record. The applicant stated that duplexes -- two family duplex dwellings are prohibited in the R-4 district. They are actually a conditional use, but that would require 8,000 square feet per unit. So, 16,000 square foot lots. Holland: Okay. So, that's certainly something for you to consider. You know, if you decided to do that we could probably -- Sonya, I don't know if they could put a conditional use request in if they did come back with an R-4 with some of these duplexes. Is that something that could be possible still? Allen: Yes, Madam Chair, we could just continue it out so that the noticing requirements for the conditional use permit could be met. I'm not sure the applicant would be in agreement with that. But I just wanted to clarify the record that it is a conditional use in the R-4. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. Jewett: And -- yeah. So, you would take my four lots and make them two and so you would have -- and that just -- really doesn't fit -- fit the model for us. And, again, I could -- I could keep the configuration, I could -- would take the existing cul-de-sac and pivot it slightly to the east, lose the common drive and reconfigure those lots and probably end up with five lots, maybe four, and, then, that -- by moving it I get a little extra room in the duplex lots to accommodate that common lot between those 58 and 59, with a net loss of one, but I lose the common drive and I think I can accomplish that for the Commission. But if they are looking at me going to an R-4, I think that just -- that just -- well, first of all, an R-4 I think it's an 8,000 square foot minimum lot and 16 duplexes. I would lose two duplex lots and I would probably lose two of the single family lots and, then, it just becomes financially not feasible to do. I currently have two rentals on the property now. I would just stay in that configuration and just -- and not develop it right now. So, I guess what I would be looking for is direction -- if that's sufficient enough change for you to move forward on that. And if it's not, then, I guess that's a decision -- I'm not comfortable going back and doing something I can't do. I hope you understand and respect that. You know, everything has to financially model. Not that we have to get rich on everything, but it does have to financially make sense and losing that significant -- like two duplex lots does not Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 30 of 66 make financial sense. Right there I think it's -- it eliminates the feasibility of the project before we even start. Holland: Thanks for your feedback, Jim. I appreciate it. For the Commissioners I think -- it would alleviate my concerns if -- if that was -- if they were to remove that common drive and reallocate kind of that cul-de-sac coming in to adjust for the -- the walkway to Linder Road, as well as eliminating one or two of the lots on the east side and reconfiguring those. That would help me a lot with the way that this looks. But I don't know what your thoughts are and if somebody would like to make a motion saying something similar to that and giving him really specific advice. Commissioner Grove. Grove: Madam Chair, I have a question and I don't -- I'm not -- still new to all this a little bit. So, what would -- what -- what would it look like instead of going R-4, really leaning into the R-8 aspect of this and reconfiguring with additional duplex units, rather than single family homes? Does that significantly change the product layout and would that allow for let's say a larger cul-de-sac or something of that nature that would encourage more spaced out driving and parking area, but retain some of the density that is included with this site layout? Jewett: Commissioner Grove, that actually was one of our considerations going in, but we felt a need to -- to add some buffer between ourselves and those existing residential houses and I -- we went with these single family single level homes as a good buffer to the two story duplexes. So, I will -- yes. So, the answer to your question is, yes, that would work and we could change things immensely. It just -- you open up a different set of -- of issues that I don't know specifically I'm comfortable with that right at this point in time, because all my neighborhood meetings and everything and I had them with my neighbors has been based on what I have proposed. So, if I did that I would have to go back to them and make sure I get their feedback first, which I'm totally okay with doing, but, again, I just would not -- clear direction from the -- from the Commission on that's what they want me to do. And I would also like to -- to state that I do really do appreciate the interaction with the Commission. I think it's all positive and I think it's all for the right reason and I do appreciate it all. Pitzer: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: Yes. I would like to entertain a motion to close the public testimony. Holland: Commissioner Pitzer, if we are planning to continue the application we have to leave it open. Pitzer: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 31 of 66 Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just question for the applicant. I mean is it -- is a continuance in your mind helpful at this point with -- with what you have been given or -- because what you kind of noodled around seems like something you could come back with already and -- and, you know, hit us with and we might all go, yeah, that might work a little bit better and I think just, you know, the overall circulation of it is kind of what it comes down to and trying to ease those concerns. Jewett: Commissioner Seal, I -- if it's losing the common drive and reconfiguring those lots to be an R-4 style lot, I would -- I would be completely in agreement to a continuance to do that. So, basically, I would still ask for an R-8 zoning, so the duplex could be allowed at their current configuration, but the other lots would be an R zone -- R-4 size lot. So, if that -- if that's a stipulation that comes out of this, I can agree to go and reconfigure that and do a continuance to accomplish that. So, I would take those six 4,000 square foot lots and I would create however many R-4 lots I could create -- create out of it and lose the common drive. The one common. The other common drive it suits the duplex and it's only accessing the duplex. So, I would ask that one remain. Holland: I think that would be reasonable for me and everybody else. Seal: I would agree and, Sonya, is that something that they would have to get a conditional use in order to accommodate for those to have an R-4 sizing standard or is that something that would fit into the R-8 with what they currently have? Well, with what would be designed into what they have I should say. Holland: Before Sonya answers, I think, you know, if they are looking for an R-8 designation they can go bigger, they just -- it gives them the ability to have the duplexes at the smaller size lot. So, I think that they would still be okay. But I don't know if we have minimum standards, Sonya, if that would work if they did that. Seal: Yeah. I just -- considering there is a difference between the R-4 and the R-8 I just want to make sure that we are not, you know, asking him to do something with those single -- single occupancy, you know, in the R-4 standard that can't be accommodated when it's, you know, technically an R-8, if that makes sense. Jewett: And I don't know if -- where Sonya is, but that's the purpose of the DA. So, within the DA you would condition that the lots not be smaller than an R-4 size lot and so that's how you would accomplish that and we have done it before and it's -- it's for specific things like this where if something fits in one zoning, but you want a lot size that fits in another zoning, they have used the development agreement as the tool. Allen: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Sonya. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 32 of 66 Allen: I'm sorry, I was speaking earlier, but I was on mute, so I was right here with you. But you guys all have it right. I mean the applicant, what he just said is correct, you could, you know, restrict it further through the development agreement. Bottom line is if you're doing duplex in an R-4 district it requires a conditional use permit. Either way you go, depending on what zoning district you go with, it has to meet the dimensional standards of the district at a minimum. If you increase the number of units beyond -- I don't think we are thinking that, but if -- if we do, then, that would require renotice beyond what they have already got, so -- Holland: But I think what they are talking about doing is deleting a couple of lots and making them bigger. Allen: Yeah. Just saying if they went the other way and did duplexes all the way around, if that would, by chance increase their unit count then -- or lot count I should say, it would require renotice. Thank you. Holland: Thanks, Sonya. I don't know if anybody feels comfortable making a motion with some of those suggestions. Jewett: I do. Seal: Madam Chair, we would need to know a date that we would be able to do the continuance to. Holland: I was just about to ask Sonya. Sonya, I know we -- we probably will not be having a meeting on July 2nd and the next one after that would be July 9th or the 16th. Are either one of those good options? Allen: One thing real quick for the applicant to ponder. I would need revised plans at least ten days prior to the hearing date we choose. So, keep that in mind. Holland: With that we could look at August 6th, too. Allen: Yeah. Just make sure we don't cut it too close on time to give the applicant time to revise and staff time to review. Jewett: For us it would -- would take a couple weeks at the most. So, any day in July or even early August -- I think you look at your schedule to see how busy you are and we would fit whatever one is least busy, I guess, to make it easier. Allen: July 16th would work, if that works for the applicant. Jewett: It works for me. Seal: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 33 of 66 Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move to continue file number H-2020-0005 to the hearing date of July 16th, 2020, so that the applicant work with -- can work with ACHD to provide -- or to possibly provide a consistent -- geez. Sorry. Construction entrance off of Linder Road until initial occupancy. So, the applicant can also work to provide a pathway between Lots 58 and 59 that complies with all city code, including fencing standards, and to work to possibly reduce density or modify the design to improve parking. That they provide -- or they provide the revised plot to city staff ten days prior to the hearing. Holland: Commissioner Seal, one more question for you. Do you want to add an addition to the extent of what the applicant has suggested of creating those lots on the east side and removing that common drive to be more of an R-4? Seal: Yeah. Well, I -- I mean I put it in here to work to possibly reduce the density or modify the design. I mean I want to give him as much leeway as possible. I like what he's saying and I think we have given him enough direction to accomplish that, so -- Holland: I just know he requested some specific direction, so maybe it's just adding -- following the direction of what the applicant proposed during the hearing. Seal: Right. So, essentially, work to possibly reduce the density by following the instruction given at the Planning and Zoning meeting to improve parking, internal circulation and provide the east lots with a -- more of an R-4 designation status. Would that accommodate that? Holland: I have a motion. Do I have a second? McCarvel: Second. Holland: Mr. Grove. Grove: Question, I guess. Sorry. Would it be -- it's not an R-4 status, this would be an R-4 sizing, would that -- do I understand that correct? Holland: That's correct. Grove: Okay. Pogue: Madam Chair? Andrea Pogue. Holland: Yes. Andrea. Pogue: There was discussion regarding the sidewalk and whether it would -- it fits and the applicant indicating he needed to make that work. Did that want to be included in the motion? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 34 of 66 Holland: I believe that Commissioner Seal had that in the motion. Pogue: Did he address that? Thank you. Seal: I did. Holland: All right. Any other discussion? I have a motion by Commissioner Seal and a second by Commissioner McCarvel. If you wouldn't mind, Madam Clerk, would you take roll on this one. Weatherly: Absolutely. Let me -- I was not prepared for that. Holland: Just since we have got a couple people on the phone it's hard to tell what they are -- what the yeses or no's are. Weatherly: I totally understand. Roll call: Seal, yea; McCarvel, yea; Pitzer, yea; Grove, yea; Cassinelli, yea; Holland, yea; Fitzgerald, absent. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: All right. Thank you, Jim and Josh, we appreciate you working with us and we look forward to seeing you in July. Jewett: Thank you. D. Public Hearing for Villas at Twelve Oaks East (H-2020-0014) by Jim Jewett, Located at 115 S. Linder Rd. 1. Request: Annexation of 6.63 acres of land with a TN-R zoning district. Holland: Okay. With that we will move on to the next item on the agenda, which is the Villas at Twelve Oaks East, H-2020-0014, and I think we may see Jim again here pretty soon. We will go ahead with the staff report first. Allen: Thank you, Madam Chair. Give me just a moment here. All right. The next application before you is a request for annexation and zoning. There is also an accompanying modification to the existing development agreement on the adjacent property to the west, which does not require Commission action. This site consists of 6.63 acres of land. It's zoned R-1 in Ada county and it's located at 115 South Linder Road on the west side of Linder, just south of West Franklin Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north are commercial uses and a fuel facility zoned C-C. To the south and east are single family residential uses zoned R-4 and to the north on the east side is undeveloped commercial land zoned C-N and to the west is multi-family zoned TN-R, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 35 of 66 which is currently in the development process. A development agreement exists, as I mentioned, on the property to the west that is proposed to be amended to include the subject property. That property is underdeveloped by the -- under development by the same developer. The commercial future land use map -- excuse me -- Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is commercial. The applicant requests annexation and zoning of 6.63 acres of land with a TN-R zoning district for the development of eight multi-family structures containing a total of 64 apartments units at a gross density of 13.94 units per acre, consistent with the commercial future land use map designation. Multi-family residential developments are a principal permitted use in the TN-R district. There is an existing home on the property that is proposed to be retained and used as an additional rental or manager's unit. The site plan depicts access via the extension of a driveway from the west boundary of this site and via South Linder Road. A pedestrian connection is required to be provided to the north to the commercial development for interconnectivity by an existing access easement. This property is planned to develop as a subsequent phase of the multi-family project currently under development on the adjacent property to the west and will share common open space and site amenities. The overall project exceeds the minimum qualified open space and site amenities required by the UDC. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required along the north side of the Ten Mile Creek from the east to the west boundary of the annexation area and within the street buffer along Linder Road in accord with the pathways master plan. The 25 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along Linder Road. Conceptual building elevations were submitted that are the same as those being constructed in the Villas of the Twelve Oaks project in the earlier phase to the west. The design of all structures in this development are required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. Because the development agreement already exists for the property to the west, which, again, is the developer of the subject property, a modification to the existing agreement is requested to incorporate this property in the agreement, rather than require a new separate agreement for this later phase. The applicant requests the removal of the existing development agreement provision that requires an eight foot tall concrete wall to be constructed along the subject property's west boundary. The wall was previously required to buffer the previous rural residential use on the subject property. With the proposed development, it's no longer necessary as the project is proposed to be integrated as one develop -- as one development with shared common areas and amenities. Written testimony has been received from Josh Beach, the applicant's representative. They are in agreement with the staff report, except for Condition B-1-2, which requires sewer to connect to the north in accord with the master plan, rather than to the west as proposed. The Public Works Department has re- evaluated the applicant's proposed sanitary sewer routing, as well as previous e-mail correspondence with the applicant on the topic of routing, and finds that the current proposal is acceptable. Therefore, staff recommends the following language to replace that currently in Condition B-1-2. The applicant shall be responsible to determine whether adequate capacity exists in the receiving sewer system, including two lift stations, to accept the additional flow from this development. If upgrades are necessary, the applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with said upgrades. Staff is recommending approval per the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 36 of 66 Holland: Sorry. I was talking, but I was on mute. Any questions for Sonya? Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: A similar question to the last. If -- if you take in all the square footage and everything and the open spaces by the addition of this, does it make the entire project within the required parameters of open space? Allen: Madam Chair, Commissioner Seal, Commissioners, yes. Commissioner Seal, there is an exhibit in the staff report that demonstrates that the overall common open space and site amenities are in excess of UDC standards. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Holland: Okay. With that it looks like we have got Josh and Jim back to join us again. I know they are having a fun night with us, so thanks, gentlemen, for joining us again and -- Beach: You tried to kick us out a few minutes ago, but we didn't leave, so -- yeah. So, you know, Sonya covered it pretty well. It -- Holland: Josh, I'm sorry, would you say your name and address for the record again. Beach: I apologize. Josh Beach. 2030 South Washington Avenue, Emmett, Idaho. So, as Sonya said, this is, essentially, we are adding to an existing development agreement with a further concept plan showing eight multi-unit buildings with an additional 64 units with associated parking and garages and there is here on -- move to the next slide here. Okay. There we go. So, there will be an access out to -- out to Linder Road and, then, that will -- this -- this -- this project here, in contrast with what has been approved with the previous phase, does not have any duplexes. This would be an all multi-family, with the exception of that one unit that -- where the existing home is would either be a rental unit or an office, depending on which direction the applicant decides to go. We -- we are providing some open space in this phase and I have got a slide a couple away from this that kind of details that, as I believe your staff report does, but you can see that there is also -- we connect a significant stretch of the multi-use pathway from Linder to connect to the -- the existing Twelve Oaks project there just -- just to the west. I can't figure out how to -- this is just -- just a zoom in of the -- the actual site that we are talking about in contrast to the -- the overall development, which includes, as I said, the -- the other phase of Twelve Oaks. And I think, you know, one thing I wanted to mention was typically when we are working through a -- a project like this, one of the things that comes up is -- is parking and so in addition to open space, doing an overall calculation, the same thing was done with the parking and the -- I believe there is an additional 21 parking spaces -- just including the -- the apartments for -- for both projects there is an additional 21. Now, that doesn't include the multi -- or the -- the duplex parking, because, you know, I Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 37 of 66 don't think those folks would object to folks that are renting the -- the apartments to parking in their driveway, as well as the commercial. So, I didn't include those. And so, you know, we are not at the bare minimum, we have got an extra roughly 20 parking spaces to accommodate guest parking. So, this is -- this is a slide that kind of shows you what we got going in terms of overall parking spaces, open space, the number of buildings, you know, these -- these -- these open space numbers are not broken down into acreage or percentages -- or I guess it is a percentage there, but it's not an acreage, but -- but that still gets you to -- you know, obviously, with -- with multi-family projects there is -- there is another section of code that requires some additional -- your -- your -- your private 80 square feet of private open space per unit and, then, depending on the -- the size of those units there is also a requirement for some additional open space. But as Sonya said, we -- we meet that requirement independently and, then, together as well, so -- so, that shouldn't be a concern moving forward and, as I said, you can see here -- hopefully on the next slide, if it ever decides to move forward here, is kind of highlighting the section on multi-use pathway that -- that -- that we are going to be constructing with this project that will connect to what's -- what's under construction and will be constructed soon just to the west as part of the -- the other phase of Twelve Oaks and so there will be a very good connection there, again, for residents further south on -- on Linder to include, you know, some of those subdivisions that we were just talking about in a previous application, they will be able to, you know, walk up Linder and bypass Franklin quite a bit and maybe get out to some of those businesses that are out there or will be constructed on -- on Franklin, which -- which is the idea. So, these are -- these are similar, if not exactly the same as those buildings in Twelve Oaks. These are actually of Twelve Oaks. I went up there and took some photos of the buildings, you know, that are now built and they are very attractive quality construction, you know, there is -- there is some -- some side elevation -- that top left photo is of the -- of the garage is -- is kind of the side of the garage and there is some nice elements there to kind of make those attractive and, then, the -- the garage building is just next to that, as well as the -- the two story buildings, which are -- again, were approved by staff. They meet design standards, so I have every -- every belief that, you know, the -- the buildings that we are building in -- in this phase would also meet that. So, that -- that should also not be a concern. I guess I don't -- I don't really have much else to -- to say beyond that. I know there was a -- this is -- it's a successful project. You know, those -- those -- those are very attractive buildings out there. I'm not -- I don't see any concerns in terms of parking. Open space is ample. You know, there is quite a bit there, even if -- you know, there is already the several amenities within the first phase and the amenity that we are adding now for the ten foot multi-use pathway just -- just adds to that and, you know, I think it's going to be a nice project and going to be a benefit to the area that, you know, needs -- needs some -- some excitement and some growth. With that I will stand for any questions and that's all I have got today. Holland: Thanks, Josh. Hey, Josh, on the Twelve Oaks East, I know there was one rendering that kind of showed a three story building. All the ones proposed for the east that we are looking at right here are just two story buildings; is that correct? Beach: So -- and you referenced west; correct? Yeah. Those -- there are two three story buildings in the previous phase, but in this phase there will be just two stories. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 38 of 66 Holland: Okay. Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate it. Beach: Correct. Holland: Any other questions for Josh -- or Jim I know is on the line as well. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: Just a quick question. There is a -- the commercial spaces to the -- the north of this -- and I know they have -- just because I have driven back there a couple times -- they have dumpsters along that. How does that align with where these apartment complexes are? Are they -- did you guys try and match that up with where the drive aisles are? Are they going to be, you know, right by some of the apartments? Beach: Yes. If we go back to -- Seal: -- the wind kind of blows that way. Beach: Right. So, there is a -- there is a concrete wall that separates the -- kind of the commercial property to the north end, this property, and we will have to -- we will have to, you know, cut a hole in that. But, you're right, there is some -- there are some dumpsters back in that area. Now, I walked the site the other day and we will have to -- we will have to coordinate that and make sure that, you know, obviously, that -- that all works in terms of getting pedestrians through there and we can definitely, you know, have discussion with that property owner to the north as to where they -- they have their dumpster. Now, whether or not we can require them to move anything is another question, but we can -- we can definitely have those -- have those discussions. But you can see -- and I need to go back a couple of slides I think here probably so you can see what I'm talking about. You can see -- I don't know how to use the mouse, but you can see between some open space on that north side and where the parking -- basically it looks like a common driveway. You can't really tell that it punches through, but that's the general location just -- just -- don't know how to describe that. You can probably see what I'm talking about. But there is a -- a couple of lines going north that will be where the -- can you see the mouse on the screen there? Seal: Yeah. Holland: Yeah. Seal: Yeah. Just -- just below the E and N in open. Beach: You got it. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 39 of 66 Seal: There is going to be one there and, then, below the T on amenities it looks like mostly another one there. Beach: No. No. Seal: No. Beach: So, just between the E and the -- yeah. The E and the N in open is where the -- the cross-access is. There -- there is not a cross-access -- Seal: Okay. Beach: -- on the other -- on the other side further east. It's just -- just that -- just that one. Holland: And there won't be -- Beach: So, it -- go ahead. Holland: Sorry. I was going to say there -- there won't be a drive access, it's just a pedestrian access; correct? Beach: That's correct. That's correct. So, with the pedestrian access, then, that becomes a -- it's not as -- as -- obviously not as wide, but we would have to coordinate with -- that property owner provided a cross-access and we are going to be providing the same thing. We will -- we will coordinate that and -- and get that accomplished there in figuring out where that needs to be and -- and making sure that it makes sense in terms of, you know, getting pedestrians back and forth. Because that -- City of Meridian -- and as most of you should make that -- make an effort to connect properties together and in this case it would be just pedestrian. But that goes a long way when you have got a -- a gas station there with, you know, snacks. There is also a restaurant and a coffee shop in that -- and several -- there is a bar in that -- in that strip mall anyway and so the idea is to get folks back and forth without having to go out on Franklin and Linder. Holland: Good place to get a hard shell coated dip cone. Beach: There you go. Seal: Yes, it is. Yeah. And, again, my concern was just where the -- the placement of the dumpsters are and how that's going to -- you know, how that lines up with all the apartments, if it's going to be in real close proximity they are probably not going to -- it's not going to be a pleasant experience some days. Beach: Ninety-five degree summer day. You never know. Yeah. No. So, we can work with that. I think there is a very -- kind of a -- from what I remember looking at that easement, it's pretty defined in terms of where the cross-access is. Sometimes it's anywhere on the whole border of the property you can -- you can have a cross-access Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 40 of 66 and I will have to look into that, but I'm fairly certain it's a pretty specific -- maybe Jim can -- can speak to that if he remembers. But I believe that's why it's placed in that location is because that's -- that's the -- that's where it's legally recorded and located is -- is right there. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Beach: Yeah. Holland: Any other questions from the Commission? All right. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone signed in to testify? Weatherly: Madam Chair, we have one person signed in to testify -- or one couple signed in to testify. That's Chad and Norma Herron. Holland: Great. If you guys can let them through and, then, we will -- we will let Jim and Josh close after we take some public testimony. And if you are joining us and you want to speak, just state your name and address for the record and, hopefully, we will have you patched over onto this side soon. Johnson: Madam Chair, I cannot locate those couple in our attendees. So, if they are in if they can do the raise hand. I don't see anyone with that name here. I do see -- well, I did see a raised hand, but, then, it went away. Holland: If you could raise your hand and leave it up there so we can grab you. Johnson: It's coming in now, Madam Chair. Holland: All right. Are you with us? It looks like they have patched somebody over, but if you can hear us and wanted to state your name and address for the record -- make sure you're not on mute. Herron: All right. How about now? Holland: We can hear you. Herron: Okay. Great. My name is Chad Herron and we live at 1767 West Greenhead Drive, which, basically, we have one outlet onto Linder. I don't know if the complex is going to have an outlet that faces the east, but we have, essentially, four streets converging within a space of 150 feet, plus the gas station as -- as well. So, our concern is the amount of traffic flow that's going to be coming into a very confined space. There is no outlet other than the Greenhead Drive for this whole part of the neighborhood. Whitestone Estates has only one entrance and one exit. Now, during the school session that road is very hard to access as it is now and I know that Mallard Landing also has that problem. So, I'm not certain what can be done, but I would like it to be addressed, because people come into Whitestone Estates looking for heaven knows what, but they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 41 of 66 -- they do a lot of turning around in here in the middle of the road and, then, they -- they just head out back onto Linder and either go north or south. But we are concerned about all these roads converging in a small area and, then, if there is an emergency vehicle that needs in here or we need to get to work, we are in sort of a congested situation. Holland: Thank you, Chad. I appreciate you -- you being here and voicing your concerns. Herron: Thank you. Holland: Are there any questions for Chad? Thank you, Chad. I appreciate it. Herron: You're welcome. Holland: Madam Clerk, is there anyone else that would like to testify or anybody else want to raise their hand in the participant room? Weatherly: Madam Chair, at this time I don't see any raised hands. Holland: Okay. We will do the awkward Jeopardy pause here for another minute, just to make sure that everybody's had a chance to speak if they would like and you can hit star nine to unmute yourself or you can raise your hand on the Zoom panel. Seeing none, I think we will open it back up to the applicant if they would like to close and address the questions of Chad and Norma for us. Beach: So, I will jump on that. Let me turn my camera back on I guess here. Holland: Welcome back, Josh. Beach: Yeah. So, if I heard correctly there -- there is some concern with the folks traveling on Greenhead, which is just to the south and that -- that road goes -- goes east- west there and there is a -- the thought is that we could somehow control traffic through -- I guess I fail to see what -- what we could -- what the concern was that we could solve there with -- with -- with what he was -- was asking. Did I -- did I miss something there? And not to say that we wouldn't attempt to, I just -- I just don't see what -- what we could do with -- with our proposal that would -- that would change the traffic flow. Is his concern that we do have an access? Holland: Josh, I think the concern is that you're connecting the -- the Twelve Oaks West and East and giving an access off of Linder and I know that they have also got an access off of Franklin there. Beach: Yes. Holland: Their concern is having that access on Linder adds some congestion to Linder and some of those other neighborhoods that exit off of there in close proximity. So, I don't know if you have got any comments that you want to pass on from what ACHD has told Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 42 of 66 you or about how you think traffic flow could work within the site, but I think that's what they were asking for. Beach: Yeah. No, I don't -- I don't have a lot -- I guess I don't have a lot of comment on -- on how we could improve that. You know, we -- we definitely want the access to Linder. That helps with, you know, traffic flow in and out of the subdivision. Now, you know, anybody knows that when -- when there is construction or when -- when residences are built, traffic flow does increase, you know, not -- not to the extent in this case that it was a concern of the highway district. Linder -- Linder is an arterial road and that's -- that's -- you know, we definitely bank on that -- that one connection there will help residents in Twelve Oaks get in and out of the subdivision easier, especially if they are trying to go south or north for that matter and so that's -- it's beneficial for us. Now, I -- I'm sympathetic that folks get lost and get turned around when they are -- when they are trying to go somewhere where they are not familiar with, they end up turning -- turning in where they don't want to be and have to turn around. You know, that does increase traffic in that -- in that -- in that neighborhood. But -- but I don't -- I don't know what the impact is from folks that are living in -- in, you know, this -- this -- this project and on the off occasion somebody does make a wrong turn and it meant to go somewhere else or to our project or something, that they will turn around, but I don't -- I don't -- without knowing, you know, that specific concern from that resident how often that happens it -- it's probably, in my mind, pretty minimal in terms of -- you know, people actually have to turn around, but -- but that is a -- you know, it is a concern to the neighbor and -- and we can -- we can, you know, do whatever we can to help folks know where they are going. We are going to have addressing and signage out there along Linder so that folks can see that before they -- before they get there and, hopefully, won't have to turn around. We will -- we will just -- should be -- it should be a pretty easy left-hand turn in when you're coming south and you will see it, but, again, it is -- you have just turned, so you won't be up to speed quite yet anyway. So, I think that -- that should be a -- should be an easy concern to -- to address I should say. Jewett: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Jim. Jewett: So, I would like to offer a few other comments as during the design stage of this, you know, we looked at not having an access -- access onto Linder Road and just using our cross-access easement with Harks Corner, the commercial area, with our existing access on Franklin Road and our additional cross-access to the Twelve Oaks commercial area in the middle, which gives us three. So, we have three access points now and after meeting the staff, Fire, Police, it was determined that the best solution was to make an alignment with the existing street across to the east of us on Linder, because with ACHD's improvement of Linder they will restrict our access to a right-in, right-out and so it is going to drive a little bit more traffic to Franklin that wants to go a certain different direction, because we do have an uncontrolled access on Franklin left-in and right-in -- left-in, right- out. So, we did put a lot of consideration and it was just decided this was the best, because in the end it was going to be a right-in, right-out only. So, there is -- really, it's Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 43 of 66 going to have minimal impact on our neighbors. With the widening of Linder Road in four lanes, obviously, the traffic's going to flow smoother, it's going to go all the way across the freeway. I mean I -- I drive down that road every day to my subdivision and so I do recognize school traffic. Haven't had for a while, but it is a factor. It does slow down. So, we always are concerned about how we affect our neighbors and because of our additional access points and the fact that it is only a right-in -- will only be a right-in, right- out at some point in the future, I think our impact will be minimal. Also, I would ask -- Sonya, do you have an aerial, because I will point out exactly where that dumpster is if anybody wants to know. It is directly north of one of our buildings and that dumpster does have a tendency to be a little bit unsightly at times I have to admit. My office used to be right across from it in that complex. I have addressed that with the current property owner there and they are working to make some changes to that dumpster to make it more suitable. We have a dumpster in our commercial area as well. It's unused right now. And there might be some sharing with some of them to allow some alleviation of some of that impact on that dumpster -- would have less of an impact on these future apartments. But if there is an aerial I could show you exactly where that dumpster is. Holland: It looks like they are trying to get one for you. And are there any other questions from the Commission for the applicant while we are waiting for them to load that up for us? Jewett: Yeah. I see the aerial now. So, if you will look at -- oops. So, if you see where it says Cornerstone Auto Repair, just the word Cornerstone, directly above that to the northeast you see a building. The dumpster is directly to the east of it right on the other side of that concrete fence. Holland: I think they are trying to zoom in and move it up for you. Johnson: Jim, you should see a pop up asking you to control the screen. Do you see that -- Jewett: Okay. A tap here to control the screen. Okay. So, now I can move it? Johnson: You are correct. Jewett: There is a delay. Holland: There you go. Jewett: So, do you see where it says Firehouse Pub and Grill, directly to the east of it is where the dumpster exists. Our access point is several stalls down from it, but there is a building directly south of that dumpster. You can see the dumpster now pretty clearly. Thanks for whoever is running the mouse. I can't. So, you can see there is a tree and, then, the dumpster is directly to the west of the tree between the building and that -- that tree there. That's it. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 44 of 66 Seal: It looks like there is some further to the -- to the east as well. Those -- the ones to the east were my main concern and, then, knowing that there is that one by the Firehouse was also -- Jewett: The one to the east -- I haven't really paid attention to those, to be honest with you. It's never been an issue to anybody. I know those have had a tendency to get overfilled and kind of be unsightly and a little messy, because there is a couple restaurants in there and there is only Arctic Circle in this other one. Seal: Okay. It was just a concern -- I mean as far as how those line up if you're, you know, trying to, you know, play out in that little bit of open area or something or you have your windows open in the morning and, you know, that smell wafting in, that could be rather unpleasant. Holland: But you do also have a donut manufacturer there, so -- Jewett: That is true and you should see the line in front of them some mornings going to get those donuts. There is a drive-thru right there. Holland: All right. Jim or Josh, do you guys have any other closing comments you would like to make? Jewett: I don't, unless there is any questions. Beach: Yeah. I don't have anything else to add. Holland: Okay. Any other questions from the Commission? Seeing none, I would certainly entertain a motion to close the public hearing, so we can move to deliberation, unless there is other questions you would like to ask. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move we close the public discussion for Twelve Oaks East, H-2020-0014. Holland: Okay. McCarvel: Second. Holland: I have got a motion and a second. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: All right. Thanks, Josh and Jim. We will deliberate and I think you might be moved to the attendee side. But thanks for being with us and spending a good amount Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 45 of 66 of your evening with us. We appreciate it. Commissioners, the floor is yours for deliberation. Anyone want to go first? Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: I think it makes sense with connecting what is already being built over there. I have driven by that going to the transfer station a few times. It looks good and it makes sense in terms of putting apartments that are close to two major roadways, with Franklin and Linder, especially knowing that Linder -- the intersection is going to be widened and also eventually have connectivity to south Meridian with an overpass at some point in the future and also just its proximity -- this proximity to the Ten Mile interchange and the growing Ten Mile district that's taking place, makes -- makes a lot of sense and especially if we can get the -- that walking path to -- to help connect, you know, that one mile block, if you will. So, I don't see any major concerns with -- with this. It makes sense to me. Holland: I will add my comments, since not everybody was jumping up and down to make comments yet. I think it -- you know, when I first saw it I always get sad when somebody wants to take commercial and turn it into multi-family, but at the same time where multi- family works best is as a transition between residential and commercial use and so I think it's a -- it's a well thought out design. It incorporates well. I appreciate that they are all two story units, instead of three story, and kind of towering there. It looks like it will tie in pretty nicely with the -- the west concept there. I think having the access off of Linder be right-in, right-out should hopefully help ease the public comment that we received about concerns onto Linder. It's certainly always hard when there is another development that ties in, but I think a lot of people will use Franklin for that full access, instead of Linder, especially as Linder gets improved. The applicant has made a request to change one minor thing with the development agreement. I didn't see any big -- any big concerns with what they were requesting there, but I would agree with staff to use their language that they have provided in whatever motion that we put forward, but we don't have to -- we don't have to give any actual comments on that development agreement, but if anyone wants to make a comment we certainly can. So, it doesn't have to be included in our assessment to City Council level thing. Commissioner Seal, any comments? Seal: Madam Chair, yeah, I mean the only thing -- I didn't see -- it seems like there wasn't a lot of detail that was included in -- in some of this, but it's -- it's kind of hard -- a lot of times we will get, you know, multiple elevations or presentations as far as what open space looks like. So, you know, noting the staff comments that, you know, essentially, the open space and the development to the west is going to accommodate all that I will kind of overlook it. I do like the fact that there is enclosed garages that are included with this. Hopefully, they don't get -- you know, people being people, again, hopefully they don't get used as storage. And, then, you know, people are parking everywhere else, so -- but I have no issues with it and I mean it's kind of nice that it's going to tie into the business there. It is in the Ten Mile corridor area where, you know, we are trying to get more of the -- you know, the higher density developments to go in, you know, to kind of Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 46 of 66 help get people closer to the -- to the freeway and have that -- have that traffic closer up there. The right-in, right-out off Linder Road should help with the traffic. I'm almost concerned about all the traffic going the other way, simply because, you know, if you're going to go -- if you want to go out to Meridian Road or even Ten Mile and you're unfettered off of Franklin, that's probably the route that you're going to take. So, hopefully, that doesn't become a concern with the residents in there. But considering they are all going to be part of the same HOA standard that will probably help them eliminate some of their own problems in the future if they have them. But I have no issues with it. Holland: And, certainly, if you had comments, too, about -- I know the concrete wall was a -- a big part of where that pathway is. I think they are going to be required to punch a walkway through there. But if we need to make a comment that they work to make sure that that's aligned in an area that's not adjacent to a trash dumpster and we certainly could. Seal: Okay. Yeah. And it's -- I mean it's more just looking at -- I mean the aerials on it compared to where everything is on this, it's -- you know, they are kind of limited as to where -- where they can put this. I mean they would have to start moving buildings around to accommodate some of that. So, hopefully, they can just work with some of the vendors to, you know, accommodate some of that shared space, whatever that might look like. So, I don't want to get too involved in trying to tell them where to put a dumpster I guess, but it is a concern. Holland: Other comments? Pitzer: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: Yes. My -- I have no objection to this. I do understand the concerns of the neighboring subdivisions where they have three or four streets coming out onto Linder already and the traffic this is going to create, that I see that Linder is going to be -- you know, once that gets widened and -- and they have a turn restriction, I think a lot of their fears will be alleviated. I, too, was concerned that I couldn't see any amenities with this, but I think they explained that that's going to be part of the neighboring subdivision. So, I have no objection to this. I think, actually, they did a very nice job in putting through access to the commercial and I think it transitions well. McCarvel: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I would -- I'm in support of this for all the reasons all the other Commissioners have elaborated on, so I won't restate them. Holland: Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 47 of 66 McCarvel: But I would be in support of this. Holland: Commissioner Cassinelli, if you have any comments or certainly anyone wants to make a motion. Cassinelli: The only -- my only thought and concern is that there will -- I mean that there is -- you know, they put the extra parking in, but that would be -- you know, I'm in -- I'm in support of it, other than it almost seems to me like you can never have almost too much parking, but they definitely meet and exceed the requirement. That would be my only comment. It's not a killer for me. Seal: I'm starting to think that Bill was a -- he was a skateboarder in his past life. He likes all that extra parking out there. All that -- all that flat space. Cassinelli: Not that I love concrete, I just know how much it gets used. Holland: All right. Well, the floor is open if someone would like to attempt a motion here. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2020-0014 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 4th, 2020, with the following modifications: That for condition B-1-2 the applicant shall be responsible to determine whether adequate capacity exists in the receiving sewer system, including two lift stations, to accept the additional flow from this development. If upgrades are necessary the applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with said upgrades. Holland: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Grove: Second. Holland: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All right. All those in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. E. Public Hearing for Chukar Ridge (H-2020-0025) by Investment Analytics Group, Located at 4005 N. McDermott Rd. 1. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 63 buildable lots, 8 common lots and 5 other lots on 15.42 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 48 of 66 Holland: We will move on to the final item and, then, to hopefully wrap up our evening here. So, we will start with the staff report for Chukar Ridge, H-2020-0025. Tiefenbach: Good morning -- or good morning. Good evening, Commissioners. Alan Tiefenbach, planner with City of Meridian. Chris, can you load up the PowerPoint for me, please? Thank you. All right. So, this is the Chukar Ridge preliminary plat. You can look at this -- the property is located at the southeast corner of McMillan and McDermott Road. You may remember a couple of years ago, Commissioners, you approved this prime -- well, you recommended approval on an annexation of 108 acres, which included the Owyhee High School that is just directly south of where you see the subject property. The subject property is zoned residential eight. Chris, would you, please, move onto the next screen. So, this is a request for a preliminary plat consisting of 63 buildable lots and eight common lots. Again, like I said, this property was annexed and zoned in 2018 in what was known as part of the Owyhee High School annexation. So, this annexation, like I mentioned, included a little over a hundred acres, which is the site of the future Owyhee High School and the particular piece that we are talking about is 15 acres, but this was part of this annexation. There was a development agreement that also applied to this particular project. The school district was required to build several roads, which I will talk about in a minute, and that was required as part of the development agreement. Two of these roads -- one of them was a north-south road and the other was an east- west road. And, again, I will give you an example here in a minute. But these were -- these were intended to be the primary access for this development and these collectors will feed traffic out to McMillan Road and the property is about 15 acres. Mostly flat. There is a canal -- if you look right into the north, running east and west there, you can see the -- the McFadden Drain and that runs across the entirety of the property at the northern border. This property also includes a three -- roughly three and a half acre piece of property to the east. That is what is shown there as phase two. That is that large parcel over to the east there. This particular property is being set aside for future construction of State Highway 16. The lots as proposed are at least 4,000 square feet in area, which that meets the requirements of R-8. Chris, would you move to the next frame, please? So, this was a -- this is an exhibit that the applicant prepared for us to sort of demonstrate the way that the access would occur. The primary access to this development would be from a north-south collector. That's what you see there in the orange and that collector is being required to be built as the Owyhee High School annexation. It's presently under construction. So, the southern part of that collector down to Ustick is being built by the high school -- or by the school district. They are also building the orange east and west that you see there, as well as the red that you're seeing going north and south right to the property. The northern part of that orange collector will be built by the Gander Creek Subdivision. They finished their final plat. They are getting ready to pull building permits, so they would be starting construction very soon. So, the applicant proposes also to use an access easement for a second access. So, this -- this project is more than 30 lots and as you probably know, any project that has more than 30 homes has to have a secondary point of access. That's what you see there in red. That is actually the McFadden Drain. There is an easement that runs across that drain. The applicant is proposing -- and I will show you -- you will be able to see that in a minute from the landscape plan. The applicant is proposing to use that drain as their access. It's Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 49 of 66 important to note that ACHD -- they have not provided any final comments on this project. They mentioned that their meeting is not until June 10th and the Planning Commission is going to have to decide if they are okay with moving forward on this development without formal comments. I will mention that I did contact the planner with ACHD today just to see sort of if they could give me any preliminary feedback on this plat and her response was that she did not notice any major issues. There wasn't any deal killers. There may or may not be some little tweaks that could probably be fixed before City Council, but, again, she didn't see any showstoppers. Can you move onto the next screen, Chris? So, this is a -- sort of a better example of the way that the interior access is going to work. So, all of what you see there in orange is what the applicant is building. You can see the green over there to the west. That is the road that is eventually going to be built by the Gander Creek Subdivision development and what you see in red there is the McFadden Drain. Originally the applicant proposed -- so, this will be the secondary access. Again, this is required for more than 30 houses. The applicant originally proposed to take a gravel access road up to that drain and, then, to go eastbound out to McDermott Road for the secondary access. The issue with that is, obviously, this is eventually going to be State Highway 16 when they build that and access to the east is going to be cut off. Knowing that, the applicant is now proposing a westbound access and that westbound access would come along McFadden Drain, it would connect into that future right of way being built by the Gander Creek Subdivision and, then, they would either go south or they would go north. The Fire just -- Fire has looked at this and they are okay with it. They haven't expressed any issues with this. We are adding a condition of -- we are recommending a condition of approval on this that no more than 30 houses can be built without a permanent secondary access. I have talked to the applicant about that and the applicant has not expressed any concerns with that. I think they are amenable to that. Next one, please. So, this is the landscape plan. This landscape plan proposes a central open space area with about a little more than ten percent of usable open space. This was quite a discussion point between staff and the applicant. There was a few other iterations of this that we didn't think were particularly usable until we arrived at this. So, first, as I mentioned, this sets aside almost three and a half acres to the east as that large blank piece that you see there, that particular piece of property is set aside for expansion of the State Highway 16 and you will look that there is a buffer that's being provided. They are required -- under the Uniform Development Code they are required to provide a 35 foot buffer against any entryway, which is what the Highway 16 would be. In addition, there also -- they are also going to be putting in a berm there. That's one of our conditions of approval. A berm or a fence or a berm or a combination of a berm and fence is one of the requirements of our UDC. In the center there you can see that they are doing sort of like a central area and this central area is what's going to be comprising sort of a pathway loop. If you could move onto the next slide, please, Chris. I think this sort of demonstrates the way that their -- their -- their -- their open space is going to work. So, there is -- what they are doing -- if you look at what's blue over there all the way onto the east, the blue is asphalt and that's going to connect into their sidewalks. So, the sidewalks are what you see there in green. The blue would be a concrete pad -- path with landscaping on either side of it that would run up that buffer for Highway 16. Part of that blue line you see there would connect across the driveway back to the other -- to the other sidewalk and what you see in orange would connect up to the McFadden Drain. The purple there Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 50 of 66 -- they -- they can't do a lot of improvements with that, because the -- the irrigation district won't let them do much more than gravel and maybe some vegetation. We are still waiting to hear on that. But they will bring it back through what's known as Lot 25. That's that lot up at the north. You can see the pink line there running north and south. At staff's recommendation the applicant is going to put a ten foot landscape buffer on either side with a five foot concrete path, as well as an access way for fire access. That purple line will come down until it hits that orange line that you see there in the middle, that will also be a paved path. This will create a loop that's roughly about a quarter of a mile. So, if you were to go around this -- this loop that would be about, yeah, give or take about a quarter mile. As this conceptual pathway plan resulted in discussions it came about over time with staff and the applicant, but we don't have a final landscape plan that actually shows how this is going to be put together. Staff and the applicant have already talked about this and they are willing to have this exhibit together before it goes to City Council. So, staff has recommended this as a condition. Staff has also recommended that this revised landscape plan show where the seating areas and some of the more passive recreational areas would be, so that we can make sure that we actually have some qualified amenities there for a sitting and for recreating. So, with that I guess I would -- that would conclude my presentation, unless you had any questions, Commissioners. Holland: Thank you for the overview. I have one question and it's related to the ACHD report. I know we -- they are having their hearing on June 10th, but I believe staff has already talked with ACHD about what they expect out of that hearing. Could you talk to that for a couple minutes, sir? Tiefenbach: Yes, ma'am. Again, the -- the only thing that they have given us so far is that they do not think that they are going to have any major issues with this. I talked to the planner today on e-mail a little bit and she said that if anything -- that anything that she's going to be recommending would be pretty minor and she thinks that there is not going to be anything -- it's not going to be a big enough deal that it can't be something small that can be fixed before it goes to the City Council. But that's about as much as I know at this point, Commissioner. Holland: Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Hearing none, I think we will open it up for the applicant to come and speak with us. Thanks, Alan. And as you're joining us -- I think they just moved you over. Make sure you're not on mute and if you can state your name and address for the record. Adams: Good afternoon. Good evening. This is Matt Adams. I'm at 462 East Shore Drive, Eagle, Idaho. Thanks for having me today. Everybody hear me? Loud and clear? Holland: We can hear you. Adams: Excellent. Excellent. All right. Well, first time I have worked with Alan and we had a good process. So, thank you, Alan, for that. I'm really excited about this project. I have been able to work on the Owyhee High School and several projects around this area and I got -- become a pretty good acquaintance with Bob and Judy Spriggel, who owned Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 51 of 66 this property, and it was kind of a dream come true for them to be able to sell it for development and retire. So, we are celebrating Bob and Judy's retirement tonight, not just a new housing development. The size of these lots and the size of the homes fill a niche market for affordability that Meridian is in -- terribly needs right now. Not everybody can buy a half a million dollar house and so having homes in the two -- low two hundreds and the 200s is very desirable for the city. A couple quick things I want to cover. I do want to clarify the ACHD issue really briefly. We have got -- we received an e-mail from Paige Bankhead, who is a Planner II at ACHD, as she stated that the Chukar Ridge Sub will need to get a commission action item due to the modification of the master street map collector, since it will not be connecting to McDermott because of the ITD right of way and future Highway 16. So, the matter that is before ACHD -- the fact that the state's building an expressway and their mid mile collector will no longer go through to McDermott, ACHD did a staff report and reviewed this project during the annexation process. So, the -- the hearing, my understanding, is not applicable to the actual pre-plat that is in front of you. I want to reinforce some of the things that Alan talked about. Is it possible for me to share my screen? Johnson: Madam Chair, Matt, give me one moment and we will give you that access. Holland: Thanks, Chris. Adams: So, I'm going to show a rendered land -- landscape plan that we put together, so you can get a sense of how much open space we have on this project. Johnson: You should be able to do that now. Holland: And, Matt, if you would just make sure that the clerk's office and the planning office has a copy of whatever you're showing for the record that would be great. Adams: Absolutely. Thank you. I did e-mail this to Alan earlier today and I will work with Alan to make sure that happens. Holland: Thank you. Adams: So, you should see on your screen now. Oh, maybe -- Johnson: Matt, sorry to interrupt. I did get that. I apologize. I didn't remember getting that. I got a pdf earlier from you. I'm sorry, I completely forgot, but we have got it now. Adams: Not a problem. So, if you can all see that, it's just a rendered plan -- a standard kind of a marketing board and it kind of enhances or shows in a little bit more detail the open space. We are excited that we have -- we have this layout to the central open space. It's kind of equidistant for all people. We have also got that really wide and heavily planted buffer on the east edge, along the ITD right of way and as you can see on this exhibit, we actually show where the roadway is set to occur. So, we have a large planted buffer and, then, there is a pretty good distance before you get to the road. We are also Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 52 of 66 -- I know that the code does not allow the McFadden Drain in its condition to be considered qualified open space, but I think we all understand the quality of a space like that for, you know, just to see the baby ducks in May or to be able to take a walk and not have anybody living directly behind you is awfully nice. The house is 12.5 feet from the fence. So, this is a great -- great attribute to the community and we still meet the open space requirement, even though we do not count the McFadden. The last one on open space, we have a high school next door to us with an open campus. It's not fenced. That large eight acre field that will be directly to the southwest. And, then, we are going to have a -- an elementary school to the west of us and West Ada always keeps those open and they have play equipment and soccer fields, et cetera, et cetera. So, we got a great product here. We have worked back and forth to make sure that we have access and we are really excited about this -- this project. I want to very briefly -- and, then, I will be done -- I'm going to stop sharing if you don't need that. There is some specific conditions in the staff report I want to make sure everybody understands we are agreeable to. Condition -- these are the planning conditions. 1-B. We agreed to provide the permanent secondary access to the north or the south prior to constructing more than 30 homes. So, our plan is to get started. We would stop at 30 if we couldn't get the secondary, but our plan is to negotiate the secondary access this year with how fast things are moving to the north and the south of us. Condition 1-C, we agree -- Planning would like us to add a ten foot landscape buffer on the west edge, so that when the future street is built on the school property we don't have homes with our street -- both on the front and the back fence, front yard, backyard. So, we are going to add a ten foot wide landscape buffer on that west edge. That's not a problem at all. Increases our open space numbers. And, then, condition 2-A, we agree to make sure we have the berm built up on that east edge, helps for separation from the island. And, then, condition 2-E talks about landscaping the McFadden Drain easement. We have no problem with this. The one reason I bring it up is we -- generally Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District does not allow any kind of landscape irrigation within their easement, so they are kind of funny, they say you can plant lawn, but you can't irrigate it, which is -- obviously, we are not Portland. It would have lived two weeks ago for one week. So, we are going to work through that with Alan. We do not want it to be a poorly maintained area, but city zoning ordinances and codes already require that we keep our weeds mowed. Note we have a nice space, so we are going to work through that specific item. So, with that I will just take any questions you may have. And, then, if we do have something specific that I can't answer, we do have Brady Lasher with the developer group available, if he can answer questions as well. Excited to see you guys. I haven't been in front of P&Z for a while and I got to stay at home and so it's even better than normal. Thank you. Holland: Appreciate it. Any questions for Matt? Pitzer: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Pitzer. Pitzer: Yes. Hi, Matt. Thank you for being here tonight. Liked the presentation. Can you tell me what amenities are going to be in that open space or is it just grass? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 53 of 66 Adams: Yeah. That's a good point. So, we have kind of two open spaces; right? We have the central area and, then, we have the area on the east edge. In both of those we have nice open lawn space in case you do have littler kids that can't go over to the school, right, to kick a ball or play catch or throw a Frisbee. But our main amenity package for this development is the pathway system. So, we have all these different loops and pathway connections and, then, at this -- at the scale of these drawings we could not show it and we were still working with Alan on it. This -- the owner plans -- or the developer plans to install seating, benches, and that type of feature along the pathway. So, it will be -- it's a walking, strolling, jogging and sitting amenity package. Pitzer: Follow up. So, what's your -- you said your price point on this is going to be in the 200,000s. Adams: Yeah. This is -- I mean, you know, this is a similar product to what we have seen like at Ustick and Locust Grove and other parts of town. By keeping the unit a little smaller you're able to still have nice finishes, good product, we keep the price down. Now, we don't know the price the day these are built, but historically this type of unit was in the low two hundreds. Pitzer: Okay. Which brings up my question with age group. I -- and how big are the homes? Adams: That I don't know. Pitzer: The square footage we don't know. But if we are keeping to that price point, I'm thinking there is probably going to be a lot of young families. You have the elementary school coming in, but before they get elementary school age there is no tot lot or -- or anything like that that you're -- that you're planning; am I understanding -- Adams: That's correct. Yeah. We are focused on the pathway system and not a tot lot system. Pitzer: Okay. Thank you. Adams: You're welcome. Thank you. Holland: Matt, one thing we have talked about quite a bit as a Commission is -- it seems to be a more common design trend lately for these common -- or these shared drives accessing four lots off of one shared drive that connects them with the public street. I always have a little bit of a concern with it, just because -- I mean for personal reasons I would never buy one that's on a -- on a common drive like that, because I hate the access going in and out of it and trying to figure out how to turn around or, you know, if you pull in forward and you got to back back out or whatever it is, it's just a little tougher to navigate. And trash enclosures can be a challenge, even though it's only once a week, people put their trash out in the morning and they don't take it back in until night. When you have got four different houses putting out one or two trash cans you can just get kind Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 54 of 66 of congested and limit roadway access. So, that's my -- my biggest concern with that. But I don't know if you have got any comments related to that. It's just a comment I frequently have related to those shared drives. It's not my favorite thing to see those. Adams: Commission Chairman -- Chairperson, that's a great comment, actually. So, really quick -- I'm texting with Brady. So, I have got some more information for you. The houses will be 1,400 to 2,000 square feet. So, you can see out of 1,400 square foot we can really be effective with the price point and just on that -- not to take up too much time, but I have a son who is 26 and he could never move back here and buy a home, which is, you know, hard for a dad to think about, but when you do have some opportunities like this it makes it possible. On the shared driveway -- so, I agree with you. It matters what kind of vehicle you have, you're either sunk or you might be able to make some of those turns; right? We actually -- I was unable to get it prepared for today, but when we add the ten foot landscape strip on our west edge, we are considering redesigning that corner to ease that and have a maximum of two lots if we have a shared driveway at all in that corner. So, we are looking at changing that. On the northeast corner, we do have a shared drive to two lots. We would like to keep that, because it is also the -- the public access to get into another point of access into the pathway system. I think it's a good comment and the one in the center it does have basically three lots. So, it's kind of that tough spot that you talked about. We will take a look at it. I know we have an opportunity to do some plat modification, because I need to get Alan's comment in and we will see if there is a way we can ease some of those spots. Thank you for that. Holland: And, then, one other question I have for you, too. I know in the future use map this area and the area to the south of it was kind of designed for mixed use regional planning. You guys are already zoned R-8, so we are just considering your plat right now, but just wondering how -- how -- what kind of transition fencing or -- or whatnot you have got between your property line and the property to the south of you. Is there going to be fencing kind of buffer space there? Adams: That's a good question. Thank you, Chair Person. So -- so, the -- that south edge right now -- as you know when you go in with your construction documents that's when you designate fencing. So, right now we have not -- I have not had a detailed conversation with the developer on that specific thing. Now, generally, on the back of homes we do a vinyl product -- a six foot high vinyl product. I will say that to the south -- I have been in contact with that developer and so it probably is appropriate to note that they plan on -- that -- in that MU zone they are going to be able to follow it a lot more closely and they are planning single family, some like duplex style stuff, as well as some commercial and it is a lot more of a mix, like the MU is desiring, and they plan on putting a similar product back up to these homes, so that there is a good transition from Gander Creek to Chukar Ridge into that next parcel to the south. But long answer to your question. Short answer is right now typically vinyl six foot, but we haven't had those detailed questions or discussions. Holland: Thanks, Matt. Other questions for Matt? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 55 of 66 Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: Thank you for this. I am always happy when we can get a product in that comes in at that lower price point. That is a -- always a big concern of mine that we don't have enough home ownership options in that lower price point. So, I appreciate that product. The -- the concern that I have is -- I haven't seen a timeline for the elementary school that is mentioned. Is that something that you are aware of? And, then, I will have a follow- up question I guess with that. Adams: Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Grove. Good question. So, I do work with Joe Yochum over at West Ada a lot and he and I have discussed this. This area set up for an elementary school. He generally plays his cards pretty close on that and two years ago when we started working on the high school he said that this elementary was ten years out. That's really hard to predict. I would not put stock that it's exactly eight years out now. It's very unpredictable. It's all based on growth and, then, the ability to pass a bond. But the -- the actual word we have heard from the district is -- would have put it eight years out from now. Grove: So, my follow up to that is similar to Commissioner Pitzer and that with the schools being somewhat of an unknown and being able to lock in -- you know, this isn't a situation where, you know, we have Pleasant Valley going in not too far from here and we know that that is in. This is an unknown in terms of when. I don't -- I see the -- the lack of amenity for this population without the selling point of having a schoolyard to go play in that you have mentioned for eight to ten years. That -- that concerns me. Is that something that you would be willing to address by adding in additional open space in that central area to accommodate an addition of some sort of amenity for those families? Adams: Yeah, Commissioner Grove, thank you. You know, when we were working out this plan, we -- we had considered a tot lot. That is a pretty standard piece. Very popular with the young families. And we had considered it in that central largest space. We started to get pretty excited about the pathway loops, but if this Commission thinks that's an integral piece for success of this project, I don't think -- we would not object to that. We can -- we can work with that and, honestly, we -- the one thing we didn't do a good job of is showing you -- you know, like Commissioner Pitzer asked, too, what are the amenities, because you can't see them. So, we didn't do a good job of showing you that and I think, yes, they would be open to a tot lot if needed and I think we need to -- when we get to Council we need to show -- do a better job showing what our amenity package is with the pathways, the seating areas, and, then, potentially the tot lot. Grove: Thank you. I think you -- if we could see more of that, that would be very helpful. I mean walking paths are great, but as a ten year old kid running around the neighborhood, a walking path is not the same as somewhere to play. So, taking that into consideration would be helpful. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 56 of 66 Holland: All right. Any other questions before we open up for public testimony? Hearing none, Matt, we will be right back with you here in a few minutes. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed in to testify on this one? Weatherly: Chair, we do not. Holland: Okay. Anybody that's sitting in the attendee panel, if you would like to speak on this application and want to hit the raise hand button or hit star nine, we would be happy to hear from you. An awkward pause, but it doesn't look like there is anybody making movement there. Going once. Going twice. Gone. Okay. Matt, we are back with you again. I don't know if you have got any additional comments. You want to make a close. Adams: Thank you, Chair Person. Not really. I did -- I got confirmation from the ownership group. They are -- they are into the tot lot idea if that's what we need to do to be successful. So, I think that's great. This was a fun meeting. I think -- I always love meeting with the P&Z Commission, because it's a little more relaxed and especially if you go last, because everybody is just shot and it is what it is at 8:54 p.m. Thank you. Holland: Thanks, Matt. Matt, the other question -- so, on the shared drive you mentioned that you might be reconfiguring the way that that kind of looks for that northwest corner of the development. Is that something you would feel comfortable if I -- if we requested that there is no more than three homes off of a shared drive? Adams: Yeah. Commissioner Holland, I think we could probably make that work. Yes, we would definitely do everything we can to make that work. And I think specifically in that corner, since we have already started looking at it and adjusting that, I -- we would be comfortable with that. Absolutely. Thank you. Holland: Any other questions for Matt before we close the public comment period? Hearing none, thanks, Matt. I would be open to taking a motion to close the public hearing. Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I move that we close the public hearing for Chukar Ridge -- for Chukar Ridge, file H-2020-0025. Pitzer: Second. Holland: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Those opposed? None opposed. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 57 of 66 Holland: Thanks, Matt, again. We appreciate you being here. And, Commissioners, it's up for comment. And if -- Chris, if you wouldn't mind putting that plat back up for us, so we can look at it. I think the landscape one was nice to look at here. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli. Holland: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Cassinelli: I guess there is silence, so I will go ahead and start. I would have to agree with a couple of my fellow Commissioners that I think this is going to cater to a younger age group and the elementary school is a ways off and it's -- it's all based on -- on growth and development. It could be eight years. It could be ten, 12 years, we don't know. So, I would like to see that, but I would -- I would not want to see -- I live in -- living in a neighborhood with pathways I think it's a phenomenal amenity to be able to kind of meander throughout your -- instead of just walking on sidewalks. I really enjoy that. So, I would rather see them lose maybe the seating areas, because I don't -- you know, I don't just sit around my neighborhood. Take advantage of the -- you know, my kids were younger, the tot lots and -- and in the pathways. The kids can ride their bikes on the pathways or skateboard or whatever. So, I would kind of echo the comments earlier. And, then, the only other thought I had here was previously when we looked at -- and I don't -- I don't remember which one it was, but a subdivision south was -- we went back and forth I remember over a height requirement I think of the -- the berm and the fence fronting highway -- the future Highway 16 and I would just kind of ask staff if -- if we could meet the same height requirements. Again, I don't remember which -- which subdivision that was, but if that's uniform to where we get -- I think we went over the minimums, if I -- if memory serves. But I think it -- just look at that, make sure that that's uniform along Highway 16. Holland: Alan or Bill, could you -- or Alan or Bill Parsons, could you help clarify Bill Cassinelli's question there about the area between the buffer and the future roadway? And I can restate -- Tiefenbach: Bill, I probably would let you weigh in on this one. I think she's asking about -- the buffer and the berming and fencing to tie into the one to the south. I'm not sure which one that is. Holland: I remember which one -- I don't remember exactly which project it was, but I remember when we had a project that was looking at going off of either Chinden or off of this, we had asked for additional buffer requirements or height requirements to give a better shield to the neighborhood. I think that's what Commissioner Cassinelli is talking about. Parsons: Correct. That -- that project is just to the south -- Cassinelli: That's correct. That's -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 58 of 66 Parsons: Yep. That -- and that project was Gander Creek South and I can look at -- I can look at the condition of approval for the pre-plat and see what you guys had recommended. I believe you wanted a taller berm than what code required, but let me get that information for you and, then, chime back in. Holland: Thanks, Bill. Cassinelli: Thank you, Bill. Holland: Yeah. I would -- I would echo Commissioner Cassinelli's concern there. I -- living next to a freeway and if you're going to have a house backing up to it and the nice pathways there, it would be nice to have a little taller berm than maybe what UDC standards requires, just to help with some of the sound mitigation of traffic there. I would also agree, I think I would like to see a path -- or not a pathway, I think I would like to see a tot lot or another amenity added to the package. I love the walkways, too. It's one of the biggest reasons I chose the neighborhood I live in, is because I love the pathways that go through it. So, I think that, you know, it's not undersold on me that's a great amenity to this, but I think just adding a tot lot would make it that much better. Any other Commissioner comments? Seal: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I kind of get the feeling that this isn't quite ready. So, that -- I may be the outlier here, but -- I mean we are -- I get concerned when I don't see reports from -- from ACHD. I mean preliminary conversations, nothing on file, says we may not have any problems, but we might. So, I just -- I hate to move forward without something in concrete from them, no matter where it's at. So, the open space -- I mean to design this without any kind of amenities -- I mean that seems to be more of an oversight than anything. So, you know, hopefully, something can be done about that. But, again, it just gives me the feeling that it's not quite ready. You know, the secondary access not coming through, you know, the ability to only do 30 lots, just some things like that, I just -- I don't know that this is ready for prime time at this point in time. So, you know, with schools coming in, that's great, and I think it's good that it has a walking path, but, again, there is a school right next to it that has lots of -- lots of space to do walking and running and all that stuff on and, you know, living close to a school with a -- you know, living in a subdivision with walking paths and living next to a school that has areas to do that is -- is nice on both fronts where the grade school isn't going in to provide, you know, amenities for younger families, which the subdivision would attract, seems to be something that should have been caught in the beginning, so -- and, personally, I would like -- you know, outside of a tot lot it would be nice to see like, you know, we have seen some of the subdivisions do climbing boulders and -- and different things like that. I do like that the -- the open space is centrally located and provides a little bit more -- a little larger area for the kids to run around. It's a little more protected, you know, instead of -- instead of putting it all on the end caps, so that part of it I do like. But, again, to me it just -- you know, I mean I would Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 59 of 66 almost think a continuance or something along those lines, just so we can get all the information put in front of us so we can provide, you know, better feedback for City Council, so they don't have to wade through everything we are supposed to wade through before it gets to them. So, just trying to function on what we are supposed to be doing here as a body. So, it just seems like we don't have a lot of information to provide, you know, good -- the amount of feedback to the City Council that we should for this. That's just my thoughts on it. Parsons: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Bill. Parsons: So, I was able to pull up that -- that project and it looks like the Council approved a six foot tall berm with a six foot tall wall for a total overall height of 12 feet along the state highway. Holland: Thank you, Bill. I appreciate it. Parsons: You're welcome. Holland: So, Commissioner Seal, to go back to your comment, so I think a few of the things we have talked about is enhancing that berm requirement. They are conditioned to only do up to 30 homes until they have got that secondary access fully committed. They mentioned that they would be willing to reduce the number of lots on the shared drive and they might be doing some reconfiguring on that northwest corner and that they would be willing to do the tot lot. If they had those four conditions and had a requirement to revise their -- their drawings before it went to City Council and revise their preliminary plat, staff -- would that make you feel comfortable enough or do you think there is still other things they need to work out besides those things. Seal: That's -- that's a great question. So, personally, I -- when things come in at the last minute and it -- to me it just doesn't seem complete. I -- I feel like we haven't had enough time to evaluate it in it's -- you know, as fully as it needs to be evaluated, so -- I mean we can try to predict the future as far as what may or may not happen, but, you know, I'm -- I'm more -- I like to see -- I like to see it in writing and I like to see what people are saying. I like to see how it's actually going to play out. So, you know -- and, again, that just has -- to me it has an unfinished feel to it. So, that's -- that's just where I'm at. You know, I mean I -- I may be the outlier in that and that's okay, I just -- I -- I feel like it's -- this is -- to me it has a rushed feel. Like -- like everything was kind of -- you know, everything's being done at the last minute. I'm -- that's the -- that's the feeling that I get. I guess if it was homework that's the way it would feel. So, it's just not quite all there, you know, and I mean if it's -- if it's missing detail because of something that's going on around it, that's one thing, but this is missing detail because it's missing detail. It's missing, you know, components that should be presented by the time it gets to us. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 60 of 66 Holland: And specifically, Commissioner Seal, the -- the components you would be looking for if you were to ask for a continuance, just so we would be clear. Seal: Detail on the open space amenities, what they are going to provide, how they are going to provide it. You know, obviously, there -- we have talked about having them reduce the amount of homes off the shared drives. Having a detailed report from ACHD is the big one. And, then, you know, the other things we have talked about as far as the berm and -- and things like that. And the berm is something we brought up tonight. So, I don't know that that one really falls in line with it, but it's -- you know, again, it just kind of goes into -- it just has an unfinished feel to me. Holland: Commissioner McCarvel, do you have any comments? I don't think we have heard from you yet. McCarvel: Yeah. I mean I have got the same concerns everybody else did there, especially with those amount of homes on the shared drive. I'm kind of -- I -- I like the pathway system, but, again, as with everybody else, I would like to see what other amenities they had in store. So, I'm not so sure that all this isn't accomplishable before they get to City Council, but, yeah, sitting here as it is, it needs -- it definitely at the minimum needs conditions. Holland: Yeah. Well -- and one note, too, I believe per UDC code, they are only required to have one site amenity, which they do meet with the pathway system and their bench system. But we certainly have it in our prerogative to make a condition that they would need to have a second site amenity, because we don't feel the first one is adequate enough. So, I'm not sure where we are at, because it sounds like we have got at least one Commissioner wanting to lean towards continuance. I'm not sure where the others are at on that. If you choose to go that direction we would have to reopen the public hearing. So, just remind -- remember that before someone makes a continuance motion. Commissioner Grove. Grove: I understand the concerns. I do think that we -- I think we could condition this and still move it forward, because I think we are all kind of in agreement on -- for the most part in terms of like the shared drive limits, the addition of an amenity to that -- most likely the central space. I personally would like to see, you know, something maybe a little more than a tot lot, just in terms of like -- a little more substantial based on what I think the potential people moving in would meet, but I'm open to whatever that is. But I agree with Commissioner Seal, the ACHD piece is definitely a big one, but I don't know, I think -- I think we could condition this and still move forward with the necessary conditions. I don't know exactly how to word all those, but I think that I would be in favor of moving in that direction. Holland: And I think with the ACHD thing we can just make a recommendation that it doesn't go to Council until that final report is done and a final hearing is done and that the applicant has indicated where the secondary access will come through on a revised plat before Council comes in. I think that might be the way you condition it. I know I can't Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 61 of 66 help you make the motion this time, but I can help you at least run through what we can consider there. Seal: And, Madam Chair, I will -- I mean -- Holland: Commissioner Seal. Seal: I will be kind of bluntly honest here. So, if -- if this was -- and I mean we have seen some presentations here in the -- in -- in the past that kind of make us all go, wow, that's amazing and for those I'm willing to kind of do whatever it takes to help -- you know, help foster those along, because they are good for our community overall. This one I just have the sense that it's meeting the basic requirements. There is -- there is nothing to this that makes me go, wow, this is a neat piece of property that's really going to enhance our community, other than the fact that it has low price housing in it. So, to me it's -- number one, it's lacking in, you know, substance and it's late to the party. So, you know, again, I mean if -- if it showed me something that made me think, wow, this is something that I really want to get behind and I want to try to help foster, then, I would probably be on a different page with it. But, again, it just -- it doesn't have that, so -- Parsons: Madam Chair? Seal: -- again, we can push it -- we can push it through with -- with everything that's in there and it will meet the minimum, but, again, that's all it's going to do and -- and I -- I'm getting to the point where as much traffic and as crowded as -- you know, as crowded as we are all starting to get, I would like to see things go above and beyond, instead of just meeting the basic requirements. Parsons: Yeah. Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Bill. Parsons: And I -- I always appreciate the -- the Commission's discussion on these projects, because, as you know, we are looking for premier and we are looking for communities that -- that have their own identity and have that -- the right open space, the right amenity package, but I just want to remind the Commission tonight that this is simply a preliminary plat before you. It's not a rezone. It's not an annexation. So, really, what's within your purview this evening is whether or not it's compliant with the Comprehensive Plan, which it is, and whether or not they meet the dimensional standards of the code and meet the minimum open space and site amenity requirements. In our staff report staff has laid that foundation for you that we believe they do with some conditions. So, right now it's -- it's not within your purview to change -- if you want to limit the lots or to have them work with us to modify access off the common drives. That's -- that's appropriate. But what we can't do is make them do more open space and more amenities than what code requires, because, again, this is just a pre-plat and the purview tonight is just to make sure it's consistent with the comp plan and consistent with code and what we have indicated to you this evening is the project before you meets the minimums and that's Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 62 of 66 what we were tasked to do this evening. So, I just wanted to bring the conversation back to what the purview is on this pre-plat. There is a development agreement on this site. The zoning is in place as part of that annexation. It was always envisioned for single family detached development that you see before you and that's why -- what we have to deal with. So, the applicant's complying with the development agreement. They are compliant with the Comprehensive Plan. And, again, they are -- they are complying with the minimum code requirements. Thank you. Holland: Thanks, Bill. Appreciate your insights there. McCarvel: Madam Chair? Holland: Go ahead, Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I think -- I mean I would be comfortable moving it forward with conditions. I feel like the applicant was with us in the spirit of what we were -- in our discussions and questions during the presentation, so I would feel comfortable moving forward with -- with the conditions to happen before Council. Holland: And I -- I would agree and, you know, I -- I think with Bill's comments in mind, too, we can certainly ask them to consider an additional amenity, but they -- because it's not an annexation we don't have as much room as we do when it's just a preliminary plat that we are looking at. So, we have to be careful just to make sure that we are making comments related to how the plat fits in with the Comprehensive Plan. I don't know if anybody wants to try and take a stab at a motion on this one. It's a fun one. Pitzer: Madam Chair? I just -- I just want to put in my two cents I guess. The -- the pathways I think are okay. It's an amenity and I love the one that we have here, but I'm in a subdivision where everybody's 16 years old or more and so that's what we like to do, because we are -- we are putting in a subdivision that has -- as he says is -- is more price effective or eaveless homes from the elevations that I have seen -- I have seen and it doesn't seem to come across in the presentation that we are getting, but we are solely going on -- is this the best thing for Meridian or is it just fitting in the comp plan, and that's all we're looking for is -- is the bare minimum, then, this meets the bare minimum, but I just -- I -- I agree that it's premature, but I do think that we can condition for -- you know, condition for -- for the approval. Holland: Thanks, Commissioner Pitzer. Do we need to recap what we have talked about on what to include here? I think one of the -- the recommendations we had was on the -- having a six foot tall berm and six foot tall fence for the boundary between future State Highway 16 and the subdivision. Asking the applicant to revise their plat to not have more than -- or to work with staff to not have more than three lots off of a shared drive. We would ask them to consider putting in an additional amenity package for a tot lot or something similar. I don't think we can require it, but I think we can request them to consider it and, then, the other thing would be to make sure that the ACHD staff report and recommendations were finalized with showing where that secondary access will Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 63 of 66 come through before it goes to Council. Those are the four things that I have on my list, but I don't know if anybody else has others. I will pause and see if anybody would like to make a motion, since I cannot do that. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli. Holland: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead. Cassinelli: I just -- on the ACHD, is there anything that we can further put a condition in there to -- I mean it's hard without -- without it going there yet and seeing their -- their recommendation and their -- you know, any conditions they have -- and I agree with that point with -- with Commissioner Seal. If there is something in there that causes all of us -- or some of us concern -- I guess my question is what -- you know, what kind of a condition can we put in there on ACHD's conditions? Does anybody have a thought on that? That would -- maybe that's part of what Commissioner Seal has a concern with. So, that's -- that's my question is how do we -- how can we condition that, not just that we get their approval, but -- Holland: Bill, one question for you. Bill Parsons, one question for you related to Commissioner Cassinelli's question there. Is there the ability to condition that if something comes back from the ACHD report that would require substantial reconfiguration of this plat, that it would come back to the P&Z Commission before it goes to City Council again? Do we have that ability? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I don't think you want to do that. If that's the case, then, we just continue it out and wait for ACHD would be my recommendation. But what Alan alluded to is he reached out to ACHD -- anytime that they have changes to their master street map that has to go before their commission. So, that's really the formality here. It has nothing to do with the internal street network. This -- this project didn't even require a traffic study. So, all of those collector roads that are being constructed with the high school are going to be able to handle the capacity out of this subdivision. What's going to be tricky is getting that secondary access because of the limited connectivity in the area. So, my recommend -- what we have done in the staff report to try to give you some assurances is we put a condition of approval that they comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. That's something we recommended as -- as a Planning Department condition, just to make sure if there are some revisions that we get those captured prior to City Council. The applicant was made very aware at the beginning that we feel comfortable with the size of this product that we could probably get past Planning and Zoning, but at no point are we going to be heard at City Council until we have ACHD's comments and so they were aware of that. They were comfortable with that recommendation and they were comfortable with the condition of approval that they comply with all of ACHD's conditions. So, I think we have you covered, but, again, it's certainly within your purview. We -- I don't disagree with Commissioner Seal, I -- with him, I want all the information for you. You're making a decision. That's been our -- our goal from day one is getting you all the information, so you can make the best decision for our community. But in this particular case, again, I feel very comfortable with what Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 64 of 66 ACHD is doing and moving this forward to City Council with -- and holding them up until we have their comments as part of the City Council hearing. Holland: Thanks, Bill. With that -- and I agree -- you know, looking back at what ACHD is evaluating, it's really just that connection point to McDermott with the road, because it's going to be eliminated at some point the future and I think that's really all they are evaluating there -- or the main thing they are evaluating. So, it probably won't make a huge impact on the internal site development here. So, I don't know if that changes anyone's perspective, but we have got an option for one of two motions, either a motion to move it forward or a motion to reopen the public hearing for continuance. So, I will leave it with you all on where you want to go with that. But I think I -- I would be in favor of trying to move it forward to Council with some of the conditions we have talked about. Grove: Madam Chair? Holland: Commissioner Grove. Grove: All right. I will take a shot at this. Holland: Go ahead, sir. Grove: All right. Let's see. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2020-0025 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 4th, 2020, with the following modifications: That the applicant construct a berm and fence both of six feet on the east side of the development. That the applicant work with staff to limit shared drive to a max of three houses and that we have a request to add an additional amenity to the site. Did I get everything? Because the ACHD part is already in the staff report; correct? Okay. Holland: We have a motion. Is there anyone that would like to second that motion? McCarvel: Second. Holland: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, would you mind polling -- polling the Commission on this one. Weatherly: I sure can, Madam Chair. Roll call: Seal, nay; McCarvel, yea; Pitzer, yea; Grove, yea; Cassinelli, yea; Holland, yea; Fitzgerald, absent. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Holland: Thank you, Madam Clerk. Appreciate it. So, the motion passes and it moves forward to City Council with conditions. I know we will need one more motion before we close, but there is also one more thing I need to ask of the Commission. Looking at the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission June 4, 2020 Page 65 of 66 calendar for moving forward, originally, we have a regularly scheduled hearing for the date of July 2nd and staff had reached out to us asking if -- what our availability and quorum would look like, but at this point it doesn't look like there is anything on the schedule for the July 2nd meeting and we have passed the noticing requirements at this point to include anything on that date. So, there will be a special meeting on the 9th, but in order to do that staff would just like to see us make a motion to cancel the July 2nd meeting and plan for a special meeting on the 9th, if someone would be willing to make that motion. Pitzer: Madam Chair, I make a motion that we cancel the July 4th meeting and have a special session for July 9th. Holland: Can you clarify that motion to say cancel the July 2nd meeting, not July 4th. Pitzer: Sorry. July 2nd meeting. That we cancel the July 2nd meeting and have a special meeting for July 9th. Holland: Thank you, Commissioner Pitzer. Is there a second? Seal: Second. Holland: All those in favor? Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: I just need one more motion. Cassinelli: Most of the fireworks are going to be -- Holland: What was that, Commissioner Cassinelli? Cassinelli: I was -- I was going to say most of the firework shows seem like they are getting canceled. We could probably go on the 4th. Holland: We might be our own fireworks show. Cassinelli: Madam Chair, I move to adjourn. Pitzer: Second. Holland: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Holland: All right. Good night all. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission June 4,2020 Page 66 of 66 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED 6 118 12020 RYAN FITZGERALD - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED By Lisa Holland, Vice Chair ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK By Adrienne Weatherly, Deputy City Clerk Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda June 18,2020— Page 70 of 276