2023-07-20 Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting July 20, 2023.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 20, 2023, was called to
order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Andrew Seal.
Members Present: Chairman Andrew Seal, Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner
Jared Smith and Commissioner Patrick Grace.
Members Absent: Commissioner Nate Wheeler, Commissioner Mandi Stoddard and
Commissioner Enrique Rivera.
Others Present: Joy Hall, Kurt Starman, Bill Parsons, Stacy Hersh and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher
Mandi Stoddard X Patrick Grace
Enrique Rivera X Jared Smith
X Andrew Seal - Chairman
Seal: All right Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
for July 20th, 2023. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The
Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall. We also have
staff from City Attorney and Clerk's offices, as well as City Planning Department. If you
are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. So, if you are joining
us on Zoom this evening we have already talked about the technical --technical difficulties
that we are having and you will need to come to City Hall in order to give testimony this -
- this evening, instead of being able to do it on Zoom. Let me see here. During the public
testimony portion of the meeting -- oh, gosh. This is going to throw me way off here, so -
- that's for everybody online. Okay. With that debacle we will begin with roll call. Madam
Clerk.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Seal: Thank you. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We have no
modifications. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda?
Smith: So moved.
Grace: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor, please, say aye.
Opposed nay? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 2 of 51
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of the July 6, 2023 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Loose Screw Brewery (H-
2023-0025) by Michael Garcia, located at 105 E. Carlton
3. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Milano Animal Care
Facility (H-2023-0026) by Blue Frog, LLC, located at 3020 W. Milano
Dr.
Seal: Next item on the agenda is the Consent -- Consent Agenda. We have three items
on the Consent Agenda. First is to approve the minutes of the July 6th, 2023, Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting. Then we have Findings of Facts and Conclusions of
Law for File No. H-2023-0025 for Loose Screw Brewery and File No. H-2023-0026, Milano
Animal Healthcare Facility. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as
presented?
Smith: So moved.
Seal: Do I have a second?
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded -- seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in
favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: Okay. I would like to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item
individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item
adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After staff has
made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond
to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant is finished we
will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the
public testimony. The clerk will call the names individually of those who signed up in
advance to testify. You will need to state your name and address for the record and you
will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pics --
pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed and you can run the -- run
the screen and presentation and we will give assistance if needed. If you have -- if you
have established that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where
others from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten
minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite others
who may wish to testify. When you are finished if the Commission does not have
questions for you you will return to your seat in Chambers and you will no longer have
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 3 of 51
the ability to speak and, please, remember we generally do not call people back up. After
all testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back
and respond. When the applicant is finished responding to questions and concerns we
will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss
and, hopefully, be able to make final decisions or recommendations to City Council as
needed.
ACTION ITEMS
4. Public Hearing for Jump Creek South Apartments (H-2023-0016) by
Kent Brown Planning Services, generally located on the northwest
corner of N. Black Cat Rd. and W. McMillan Rd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 11 buildings and 44 multi-family units on 3.29 acres of
land in the R-15 zoning district.
Seal: So, at this time I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2023-0016
for Jump Creek South Apartments and we will begin with the staff report.
Hersh: Good evening, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. The applicant has submitted a
conditional use permit for Jump Creek South Apartments. The site consists of 3.29 acres
of land, zoned R-15, located at the northwest corner of North Black Cat Road and
McMillan. The history on the property is there is an existing development agreement and
multiple final plats approved. The Comprehensive Plan FLUM designation is medium
density residential. The subject property is one of two multi-family properties that was
approved with the preliminary plat. The gross density for the multi-family portion of this
development is at 13.37 dwelling units to the acre, which is higher than the medium
density residential -- residential designation of the Comprehensive Plan. However, this
was contemplated during the review and approval process of the Jump Creek
development. The overall gross density for the Jump Creek development is
approximately 4.54 dwelling units to an acre, including the 44 multi-family units proposed
with this development and the previous approval of the 28 multi-family units, which is
consistent with the medium density residential land use designation. A two story multi-
family development containing 44 dwelling units, consisting of 11 residential apartment
buildings with a leasing office that is 400 square feet and serving -- is to be served -- used
by both multi-family developments once built out of the project is complete. During the
review of the previous multi-family development the applicant did not commit on the
record to -- or did commit on the record to constructing the leasing office with this phase
of the development. The buildings meet the design setbacks for the multi-family
development as proposed on the site plan. The site plan depicts screen trash standards
for only one trash enclosure provided for the multi-family development. Staff
recommends that the applicant work with Republic Services to --to establish an approved
location for the enclosures, as well as an adequate quantity of trash and recycle bins to
service this development prior to the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. A minimum of 80
square feet of private usable open space shall be required for each unit in the plans -- the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 4 of 51
floor plans and the architectural plans state that there will be decks and patios and those
are depicted on the floor plans that meet this standard. Open space and design
requirements. Because the site is only 3.29 acres, the total baseline layering -- land area
of common qualified open space is ten percent of the gross land for multi-family
developments of five acres or more does not does -- not apply. The site was required to
develop with a minimum of 15 percent open space to include the following amenities.
Three tot lots, internal walking paths, a ten foot wide multi-use path on the south side of
West Gondola Drive and five percent open space. Additionally, the master pathways plan
requires a ten foot -- ten foot multi-use pathway to be included as part of the development
plan for this site. Both multi-family developments approved as part of the Jump Creek
overall development have access to the common areas and site amenities throughout the
entire development and in addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum
of outdoor open space shall be provided, 250 square feet for each unit, containing more
than 500 square feet up to 1,200 square feet of living area. All 44 units are between 500
and 1 ,200. So, therefore, 11,000 square feet of common open space is required.
Because the site is below the five acres in size, the baseline requirement does not apply.
The submitted plans include two open grassy areas. These appear to be over 5,000
square feet in size and are illustrated as a drainage swale and a subsurface sand
drainage area. Additionally, a picnic area located behind the leasing office is shown on
the site plan. Staff recommends that the applicant open or submit an open space exhibit
that demonstrates compliance with this. To satisfy the specific use standards for the
proposed multi-family -- 44 multi-family units, a minimum of three amenities, one from
each category, must be provided. These -- these proposed amenities were the leasing
office, with an outdoor barbecue that serves both multi-family developments. A picnic
area with tables, benches, landscaping. A shade structure attached to the office. A
bicycle repair station. A community garden and charging stations for electric vehicles.
Additionally, there is a multi-use pathway that surrounds the site serving as another
amenity. The amenities meet the standards in the UDC. The dimensional standards.
This -- this development meets the dimensional standards for the R-15 zoning district, as
well as the multi-family development. However, staff recommends that the applicant
reorientate Building H to face south and move the lease office to face east in a central
location within the development to improve the accessibility and convenience. All access
was previously approved with the Jump Creek preliminary plat. The primary access for
this will occur from West Daphne Street, which connects to North Black Cat Road. There
is additional access through numerous roads in the Jump Creek Subdivision which will
eventually terminate at West Riva Capri Street and North Maplestone Drive. Since the
drive aisle within this development is not classified as a private street, the street name
shown on the site plan should be removed. The common drive located on Lot 10, Block
1, of Jump Creek Subdivision No. 6 serves as access for Lots 22 and 23, Block 1, of Jump
Creek South Subdivision and functions solely as a secondary fire access point for the
multi-family development and as per the fire department's requirements two bollards need
to be installed on the property line of the multi-family development spaced out 20 feet
apart. These bollards should be accompanied by a heavy chain and Knox padlock on the
property line of the multi-family development. The buildings within this development will
have their address assigned based on West Daphne Street and furthermore it is
recommended to place a wayfinding sign near the entrance of the multi-family
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 5 of 51
development to provide clear directions. Off-street parking for the multi-family
development is required to be provided per the UDC based on the number of bedrooms
per unit. The applicant is proposing 46 units consisting of 36 two-bedroom units and eight
three bedroom units. In addition, one guest space for every ten units is required per the
UDC. Based on the total number of units proposed and their bedroom count distribution
a minimum of a hundred parking spaces, with a minimum of 44 of these spaces to be
covered in a garage or by a carport. According to the plan -- site plan submitted the
applicant is proposing a hundred spaces with 43 of these spaces to be covered by a
carport. The proposed parking just meets the minimum code requirements. However,
one additional parking stall should be -- covered parking stall should be added.
Additionally, the plan submitted is deficient in trash enclosures, for which may impact the
proposed parking. Bicycle parking is required per the standards of the UDC and that
complies with the site plan. A five foot wide sidewalk is existing along West Daphne
Street connecting to the multi-family development. The applicant is proposing attached
sidewalks on either side of the pedestrian walkways throughout the entire site. Internal
pedestrian walkways are required to be distinguished from vehicular services through the
use of pavers, colored or scored concrete. The proposed pedestrian sidewalk shall be
constructed with a different material than the driving surface, with the plan submitted with
the certificate of zoning compliance. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required within
the landscape buffer along North Black Cat Road from West Daphne Street to the
intersection -- intersection of West McMillan as part of the path -- pathways master site
plan. The pathway should be placed in a 14 foot wide easement, which would be
submitted to the planning division prior to certificate of zoning compliance and the --
additionally the applicant's engineer shall provide written documentation that the pathway
was constructed per the recommended specifications in accordance with the UDC.
Landscaping is required along all pathways in accordance with the UDC. Landscaping.
The applicant is required to construct 25 foot wide landscape along the North Black Cat
Road and along McMillan and the landscape plan does comply with this. All fencing
constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards of the UDC and they also
comply -- or are in compliance on the landscape plan. The applicant has submitted
conceptual building elevations for the future multi-family fourplex buildings and residential
projects require administrative design review and approval. So, staff will look through
that once that is submitted and a certificate of zoning compliance for the site design. And
written testimony is none and staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
with the conditions listed in the staff report and that concludes staff's presentation and I
stand for any questions.
Seal: Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Brown: For the record Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood is my address. Stacy, if you
could put up the little slides that I -- it's kind of interesting. I have been doing this for 33
years -- doing planning work and when I created my own company this is one of the first
projects I worked on. So, in 2014 is when this preliminary plat was approved -- the fall of
2014. 1 wasn't involved in the entitlement part, but I have done all the phases. So, I have
been very involved with it. It's not on this screen. I just thought it was my touch that I
couldn't make it work. What this preliminary plat shows -- in the very northeast corner is
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 6 of 51
where we did some other apartment buildings. I will just look this way and not talk. So,
the open spaces that are there are for both the single family residents and the multi-family
residents. What -- if-- if you look at the vicinity map that's on the right-hand side you can
see that when this was originally approved this was like the only thing that's out there. It
doesn't look that way today. Stacy's plan and what's in your staff report shows a much
different view. If you would go to the next slide. So, Building H that Stacy talked about
that she wants rotated is down at the bottom of the screen right there where the cursor
is. We are in agreement with that. That really opens things up I think and by putting that
office patio and all of that there I think that that really helps in the overall view there. It
kind of moves it closer to the center and we are in agreement with that. We -- I had the
engineer look at it and we can make that work. So, the office that is on the left will be
basically where the north part of that building is. The trash enclosure that's on the other
side -- today I got a letter from Republic Storage and they said that we are adequately
taking care of the trash and that they liked the location of where we are putting the trash
enclosure. So, I can provide staff with a copy of that -- that letter. This plan also shows
at the very top that we have a map that is required for any of your apartment complexes
that there is a directional map. It's on the left-hand side as you are pulling in. So, where
the driver is pulling you can see the map to know which buildings are -- and where those
buildings are located at. I just thought it was me. The next --
Seal: Seems like technology is running rampant tonight.
Brown: Yes, it is tonight. So, this is the landscape plan and you can better see from that
the -- the office. There is raised beds for a community garden. There is a bike repair
station. There is a barbecue that's attached right next to the office with -- there you go.
Thank you. And now it's gone. That's weird, isn't it? It was on until I turned and looked
at it, so --
Seal: It knows you are looking -- that you are watching.
Brown: It really does. The only reason I show you that is so that you can see where that
clubhouse is at and realistically that the buildings are the same size. So, if we rotate it
around there shouldn't be any issues with that. The next slide. This is a picture of the
office and as you look at that, the upper part is where the picnic tables, the barbecue and
the bike repair thing is and, then, the office to --to the south. When we did the apartments
in phase four we temporarily provided one of the units as a temporary office until we got
this one built. So, it will remain. But, then, it will be responsible for the entire amount of
apartments that are within the entire development and, then, they will -- they will have it
manned from there. The next one. It's just another picture of the office. We have -- we
have been working with this for quite some time. The reason I -- I brought up that I started
-- this started nine years ago is just sometimes as planning and zoning commissioners,
which I -- I have been for the City of Meridian, you -- you get something approved and
you -- and I would say even the general public and they view that it's going to be there
next week and this project we tried to move along as quickly as possible and we still have
a number of homes, but we have recorded seven phases of the development for single
family of -- six for single family and one for multi-family. This requirement from the staff
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 7 of 51
is asking us to record a plat on this one. So, by the time we are done we -- we have been
working on this for a decade and not all those projects, you know,just immediately happen
and traffic has changed. Highway district has already taken up the right of way. We have
given them the right of way that's adjacent to this site, so that they can make those
highway district improvements as a part of this moving this forward and we just seek your
approval and I will stand for any questions you might have.
Seal: All right. Thank you much. Commissions, do we have questions?
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: You said there were seven phases. What phase are you in now?
Brown: This -- so, we had -- we had -- this would be the eighth phase of doing it. It will
eventually be called the -- it's kind of confusing. We -- we had to call one phase Jump
Creek South, so we did six numerical phases and, then, Jump Creek South and this one
will be called Jump Creek seven as we go forward, so --
Lorcher: And which phase are you in now? Jump Creek two, three, four?
Brown: We have built -- all of them are built and all -- all seven have been recorded.
Lorcher: So, this is the last --
Brown: This is the last hurrah in this entire development. Yeah. It kind of started in the
middle and, in fact, we had a temporary access to Black Cat Road until we could meet
emergency fire provisions and, then, we actually had to go in and vacate that road --
roadway, because when we did phase one we did it incorrectly. We shouldn't have
dedicated it. We should have just had it as a lot -- common lot and providing access to
the public and, then, make it go away. But this was the first time -- I mean ten years ago
the highway district hadn't thought about providing a temporary means in that looks like
a main entrance and, then, making it go away. So, today they have -- they have worked
that out and I'm recording a plat in Boise that we are -- we are calling it a common area,
but when you go look at it it looks like the main entrance to the subdivision, but the only
reason they are allowing us to have that is for a temporary purpose, because they want
to limit the access points to major roads.
Lorcher: Got you. Thank you.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: Yeah. So, you talked about building -- I don't think I heard anything about the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 8 of 51
additional parking spaces in close proximity that's recommended in the staff report. Do
you have any -- is that amenable to you or --
Brown: I -- I did ask the client, you know, what -- what are our possibilities that we could
do. As Stacy was reading the number she said that we had eight three bedroom units. I
asked, you know, how critical is it for them to have the three bedroom units and they said,
actually, the two bedrooms rent better, so they even had a suggestion, which I'm excited
about, if that's -- if you wanted to pick up, you know, from the code standpoint, is tell us
not to have three bedrooms and they will -- apparently if you don't put a closet in there it's
considered a den and the world has changed from when this was originally approved.
COVID is having more people work at home. I would have that as an office in a rental
facility. So, just change the floor plan to remove the closet and, then, it's -- then it's not a
bedroom anymore, so -- but we could remove eight bedrooms or four bedrooms or
whatever to increase the number of parking, if that's -- if that's what you so choose to.
Seal: Any other questions? Commissioner Grace?
Grace: Yeah. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. So, I had a similar question related to parking.
So, you talked to Republic trash I guess.
Brown: Republic. Yeah.
Grace: And they were good with the location. Were they good with the adequacy, the
amount that you had?
Brown: Yes.
Grace: Okay. So, that won't affect the -- the --
Brown: Sorry about that. And that's not technology, that's just old. Yeah. They -- the --
the approval letter speaks to it being adequate for this facility and large enough for
holidays and weekends and that kind of thing to cover the -- the amount of waste that
would be generated by 44 units.
Grace: And, then, second question. If you reorient that Building H and move the office
you don't lose any open space I wouldn't think.
Brown: Shouldn't. I mean we still got the same amount of footprint.
Grace: Right.
Brown: I totally get why staff is asking for it. I mean we have -- we have looked at that
plan over and over again trying to address like parking. What the site -- in the original
approval was a lot larger because they weren't planning on a roundabout on the corner
and so this site has had that kind of change a little bit over -- over time and it's gotten
smaller, but at the same time -- I think in the original plan it showed 12 buildings and we
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 9 of 51
only have 11, so --
Grace: Okay. Thank you.
Seal: Quick question for staff. On the comment in the staff report for the inadequacy for
the -- essentially the trash receptacle -- receptacle. Is our code around that or is it --
Hersh: Republic Service -- sorry, Mr. Chair. Republic Services is actually the -- the
governing body that they have to submit the approval with the certificate of zoning
compliance and design review. But they are good with it.
Seal: Okay. I -- I tend to agree with staff and -- and the only reason that I say that is
because if you only have one option it only takes one person being a jerk to make that
not an option and -- and I have seen that in different locations over and over. One person
decides they don't want a mattress frame and they throw it in there, nobody else can
throw anything in it. So, it would be nice to see two of them in there.
Brown: There is two inside the -- the enclosure. What we are talking about is that it's
adequate. We only have one location for the enclosure.
Seal: Okay.
Brown: But two -- there is two inside.
Seal: Okay. So, you can accommodate one jerk and still have adequate storage. Got
you.
Brown: Depending on the jerk.
Seal: That's right. Well, we can't measure that, so -- okay. That -- that makes much
more sense, so -- because I was kind of thinking, man, one for the -- all those just doesn't
make sense. Got you.
Brown: One -- one structure, physical structure that's there. Actually, on one side of the
structure, if you look closely at the plan, there is the cluster mailboxes attached to the
side of the -- the cement structure that's there. But there is two --
Seal: Got you.
Brown: So many yards --
Seal: Dumpsters.
Brown: Yeah. Dumpters.
Seal: Got you. Okay. That makes much more sense. So, if I would have been paying
more attention to the picture I would have seen that. Commissioners?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 10 of 51
Brown: It was technology.
Seal: It was -- technology got in the way for sure. Is there any other-- no more questions
we will have you take a seat and --
Brown: Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Joy, so do we have anybody signed up?
Hall: Mr. Chair, we have Jonathan Davis. Mr. Davis, you want to come up and testify?
Oh. Okay. Got you. And -- and real quick, because I see somebody else has come
online. For our -- for the folks that are joining us online tonight we are having technical
difficulties where you will be able to hear us, but we cannot hear you. So, if you would
like to give testimony on either of the applications this evening, either for Jump Creek or
Stapleton, you will have to come down to Council Chambers in order to do that. Sorry.
Go ahead.
Hall: Mr. Chair, there is no one else.
Seal: Okay. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to come up and testify? No
takers? Okay. Anything else? All right. With that we will take a motion to close the
public hearing for File No. H-2023-0016.
Smith: So moved.
Grace: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-2023-0016
for Jump Creek South Apartments. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay? Okay. The
public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: Who wants to start on this one?
Grace: Mr. Chairman, I don't mind. I -- it is an awful lot of buildings on a 3.29 acre spot,
but it's been going on for a little while and I like the layout and I like the idea of moving --
reorienting that building. I would say that -- I don't know that I'm comfortable telling them
that they have to eliminate bedrooms and things like that. I feel more comfortable saying
you just have to have adequate parking. So, to the extent that the applicant made that
offer that we could compel them to do that, I -- I, for one, don't feel comfortable telling
them that. I just -- I would rather tell them that they need to have adequate parking. But
other than that I think it's a good -- it's a good project for that corner and, like I said, it's
been going on for a little while, so I'm in -- I'm in favor of it.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 11 of 51
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Smith: I'm kind of in the same spot on the parking for bedroom removal and one thing I
have been bouncing around is a question for Kurt, but also for Commissioner Grace. A,
is it possible, Kurt? And, then, B, is would you be more comfortable with something that
would compel them either to add parking spots or to limit bedrooms, so it's their choice,
but it creates the ability to say, hey, if you can't-- if you can't find more spots, then, I mean
that's -- if you don't want to put more spots that -- that's a choice you have to make. So,
I guess, A, Kurt. B, Commissioner Grace.
Starman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Smith, I think this is a conditional use
permit and you are -- the Commission is able to place conditions to mitigate the impact of
the project. So, that would be an appropriate mitigation. You know, you can do A,
additional parking or, B, fewer bedroom counts. I think that's within your purview. So, to
answer the first part of your question, yes, that is possible.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go right ahead.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal, I'm a little challenged on this one for two reasons. Number
one, it was approved in 2014 and that was -- I can't add that fast, but that was many years
ago and the area has changed quite a bit. So, based on 36 two bedrooms and eight three
bedrooms you are looking at -- at an average of 96 more cars and 192 movements of
cars per day at an intersection that can't handle the -- the traffic that's already there. So,
in one sense it's kind of grandfathered in, because they are just trying to cross their T's
and dot their I's and finish their project and it wasn't anybody's fault there was a recession
or supply chain issues or whatever and he is just trying to finish it up and the other sense
that, you know, adding 96 more cars or families with -- you know, in and out almost 200
a day on the intersection that can't even handle it, with ACHD not even getting ready to
build the roundabout for another, what, two years. They are just taking public comments
now. I struggle with this because, yes, it should be there, but the question is should it be
there right now? Now, if we all wait for ACHD to catch up with development we will all be
gone from the planet before that actually happens. So, the question, then, becomes as
a Council and what's best for the City of Meridian -- to go ahead and say yes for the
conditional use permit for you to go forward or we ask them to wait, but, then, that
becomes a financial hardship for the development that's already been approved since
2014 when they are just trying to complete their project. So, I guess I'm asking rhetorical
questions here or making just comment. I'm -- I'm -- I'm on the fence, because, yes, they
should be able to complete it, but, no, we can't really add 200 more trips for cars per day.
So, I'm a -- I'm a big maybe on this one.
Seal: Yeah. And I kind of on purpose wanted to wait until last. We have had many long
hearings and many a late night over McMillan and Black Cat. We have denied an
application that was on the southeast corner of Black Cat and McMillan. We
recommended denial. City Council denied it. So, it is still an empty piece of land based
on the, you know, traffic alone. The issue that I have with this -- well, I will -- I will start
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 12 of 51
with everything that I like about it. I -- I like, you know, the way that the multi-family is put
together, the fact that it has ten foot pathways, you know, there is some room to breathe
in here as it would be. So, I have no issues with that. I have no issues with -- with multi-
family at all. What I do have issues with is that we are working on an approved report
from ACHD that used data from 2013. And that is quick math. That is ten years ago.
That's a decade. So, I didn't have gray hair when this was -- study was completed, so
that said it was approved back then and -- and like Commissioner Lorcher said, nobody
said -- nobody knew that it was going to take ten years to get to this point. But, you know,
I -- I'm having a very difficult time with needing to approve this, because, essentially, what
our purview is is this -- is this -- essentially the multi-family function a good use for this
plot of land and, traffic aside, I would say yes. The problem is is that we are using a traffic
report from 2013 in order to make that decision and we have no other option than -- than
to honor it, because we don't own the roads. ACHD does. So, to be perfectly honest, I
just -- I have such a hard time with that at this point in time and I'm getting so tired of
having these meetings and having to talk about McMillan and Black Cat and how it is just
adequately -- or inadequately it -- it does not provide for the traffic load that's on it today,
much less a few years from now when they decide to start planning for the roundabout
that--you know, that's going to go in there in 2028, as well as further down the road when
they might include Black Cat or McMillan in any further plans to do anything else. You
know, we are putting in a lot of homes, a lot of multi-family and I stress the word family.
A lot of kids along this corridor. A lot of schools along these corridors as well. And you
can't so much as put a foot between your -- the white line and the gravel on the road. I
mean when I was a kid I rode my bike everywhere. You can't here. And I have been to,
you know, few roads in this valley for kids that will never be able to do that again because
of inadequate roadways. So, to -- to be honest, I would rather vote no and have City
Council have to weigh in on this. I'm just -- I have nothing against the builder. I have
nothing against multi-family, I just think that it is wrong to approve this knowing the traffic
troubles that we have there. That's just kind of where I'm at and I don't know if that's
shared with my other Commissioners, but I just -- I struggle with this.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Smith: Yeah. Just some thoughts tonight. I am frustrated. You know, you said you didn't
have gray hairs. I still had gray hair when this was approved. Or I still had hair. Sorry.
Not gray hair. Lost the punch line there. But it -- yeah, it's -- it's frustrating that ACHD is
moving as slowly as it is on this, but I -- I think there -- there is two things that are -- are
keeping this that -- to where I probably, you know, with -- with some heartburn and I'm
leaning toward a yes. One is that, you know, there is additional, you know, multi-family
on this corridor and also schools on this corridor. Now, there is the -- the Issue of
inadequate service, but there is also the benefit of having, you know, more multi-family,
more children closer to schools when you can consider that if someone is living here and
has to live in multi-family housing say in a different spot in Meridian, you know, you are
not really necessarily reducing -- you know, reducing the strain on the -- on the schools
in those areas, you are just shifting the load somewhere else. So, if I'm -- if I'm looking
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 13 of 51
at kind of a 30,000 foot level, I'm trying to think in terms of -- for the good of the entire
city, not just for this corridor. I still think that kind of edges out as a benefit of, you know,
there is -- we are growing out out there, there are growing pains and it's really frustrating
to see ACHD move so slowly on this, but I don't know that the answer is to shift that load
to other corridors and other schools that are also, frankly, kind of impacted because of
some of the ACHD issues. Yeah. The other side -- the other-- the other issue I'm having
-- and this is the -- the heartburn I would be having if I'm voting no is that in a sense we
are saying because you took long to build this we are going to make it take longer and it
-- I started to get into a mindset of, well -- and maybe not legally, but philosophically --
how long before this kind of becomes a taking? If we say this is a -- this is a pretty good
development, just not the right time, you know, and in a year it's not the right time and in
two years it's not the right time and I know that no one's recommending that, but there is
kind of a -- if we are saying this -- this roundabout it's going to take forever, you know,
how long do -- are we forcing this developer to kind of just sit with this, you know, and I'm
not comfortable -- I'm not comfortable having to hold them hostage to the whims of ACHD.
So, I -- I -- you know, I'm -- I'm -- I'm -- I'm half kind of talking about my position, half
thinking about that -- thinking out loud. I just -- I don't know that I'm -- I think probably
where you are if you are not quite comfortable with approving -- I'm not quite comfortable
voting no on it. I -- I think for all its flaws it -- it does benefit the city as a whole. It does,
you know, kind of start to -- to address some of the need for additional housing out there
and, you know, it's -- I don't know that we can -- I don't know that I'm comfortable saying
no just because ACHD moves slower than -- than we wish they would. So, this is where
I'm at at the moment.
Starman: Mr. Chairman, can I just interject about two minutes of some legal background
and I will let you all continue your deliberations. I think it's an excellent discussion and
exactly, you know, why we like to have, you know, citizens on our commissions and you
bring a great insight. So, excellent conversation. A couple legal points I wanted the
Commission to be mindful of as you deliberate. One is we are sort of in a difficult spot in
the sense that this project largely has most of its entitlements in place. We annexed the
property some years ago. It has a development agreement that's been approved and is
binding on both parties and the property's been platted. So, this property is far along in
the process in terms of city entitlements and that provides certain legal protections for the
property owner. With that said, this is a conditional use permit and the Commission
definitely does have the ability to place conditions on the project to mitigate impacts, but
we don't have the ability to just simply say we don't like the project anymore, we don't
want to do it. That -- that really is not legally viable. And, then, related to that is my next
point and I will be quiet and let you continue deliberations -- is that if for argument's sake
the Commission was inclined to say to deny the application, I just want the Commission
be mindful that there are specific findings that you all make when you approve or deny a
project that are required for conditional use permits. Those are in your staff report on
page -- starting on page 23, if you want to refer to those. But I would encourage you to
just be mindful of -- of the findings that you are required to make to approve or to deny
and, then, particularly if -- if you are in denial situation articulate your reasons why you
are denying, what those findings would -- are going to be when you adopt them, why you
are denying the project and, then, also importantly, you need to provide the applicant with
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 14 of 51
some information about how the project could be modified to address your concerns, so
that they could proceed with the project. So you need to give the -- you need to tell them
what they could do to fix their application essentially. So, that's just some legal ideas I
wanted to put on the table and I will let you all continue your deliberations.
Seal: Thank you. I always appreciate anything you have to add to keep us on track for
sure. Commissioner Grace.
Grace: Mr. Chairman. The points I guess I would make are that we need the housing,
the multi-family, the apartments and so that -- that's a -- that's a big concern of mine and
it's been around -- it's been in the process for a long time. I would ask somewhat
rhetorically maybe, but what else are we going to put there? You know, what are our
options? I understand the concerns about ACHD, but sort of in line with maybe what
Council was thinking, one of my points was simply the decision in front of us and, you
know, I know we have some discretion in that regard, but I -- you know, it's a CUP in front
of us and I -- I guess I would ask the -- you know, if there are additional conditions that --
that we think are reasonable and -- and might help some of the concerns that you have,
I'm willing to listen to those. I am. I know it's probably a tough question off the top of your
head right now, so I don't want to put you on the spot, but I'm not unwilling to consider
those and listen to those. A final point just to Commissioner Smith, your -- your sort of
compromise. I like that. If we go down that road of approval I do like the idea of giving
them the choice to decide how they want to meet the parking requirements, so that's all.
Thank you.
Seal: Well, that--yeah. I want to say-- I mean this --this is of no fault of the developer's,
so, honestly, I think -- you know, I mean usually try -- don't try and point fingers or, you
know, throw blame, but I mean as a city I think this is our problem that we have created
and so -- and -- and the hesitation that I have -- I mean I -- I understand that legally,
basically, we have to approve this, so we can put some conditions in there. You know, I
mean the parking, you know, one or two spots isn't going to make a difference in my mind,
you know, one way or the other. So -- you know. And, again, I think it's a quality multi-
family development and, again, I have nothing against multi-family development and I
understand the need that we have. The one thing I will say on record -- and we have
shown that, again, with the -- the application that was put in on the southeast corner of
Black Cat Loop and McMillan that, you know, we can't tell people that they can't develop
it. I can't imagine that we will annex in anything else in this corridor until at least 2028
and I mean the only thing that they are going to do is add a roundabout here, which to
me is like putting a fire hose connector on the end of a garden hose. It just doesn't make
any sense, so -- I mean you are going to let the -- you are going to let the traffic move
faster? Great. That's awesome that they can move faster. You know, I just -- just -- I
have a lot of heartburn with this -- not necessarily this application, but just with that traffic
corridor and what we are allowing to go in there. So, again, it's not the applicant's fault
at all, but it kind of speaks to where we are at as a community and I mean the need that
we have is being generated by ourselves, so -- yeah. I mean -- I don't know that housing
can get more expensive here. I would hope not. But I mean everything that we deny just
helps drive up the price, because, then, the demand just gets higher, so -- I don't know.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 15 of 51
1 just really struggle with where we are at. But the city itself is not in control of its own
future as far as roads go and we are just held hostage by ACHD in -- in situations like
this, so I -- I don't know what we do about that.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Simison: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: I agree if this was a preliminary plat it would be an easy denial, but the fact that
it's been going on for so long, as legal said, you have to come up with a good reason for
denial and traffic is not one of them, because it's something he can't modify or control.
So, I guess we have made our peace with public record. You know, we don't like it. We
-- there is no fault for your development. I mean it's taken ten years and as the phases
have come through, but, you know, like I said I'm still -- I was on the fence, but I -- I don't
have a reason to deny it, except for traffic and that's not something he can fix, so --
Seal: I would agree with that.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: I'm going to try to make a motion and I'm like -- I will echo what Commissioner
Grace said, if there are any amendments I'm happy to discuss them. So, after considering
all public testimony -- apologies -- staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve
File No. H-2023-0016 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 20th,
2023, with a modification to require the developer either add additional parking spaces
for overflow parking or reduce the number of bedrooms to reach a -- a ratio that is
desirable with staff.
Grace: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to approve File No. H-2023-0016, Jump Creek
South Apartments. All in favor say aye. I will be a nay on this still. But motion passes.
Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT.
5. Public Hearing for Stapleton Apartments (H-2023-0033) by The
Architects Office, PLLC., generally located on the NW corner of S.
Meridian Rd. and W. Harris St.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 5 two-story buildings and 19 multi-family townhome
style units on 2.07 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district.
Seal: And with that I would like to open the public hearing for File No. H-2023-0033 for
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 16 of 51
Stapleton Apartments and we will begin with the staff report.
Hersh: The applicant has submitted a conditional use permit for Stapleton Apartments.
The site consists of 2.07 acres of land. It is currently zoned R-15, located at the northwest
corner of South Meridian Road and West Harris Street. History on the property is there
currently is a development agreement that governs the property and multiple -- multiple
phases of various final plats have already been approved. The comprehensive FLUM
designation is medium high density residential. A two story multi-family development
containing 19 dwelling units consisting of five residential apartment buildings with a gross
density of 9.18 units per acre consistent with the density in the medium high density
residential designation. The conceptual development plan included in the development
agreement initially proposed 18 units on this lot. So, they reduced it down to 19.
However, the applicant believes that this location would be better served with larger units
instead and, therefore, reduced the number of total units, thereby increasing the square
footage for each unit. The applicant's decision took into consideration the proximity of a
larger future multi-family project planned directly to the west of the site. Because the site
is only 2.07 acres, the total baseline area of qualified open space of ten percent of the
gross land for multi-family developments of five acres or more does not apply. In addition
to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum out -- area of outdoor common open
space shall be provided based on the square foot of living area per the UDC. The
applicant is required to provide common open space based on the square footage for
each unit. The submitted plans did not depict the square -- the square footage for each
unit, for the 19 three bedroom units. Staff recommends that the applicant revise the plan
submitted with the future certificate of zoning compliance that meets this requirement. To
satisfy the specific use standards for the 19 multi-family units a minimum of two amenities,
one from each category, must be provided and according to the plans and narrative
applicant has not provided any amenities within this development, so they do provide on-
site storage with roll-up doors. That can be counted. We just need to see floor plans for
this, each unit, and how big those are. The buildings shall provide the minimum setbacks
and the site plan does comply with this for the multi-family development. The site plan
depicts screen trash standards for only one trash enclosure provided for the multi-family
development. Staff, again, recommends the applicant work with Republic Services to
establish an approved location for the trash enclosures, as well as the adequate quantity
that would be required for this development. A minimum of 80 square feet of private
usable open space shall be provided for each unit. The requirement can be satisfied
through porches, patios, decks and other enclosed yards. Landscaping entry or other
excess ways shall not count toward this requirement. The submitted elevations depict
several outdoor patios and balconies that may qualify for this -- for this requirement.
However, without floor plans staff cannot verify it. So, we would like the applicant to
submit floor plans with the certificate of zoning compliance so we can do the analysis to
make sure that complies. This development complies with the dimensional standards for
the R-15 zoning district in the multi-family development and the landscape buffers next to
collector streets for the R-15 zoning district and also the height limit of 40 feet. They are
depicting 35. All access was previously approved with the Stapleton preliminary plat.
There are two primary accesses for this project that will occur on North Lone Pine Way
via West Harris Street, which connect to South Meridian Road. There is an additional
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 17 of 51
access through numerous roads in Stapleton Subdivision. According to the development
agreement the applicant is required to provide an emergency vehicular connection
between the site and the planned multi-family development to the west for
interconnectivity and they have shown that on their site plan to the southwest. Off-street
parking for multi-family developments is required to be provided per the UDC based on
the number of bedrooms per unit. The applicant is proposing 19 units consisting of all 19
being three bedrooms. In addition, there is one guest space for every ten units is required
per the UDC. Based on the total number of units and bedroom count distribution, a
minimum of 59 parking spaces with a minimum of 19 of these spaces to be covered in a
garage or by a carport. According to the submitted site plan the applicant is proposing
58 spaces with 24 of these spaces to be covered by the carport. The proposed parking
is short one stall from meeting the minimum code requirements. Staff is asking that they
add that additional stall and additionally plan for the deficient trash enclosures for this
site, which may impact the parking proposed, depending on what Republic Services
comes back for. And, then, there is also one -- one bicycle parking space is required for
every 25 proposed vehicle parking spaces. Based on the 59 spaces a minimum of two
are required and they provided four. Staff recommends that the applicant include an
additional parking stall to meet the parking requirements and allocate additional parking
spaces within close proximity to the development to accommodate the overflow needs for
this development and add a detail of the bicycle rack with the plan submitted for their
certificate of zoning compliance application. Existing detached sidewalks along West
Harris and Lone Pine Way connecting to the multi-family development, the applicant is
proposing attached sidewalks and other pedestrian walkways throughout the entire site.
Internal pedestrian walkways are required to be distinct -- distinguished from vehicular
driveway services, services through the pavers of colored or scored concrete or bricks
and they shall be constructed with a different material than the driving surface with the
plan submitted with the CZC. The landscape requirements for the street buffers are in
compliance on the landscape plan. All fencing is also --the proposed fencing and existing
fencing meet the requirements of the UDC code for this project. The applicant has
submitted conceptual elevations for the future multi-family buildings. Multi-family
residential projects also require administrative design review, so staff will perform the
thorough analysis at that time and they will also be required to submit a certificate of
zoning compliance that requires to be submitted for the entire development for us to
analyze as well based off of the conditional use permit conditions. And staff also wanted
to add that the roll-up doors adds a value -- is-- adds a valuable amenity to this developed
to the rear of these buildings. We haven't seen that before, so we thought that was kind
of neat. In addition, the conceptual elevations depict buildings with various roof lines and
materials, including stone, horizontal lap siding, vertical board batten siding, stained wood
and fenestration. Written testimony. We had one written testimony by Stacy Cable.
Concerns with cut-through traffic and neighborhoods exceeding 25 miles an hour. Safety
due to drivers making left turns from Harris Road onto Meridian Road without a traffic
light. And, then, staff does recommend approval with the conditions listed in the staff
report and staff stands for any questions.
Seal: Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening,
sir. I need your name and address for the record.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 18 of 51
Ruby: Good evening. Can you hear me?
Seal: Yes, sir.
Ruby: Okay. David Ruby. 499 Main, Boise, Idaho. Thank you for taking the time to hear
me tonight. Here for the Stapleton Apartments. I'm here to present the questions about
the multi-family aspect. As you know, the single family subdivision has been approved
and is under construction. Most of the homes are going in. Our goal -- or this all started
back with the annexation and rezone with case number H-2018-1029. Our goal tonight
is to obtain approval for a conditional use permit. The next steps in the process would
be submittal of design review and CZC applications, which we are working on. And, then,
following that we will submit plans for building permit -- building plan review. This project
is for 19 units. I -- I believe the original approval was 24-28, but as staff mentioned in the
time frame that has elapsed and doing a market study with that large project nearby, they
have opted to proceed with only three bedroom units, because they felt that was the --
the greatest need in that area right now. So, that is what we are showing. So, it's 19
units total in five two-story buildings. The buildings are designed to be similar both in
height and overall mass with the other rural neighborhoods that are around. The
materials, roof lines and -- and whatnot are very similar to those homes. We have
reviewed the staff report and we are in agreement with all conditions of approval in that
report. We will update various drawings as requested in our upcoming design review and
CZC application. There are only two conditions that I just want to touch on briefly and,
then, I will keep it short. Condition A-3 -- or A.3.F, Amenities. Over the past day or so
we have been in communication with staff and we are -- I think between my client and
other planners involved in the -- the overall Stapleton project are -- my understanding
coming here tonight was that we are basically in agreement with providing two amenities,
one of which is the storage shed that Stacy mentioned. The other -- and I just realized I
didn't bring a thumb drive with a drawing of it, but the -- the plan that was up there, the
site plan -- and you can't really see it, but on the very right-hand corner of that site that's
almost touching the title block there, there is actually a dog park -- that was another dog
park that was put in with phase one. That was not part of the previous requirement. They
just -- the other one was so popular they added another one and it's my understanding --
maybe staff could comment on that -- that they discussed that and that would be
amenable to them. If that is the case we are completely in agreement with that. The
other condition is A.3.E, open space. I just wanted to comment that the -- the patios are,
in fact, large enough to meet the common open space -- or the -- the private open space
requirement and, then, I have double checked it and I will do an exhibit that shows that
we do have adequate space on site for the common open space as well. So, with that I
will stand with questions.
Seal: Commissioners, do we have any questions of the applicant or staff?
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 19 of 51
Smith: Question for Stacy if she could comment on the discussion of the dog park and
any staff thoughts or considerations on that.
Parsons: Okay. Chair, Members of the Commission, yes, the applicant and I had a
discussion this afternoon about that and -- and I -- we did discuss this with -- this topic
with the chair as well as we deliberated as we got prepared for tonight's hearing. So,
there -- there is some gray area here for sure and that's and just like the legal counsel
tells you, you know, it is a conditional use permit. So, this is your opportunity to say, okay,
do you find that a dog park on the adjacent -- abutting adjacent from this property meets
the intent of the code or do you want to physically see two amenities on this particular
development. When Stacy and I looked at the record it was very clear to us that although
conceptually multi-family was approved here, it was still required that it would go through
a conditional use process and we would analyze open space and amenities and parking
at that time and the design, which I think the applicant's done a pretty good job here. I
really -- I really like what they have done with it. I like the fact that they also reduced the
number of units. I think it fits in better with the character of the neighborhood. So, that's
the other caveat that we are not privy to, Stacy and I or the city in general, is there are
CC&Rs out there that govern this particular property and, then, those CC&Rs -- this -- it's
apparent that these are shared. They are --they are joined together as one development.
So, that's something that at least we want to bring -- put on the record, then, inform you
that, yes, although this site doesn't have the two required amenities, it has one, there are
amenities in this subdivision that are above what code required at the time that it came
in, along with the open space. So, again, that's kind of your purview tonight. Do you want
to see more amenities on this site? I'm -- I'm -- we are in agreement with the applicant. I
think he's going to have plenty of open space with the 19 units here. No -- no doubt about
that. So, it really comes down to whether or not you guys are comfortable with the CC&Rs
and that the two developments are married together and -- and joined in sharing in all the
open space and amenities, because if I lived in Stapleton and there was an amenity --
obviously, the amenity for these apartments won't be used for the -- by these neighbors
if they are here to testify in that, because it's storage for the apartment renter. So, that's
-- that's something that you have to take under consideration when you look at this, yes,
although it's all integrated and meant to be one development, there is really no benefit for
these -- the single family homeowners to go to the multi-family development, because
there is nothing for them to share. So, that's something to take -- to take into account
when you look at a dog park across the street. Yes, can that work? I think it can work.
I'm comfortable with that. I'm comfortable with the CC&R language. But, again, it's
whether-- this is a conditional use permit, we have people who --that may feel differently,
but certainly just wanted to go on the record and share that conversation with you.
Seal: Okay. Thank you, Bill. Appreciate it.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 20 of 51
Lorcher: Dave, you mentioned there was annex-- annexation and rezone. How long has
this project been in the works?
Ruby: The number says 2018 as a part of that. So I'm assuming --
Lorcher: Okay. So, 2018.
Ruby: Yes.
Lorcher: And are all the single family homes already built?
Ruby: No. No. There is -- you know, the -- the neighbors probably can attest better than
me. About half.
Lorcher: About half.
Ruby: It looked pretty empty when I went out there.
Lorcher: Oh, you have another phase to go for single family houses?
Ruby: Two. Yeah.
Lorcher: Two or three.
Ruby: I believe so, yeah.
Lorcher: Okay.
Ruby: Yeah.
Lorcher: All right. Just curious. Thank you.
Ruby: Yeah. Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Grace?
Grace: Mr. Chairman, I had a -- Dave, I just had a question about the storage units. What
-- can you just elaborate a little bit on the storage units and what those are and -- and --
Ruby: If you -- Stacy or Bill, would you mind going to one of the exterior elevations? They
are attached to the backs of the units and they have -- they have a roll-up door. So, a lot
like people would have out the back of their garage to their yard. Can you zoom -- can
you zoom in on any of that? Is that possible or is that high tech? The -- the bottommost
elevation that you are seeing is the rear and, Bill, you can kind of see the door. They are
fairly large. So, they are per unit right attached -- right next to their patio.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 21 of 51
Grace: And, then, if I'm mischaracterizing this tell me, but are -- for lack of a better way
to say it, are you getting credit for the second amenity for something that's already there?
Ruby: That's one way to put it. And I -- I guess I'm going to bring it up now even though
I wasn't going to, because we have had -- staff and I had a disagreement and we have a
staff attorney here, so I would love to know what the true legal basis is, because as
someone on the outside of that world -- I'm the architect-- I read through the development
agreement, which told me which amenities the entire development had to have. It
specifically told me how I calculate parking for a multi-family development. Told me all of
that. That was a few years ago. So, when I'm going through it, the difference in opinion
we had is do you ignore all that that's in a legally binding development agreement or to -
- to use the current recently updated parking counts, open space calculations, that sort of
thing, does that trump a legally binding development agreement? Which the reason I
bring that up is because all the amenities were supposed to be shared and so we wouldn't
have to provide any.
Grace: Okay.
Ruby: That's my point. So, we opted to not try to pick a fight about that language with
staff and we --when they had those discussions about the amenities, the shared dog park
being something they just voluntarily built with -- and it sounded like staff was okay with
that. Let's proceed with that. So, I wasn't even going to bring that up, but to answer your
question, because I -- I'm -- I'm not trying to -- that kind of sounds bad when you are like,
oh, yeah, we are trying to take credit for something that's already there, but --
Grace: So -- so -- I and -- in my mind I -- I can understand. What you are saying, then,
that it was your understanding that -- that it would be a shared amenity and you could use
it in this nature in this way.
Ruby: Probably the -- the better way is it was my understanding that we were required to
provide zero amenities. They were already required -- and as a part of the development
agreement, which we did. This multi-family lot was not required to provide anymore and
it didn't say provide them per the UDC for multi-family standards. It lumped everything
together. If that makes any sense. Sorry.
Seal: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean as -- as we go through this -- and that might be
something that we work on in the code to better structure that, but generally speaking,
especially when we see something like multi-family, we want it to stand on its own. I
mean I'm -- I'm just -- you know --
Ruby: I -- and I don't agree with that, Mr. Chairman, but what is confusing is it doesn't
just say meet the parking requirements -- and I'm using parking because it's more
detailed. It literally says this is how you calculate it and it doesn't follow that paragraph -
- and this is the development agreement I'm talking about -- with language that says or
as modified in the future. It's -- it's a contract. So -- so, is everything else. I think it's a
difference of the world I'm working in day to day versus city staff; right? They are reading
it through their lens. I'm reading it through mine. But I would love to know truthfully,
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 22 of 51
because it is no fun being told you didn't provide amenities when you thought you did
what you were supposed to do. We are not trying to get out of anything, we are just --
Seal: Yeah. I mean I can't speak to it legally, but I mean as I look at this piece of property
I would hope that you would be able to enjoy amenities without having to cross the street.
That's my point.
Ruby: Well, the true goal of this is it's not -- it's not a big multi-family that just happens to
be out on the street in front of the subdivision. It's part of this neighborhood. It just is
both ways. I mean it's very small. I mean if it was bigger we would probably have a pool
that could be shared. It's not. It's 19 units, so --
Seal: Okay. Bill, do you want to offer anything? I mean, you know, I -- I would like to
hear the -- the other -- you know. Or more information on that as far as how the -- the
legality of it occurred. I mean if you want to pile in on that I'm -- I'm more than fine hearing
from either one of you, because I am not an expert in this.
Parsons: I'm happy to chime in on -- on some of that topic and, then, Kurt, if he wants to
weigh in on it he's more -- he's -- he can do that as well. So, that -- that's -- that's where
I think staff and the applicant are in agreement. It's gray. That -- and that's -- because
when -- when you guys approved -- or recommended approval -- or the city approved
Stapleton in 2018, the concept plan showed 28 multi-family units. As part of our review
of the annexation and we had to make findings how do we get them compliant with the
density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. We worked with the applicant. They
threw on this token multi-family development to try to increase the density on the particular
property and we -- they weren't ready to submit a conditional use permit at that time. So,
when staff analyzes that and you see that in the -- in the body of the staff report, it's -- it's
generalities. It's not thou shall do this. When we are looking at it. We are like keep in
mind when you come forward think about these things. Parking is -- open space and
parking always drives the design for multi-family and I know David can attest to that,
because he does a lot of projects in this valley for this. He's got the niche on this, so he
understands our standards very well. In this particular case -- and this is what I have told
the developer-- is you got caught where you had an entitlement and, then, code changed.
So, now -- so, right now as an example we have a -- a screen here in front of you -- when
we look at it it says very clearly to us that everything will be evaluated with a future
conditional use permit. However, when I go to the development agreement all it says is
you need a conditional use permit. It didn't say you need to comply with the specific use
standards. So, that's where I can side with both the applicant and I can side with us
saying, yeah, we didn't -- we weren't specific enough to say that the multi-family
development needs to do X, Y and Z. All we did was conceptually approve it for a multi-
family development in the future and now we are here tonight to debate or arbitrate what
we think is appropriate. So, looking at the letter of the law, if-- that's why I said if you feel
like the intent was there and the intent was always there to integrate these two things,
then, that's one thing. But, again, it's a conditional use permit and it's your purview if you
still feel -- to make it in the best interest of the community to have additional amenities for
this development. That's your purview tonight. So, that's why we really put it on you. I -
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 23 of 51
- I'm comfortable -- that's why I said I'm comfortable either way. All the amenities in a
residential subdivision -- you have to walk to them unless you live right -- right next to
them; right? So, again, that was the intent here. Yes, it's -- is it a perfect situation? No.
But I think all of us are learning -- kind of going through this and saying we need to
reevaluate that, because if we truly wanted something different, then, we truly should
have said we want it -- the multi-family to have its own amenities and open space. And
to your point they really should stand alone. It -- but it should still integrate. So, that's --
again -- and, then, just the fact that the CC&Rs showed that it was -- that integration did
occur, I -- I think there is kind of -- I could see it both ways I guess and that's why I say
it's gray. I don't -- and that's why we will leave it up to you guys on how you guys want to
go with it. But to me I -- again, it was always one development and they added it at the
request of staff to make sure that we got additional density. And the fact that they reduced
the density, again, I think they are trying to, again, help integrate a little bit better into the
community.
Seal: Okay. I appreciate that, Bill.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: So, if the conversation is revolving around amenities as a standalone multi-
family development of 19 units, is your client amiable of putting in a tot lot and a dog park
to be able to accommodate, so that those things are withhold -- I mean you have plenty
of space since you went from 28 units to 19, so there should be plenty of open space to
be able to have your -- even though the community is integrated with the entire thing, but
if I'm in the unit at the front of the development and the dog park is all the way at the other
end, you know, it -- it might be not necessarily a challenge, but it would be -- it would be
inconvenient. But if there was something closer where all the buildings clustered, then, I
feel like, well, now I'm part of my little community in front, even though I'm part of a bigger
one. Does that makes sense? So, would your client be an amiable to possibly putting in
a couple more amenities?
Ruby: Madam Commissioner, you put me in a tough spot. My client -- and when I shared
the staff report -- is completely adamant that this was all agreed upon up front and he --
I'm trying to walk a finer line, a more compromising line, because he -- just his memory
and his stance of being a part of it was -- and he told me this from day one, actually, and
I -- I think I brought it up in the --the --the pre-app -- is -- because I thought it was strange.
No amenities. No open space; right? Because that's -- that's -- and that's where I start.
And so it -- and to answer your question specifically, I don't -- I mean I could put a token
tot lot, like -- but I couldn't fit a real amenity with the open space that I have to get, even,
though we did reduce the numbers, because I did that calculation yesterday, drew them
out, and it eats up the space pretty good, actually. Just a final --just a little comment on
the -- the -- I guess part of his adamant -- the reason he is so adamant about that is -- he
was like, well, why do we have a DA then? Because that's --from a developer standpoint
-- and I'm not a developer, I'm just an architect. But it helps mitigate some of their risk. It
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 24 of 51
takes some of the unknowns away, so that as they move forward -- and it's not black and
white, because, obviously, that's like the last project times change and you have to adapt
a little bit. But some of the risk goes away. So, that's kind of the question is which one.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: So, two questions. One to make sure -- so, as I'm understanding the previous
development there are two dog parks and those are the two amenities. Or is there one
dog park?
Ruby: Mr. Commissioner, in the -- in the phase -- I don't know which phase, but in the
single family subdivision I understand there is a large dog park and, then, a -- I think it's
a half acre community park with tot lot, climbing dome -- yeah, there is a whole list. It's a
pretty substantial park and it's also fenced. Yeah. There is a basketball court. And I was
told to make sure -- to mention that it's fenced, so that parents can sit with their kids and
not worry about them just darting out into the road. But those were not -- that's -- that's
the only reason I can kind of in good conscience even come up and propose that is it was
not part of those -- those amenity package at all. I don't know if it was a corner just
happened to be right across from this that was available. I don't -- I'm sorry, I don't know
the history of that as well.
Smith: Okay. Thank you. And my next question is -- I did want to confirm -- it sound -- I
believe I heard Stacy -- this is -- this is part of -- there are additional phases expected or
is there additional -- like a multi -- larger multi-family development?
Ruby: Not -- not -- Mr. Commissioner, not in Stapleton. These 19 units are the large -- it
-- it -- I mean as we are all growing it's to our west. I believe there is plans for a much
larger --
Smith: But that's not --
Ruby: No, it has nothing. No. Different client. Different everything.
Smith: Okay.
Ruby: Yeah. That -- that was -- that was my concern was less -- the way -- the way that
I was thinking was less about -- we are kind of straddling the line here, but I wanted to
make sure it wasn't going to be --okay, there is another 19 units and that's what's included
in that. That was my concern, so --
Ruby: No.
Smith: Okay. Thank you. That helps.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 25 of 51
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, if I could just let you know also Mr.
Ruby doesn't know all the entitlements out there, but there -- and some of you are newer
commissioners and you don't know all the history out there either, but you are correct
there is a 200 plus unit multi-family development that potentially could come down the
road in the future and, then, as part of those residential developments that have been
approved in that section the developer was required to give a certain amount of land
towards the dedication of a city park in that area. So, I just -- I just wanted to put that out
there, too, that there will be a public amenity out there for the residents to use and that
will come in the future when those developments start happening and final plats come in
and those pieces get put together and the park gets built out there. But I think it was a --
I can't remember if it was a neighborhood park or a community park, but I think pretty --
pretty nice amenity happening in the future.
Ruby: I think I heard about that in the pre-app, too. Yeah. Much larger.
Seal: Quick -- quick question for staff. Lone Pine Way that's ACHD's road; correct?
Hersh: Mr. Chair, yes, that is.
Seal: And to be honest, the -- the only heartburn -- and I -- I get it that -- I mean different
parts of subdivisions share all the amenities and everything, but we have had issues in
the past where people have to cross a busy road to get from, you know, where they live
to their amenities, so -- and where this is -- you know, the entire thing is basically on the
entrance and exit to the subdivision, I just -- I -- you know, I hesitate for the safety of
people that have to cross that street in order to get to the -- you know, to the different
amenities that they are there. So, is there something that can be done in order to help
mitigate that? And I pose that question to staff and the applicant as well as far as, you
know, can -- can there be a signalized crossing put in there or something along those
lines? So, you know, when kids, families, you know, moms pushing strollers or dads
pushing strollers, for that matter, you know, want to go over and enjoy, you know, the
park-like setting that's over there, can they get there safely.
Ruby: Mr. Commissioner, my only comment would be -- and I'm not trying to make light
of it, but I -- I think a majority of the houses in the subdivision will have to go further to go
to any park or dog park and these folks to walk to that one dog park -- if that's kind of
where we are focusing and crossing streets -- I mean I think one of the things that we --
we did -- we didn't do because we couldn't, because the fence was already up, but Caleb
was actually asking for a connection north to that future city park, which there probably
will be a crosswalk of some kind at some point, but nobody knows when that's coming in.
The fence is already built, so we didn't -- we were trying to focus everything inward. I --
don't -- I mean I as the applicant and his agent don't have the authority to agree to like
put a tot lot on here. You definitely do have the authority to require that if that's what you
think we need to do. I just can't. Because he's told me -- I asked him what stance do you
want me to take and he's just -- he firmly believes that the DA did not require any of that
and that it can't be added at this point.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 26 of 51
Seal: Okay. I mean I find it interesting he's willing to die on his sword for something like
that, but at the same time I get it, so --
Ruby: And I -- I -- I probably should be quiet, because I shouldn't be putting words in his
mouth. I don't know if it was e-mailed and text discussion, so --
Grace: Mr. Chairman?
Seal: Go ahead.
Grace: I'm getting the sensation that we may hear from -- opinions from neighbors and
before we do that I wanted to ask you what kind of conversations, if any, do you -- are
you aware of that have occurred, whether related to the amenity in particular or anything
else from your perspective?
Ruby: Mr. Commissioner, I received two e-mails out of the letters that we had sent out.
I think they were both from neighbors of the subdivision that's north and a little bit west
and they were -- they had really nothing to do with amenities or unit, it just was all about
traffic. Just issues with traffic, which, again, I plead the Fifth a little bit. I don't know that
area as well. I spent more time out there during the neighborhood meeting just to try to
get familiar with it, but there was nothing about amenities or -- and I have not heard
anything since.
Seal: Okay. If nothing further I think we will move on to public comment portion. Thank
you, sir.
Ruby: Thank you.
Seal: Joy, do we have anybody signed up?
Hall- Mr. Chair, we do. And let's start with Mary Scheller.
Seal: Good evening. I will need your name and address for the record, please.
Scheller: My name is Mary Scheller. My address is 4220 South Chesman Avenue. I'm
one of the residents in the Stapleton community. My husband and I bought our home in
August of 2022. We like the neighborhood as it was quiet. Currently there is a lot of
construction traffic, but once that stops the only traffic in the community would be from
homeowners and visitors to the homeowners. This is a nice -- there is a nice community
park. This was the appeal for us to buy a Black Rock home in a community where we
did. We were never informed, nor was it disclosed to us prior to buying our property that
there was going to be a multi-family apartment building in our subdivision. We had -- had
that been the case we would not have bought in that --we wouldn't have bought our home
there. If you look up the Stapleton community it states the following: Black Rock Homes.
Stapleton embodies a nice mix of highly sought after two story and single family homes
in Meridian, Idaho, featuring a community park with open space and playground,
community dog park, walking paths. Centrally located with great access to the interstate.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 27 of 51
The plat maps that I looked at -- that we looked at when we bought the property has four
phases. We are in the first phase. They are just now starting the second phase. So,
they have phase two, they have phase three and they have phase four to go and that
doesn't even include this multi-family development. We did not see that on our plat maps.
I have -- this was the original plat map that I did look up, because I noticed on the
information that, yeah, homeowners all shared with one another. This is the original plat
map. This does not in the common land, looking at this, does not show anything about a
multi-family apartment complex. It also -- if you look up this Stapleton community
currently it shows you the plats available, which, again, doesn't show the multi-family.
This one I just pulled up. This one is from July 8th. Today is the 20th. So, 12 days ago.
Again, this looks like --this is where I'm guessing that the multi-family apartment complex
is supposed to go, but to us the common person -- this looks like trees and landscaping.
It doesn't show anything -- and it was never disclosed to us that we -- it's supposed to be
a multi-family unit there. Now, we did get the CC&Rs after we signed all of the final
paperwork and I have -- we went around to our neighbors and this many people signed
that, again, had they known that there was going to be a multi-family sub -- a multi-family
building there they would not have bought or they would have -- they are voting no to do
the apartment -- the multi-family complex, because there are literally two ways in our
subdivision. You come in off of Meridian Road and, then, we happen to live -- we happen
to live right here and if you go -- you have to go up this road and this is where the multi-
family unit is going to be. So, this is one exit and the other exit the -- is right here. You
have literally two exits. All the rest are residential streets and where they want to put this
multi-family -- the dog park -- right here is where they want to put the multi-family unit.
Right here is the dog park and right next to that is the community park. So, there -- if they
are doing three --
Seal: You will need to wrap up here pretty quick.
Scheller: Okay. If they are doing three bedrooms, those families with those little kids are
going to be walking all the way down here just to go to the park. So, I would say vote no
on it, but -- and you are going to hear from a lot of other homeowners who are going to
tell you the same thing, because they were never--we were never informed that that was
in there. Yes, it could have been in the CC&Rs, like he said, but we didn't get those until
after we already signed the final paperwork. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you.
Hall: We have a Natalie -- and I won't even try your last name. Sorry.
Knighton: Good afternoon -- or good evening, everyone. Mr. Commissioner. Committee
Members. Staff. My name is Natalie Knighton. I am a new resident in the Stapleton
community, so --
Seal: Your address, ma'am.
Knighton: I'm sorry?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 28 of 51
Seal: We will need your address, ma'am.
Knighton: 4193 South Chesman. Right next to Mary.
Seal: Thank you.
Knighton: So, this developer sounds like a gem. So, David --
Seal: Ma'am, can you speak into the microphone.
Knighton: Oh. I'm sorry. I said the developer sounds like a gem. So, I appreciate David
coming and falling on the sword for him. So, I stand before you today strongly opposing
this multi-family unit complex and our peaceful housing unit. While I understand the need
for urban development and this particular project proved -- I'm sorry. I'm going to have to
wear my old lady glasses. This particular project poses significant concerns that we
cannot afford to ignore. First and foremost is the addition of this complex undoubtedly
will lead to increased traffic congestion as you heard Mary say. If you are not familiar
with our road you should go out and try to pull out on Meridian Road. You take your life
into your own hands. Okay? It's pretty uncomfortable.
Seal: If people in the audience can keep their comments down. Thanks.
Knighton: So, it also compromises our safety. So -- so, there are two exits, as Mary said.
The first one coming out on Harris, which you can turn left at our own risk and the second
one we cannot turn left, we have to go up and make a U-turn. So, imagine adding another
59 cars plus to that process. Very congested. So, really this is going to create a
tremendous traffic jam and also be humanly treacherous. Moreover, a construction
project with a complex like this will have an adverse effect on our environment. In addition
to the concrete and the infrastructure, it will disturb the aesthetic balance as described in
the homeowners website about where we live and why we bought here. Furthermore --
and it -- allowing the complex next to our housing development will significantly lower
property values, as you all know. I'm interested in how many of you have a complex in
your communities or how many of you would purchase your home in the community if you
had known, as we did not, that this was coming. Of course, David and probably many of
you would have been smart enough to know where to find that information, but we were
not and it was never mentioned. So, as a personal testimony -- I don't know if you are
familiar with Hazelwood Village, but I just sold a beautiful home there. Do you know why?
Because they put a multi-family apartment complex in. Okay. I sold my home. And
loved my home. So, I was sick to my stomach when I heard this. Our housing
development was built with a vision of fostering a close knit and serene community. In
addition, the larger complex might disrupt this harmony and potentially leading to noise
disturbance, privacy issues and a sense of overcrowding. I am curious about what the -
- the study is on crime increasing as well, because I'm certain, as I heard in my other
neighborhood, I lived kitty corner to a policeman who told his ten year old daughter -- she
could no longer walk alone in our neighborhood when the apartment complex came in.
Okay. So, you might look at us -- a lot of us have gray hair. We came here to sunset;
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 29 of 51
right? So, we are not very thrilled about having to share our community with folks who
may come in from a larger city may not respect our peace and our values here. So, there
are certainly-- there is certainly a need for housing in our community, but have we known
I personally and many of us here would not have purchased our home, put our life savings
into this development. I want to retire here. If this passes I will reconsider. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Joy?
Hall: Georgia --
Konkoly: Put my timer on here.
Seal: Good evening, ma'am. We will need your name and address for the record. If you
just want to grab the microphone and speak into it, please.
Konkoly: Georgia Konkoly. 3790 South Lone Pine Avenue. I'm a resident of Oakwood.
I'm here to give you a reality check. I don't know if any of you live in this area. It's very
dangerous to make a left-hand turn on Meridian Road. It's a 55 mile an hour speed limit.
Most people go 60 and 65. The only access -- we have already heard -- through to
Meridian. There is also another one. If they back up and they go down Kentucky Way,
which is our area. And I -- I'm -- I'm up at 6:00 o'clock. I'm out of my house at 6:30. 1
swim every morning for an hour. I have to go -- if I go straight down Victory and I want to
make a left turn with a light, I have to take my life in my hands, because people just run
through the red lights on -- on Meridian Road. It's -- it's standard. If I'm the first car I give
it ten seconds before I hit my gas to make sure that I can get across free. I go on Stoddard
Road up to Overland and it's a bigger cross and I still give it ten seconds. I come back to
my house about 8:15 in the morning. The traffic on Meridian Road is so backed up people
have to wait for two, sometimes three lights to get through a light going north and south.
It's not even giving those people a chance to get out. And I had another point -- I'm sorry.
I'm 78. I'm losing my -- my thoughts. I'm -- I'm totally against this, because our -- our
area is a very sweet quiet area. It's a wonderful place to live. Everybody gets along.
There is no hassles. We help our neighbors out. And I don't want to be really negative
about apartment dwellers. I was one for sometimes in my life. But they don't have the
homeowner spirit and they don't take care of things the way homeowners do. Yeah, you
have got landscapers, but you have also got people who don't watch their kids necessarily
and people going on a 25 mile an hour speed limit going 30 and 35. That's on Kentucky
Way where I have to make my right turn to get -- get -- to get down to Victory Street. It's
going to be crazy. They are building another -- what -- they said they were going to build
between 140 and 200 homes west of Stapleton. How are we -- how are we even going
to get our cars out? It's crazy. I -- I urge you to vote no on this. Please. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you.
Hall: Ruth Brogdon.
Seal: Good evening, ma'am.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 30 of 51
Brogdon: Good evening, Chair, Commissioners, staff and attendees. Before you start
my time I did have one house cleaning thing I would like to ask. If we had a technical
difficulty where -- we had a lot of other people that would have come here if they knew
they could not attend by Zoom -- who really wanted to share their concerns with you this
evening and many couldn't make last minute -- I have already had texts -- couldn't make
last minute childcare et cetera because our technical things did not work. So, I would
implore you, besides my comments, to at least give them an opportunity to e-mail after
this hearing, because they are disenfranchised by not being able to speak when they had
planned to, but we had a -- we understand you had some technical difficulties, but I don't
think we can just say, well, if you can't get down here they can't -- they may not even be
able to hear you. They may not be able to get on to even listen and you don't have any
phone lines open now. So, I would just ask that that would be the fair thing to do. Number
one. Number two, my name is Ruth Brogdon. I am a resident at 103 West Norwich
Street. I purchased my home just in March. As you have already heard, we saw a
Stapleton block that looked like a -- no one ever said a word Stapleton Apartments. I
have never heard it before. I wouldn't even know now. I never-- none of us ever received
letters. We never received any postcards. What we saw this week or last week was a
posting by somebody on our mailboxes that said did you know this was happening? Here
is information. Go look on the city site. That's how we found out about it. So, that's a
concern. Also as you have already heard, I'm concerned about this approved permit in
2018, because what I also heard is that you are able, because you did not have a new
open space study, a traffic design, it was a conceptual idea that you would have the right
to say no to this from what I can see. Also I -- I purchased based on the plans that I saw
that didn't show any kind of apartment buildings, no Staples -- we have a -- we have a
name of Stapleton, which are homes and now there is going to be -- Stapleton is going to
be known as these, you know, all these apartments and things. So, that was another
thing. We -- has there been an updated traffic flow study for all of these apartment
conditions? When was the last traffic study done? You have already heard -- I have
never seen anything like trying to turn left there on Harris or trying to go through all the
construction we can hardly -- I already have two brand new tires with holes in them trying
to go through the back construction way as she's talking about, down Kentucky. Either
way you are taking your life in your hands, because you can't even get through that street
and we don't have -- like we have already said, we have hardly any of our single family
homes finished in the other phases. We haven't even gotten to these multiple -- you
know. And how do we know how many cars will be coming out of there, how many drivers
will be in each three bedroom unit et cetera. So, none of this was explained to us. The
other thing is -- is my concern also is that a light is desperately needed somewhere there
and here is the thing I heard you in the last conditional use permit. So, we make a plan
ten years ago or five years ago here, we don't have the street structure and process yet
or we don't know whether it's going to be. But, of course, you are approving a future plan
and you don't know what the situation is going to be. All these homes that are built out
already are going out and you have to get through these lights on -- but, then, you are
going to say, well, this developer, for whatever reason, we didn't have COVID in 2014.
We didn't have COVID in 2018. So, for whatever reason they get to just wait ten or 20
years and say, hey, we get the old plan we can still buy that traffic -- not by the reality of
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 31 of 51
what the citizens are living through now and we haven't got to here yet. So, that's another
issue. If -- if the planners did -- made these decisions on prior traffic patterns, how can
you not make them update these plans now and go through another process? The last
thing is, you know, we bought these things with a builder and with what we could see
which was not this apartment situation and so now we have paid our money, we -- and
we count on you, the Commissioners, we count on you to find an alternative area without
these existing approved plans that we were not privy to, to protect our property values,
protect our traffic situation and safety. We would ask that you say no to this conditional
use permit. We appreciate that this is not good use of land when you are going to further
impede traffic and cause many more issues. I noticed that also it was said that technology
issues weren't addressed. So, I would like to ask you to vote no. And I would also like to
know -- we keep talking about this person. What's the name of the client -- we should be
able to know who that is. What builder? We have a lot of builders out there. What's the
name of the builder that is wanting to do this and did not share this information? Thank
you.
Seal: Thank you.
Hall: Linda Stevens.
Stevens: Good evening, Commissioners. I am Linda Stevens and I live at 3900 South
Lone Pine Avenue and I wanted to also -- not to beat a dead horse, but the road
infrastructure. I'm always wondering why builders do not get permits for the infrastructure
when they build homes. At the end of Harris Road there are 200 KBH road -- KBH homes
going in there and that's in back of Stapleton. I know that Stapleton has about a hundred
homes, so that's 300 homes that go in and out of Harris Street, which is only a two lane
road and at least -- everybody I know has at least two cars. So, that's 600 additional cars
already that are going to be going back and forth on Harris Road. Needless to say with
more Stapleton apartments and more townhouses going in it just increases the traffic so
much. I also wanted to address the -- it seems silly the dog park issue on Stapleton. I'm
well aware that the people that live in Stapleton -- and no offense to any of you -- they
bring their dogs over to our dog park, which is clearly for our subdivision. They let their
dogs run rampant and they do not pick up dog stuff. So, an additional dog park would
only be great. But when you addressed earlier, Mr. Seal, about your traffic concerns,
about the project that -- at Jump Creek that was approved ten years ago, the -- I just can't
imagine the traffic and I wish that ACHD would have to approve building permits before
they allow builders to put two and three hundred homes in when there is not adequate
roads to go in and out. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Madam Clerk?
Hall: There is no one else signed up, sir.
Seal: Who else would like to come up and testify? Sir?
Johnson: Good day, everyone. My name is Mitchell Johnson. I live at 162 West Haniken
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 32 of 51
Street in the Stapleton community. First thank you so much for staying so late this
evening to hash this out. I have lived there since March, like my neighbor there. And like
them I only heard of this Monday of this week. When we were buying none of this was
mentioned. Nothing like this was disclosed when they were describing the future plans
of the community. They told us about phase one that was finished. Phase two, three and
four that were coming up and like my neighbor said they are currently in the beginning of
phase two. I was looking at the Stapleton plat map for available lots. Currently the map
shows this area of land, but it is not labeled as any kind of future development. It's totally
blank, so to speak. Which in my mind would lead potential buyers to believe that nothing
will actually be there, unless, you know, some sort of notice was given. The 200 houses
are planned in this area. Probably 30 to 40 are built right now. So, that's potentially, you
know, 70 more buyers who, under the status quo would not be aware of this upcoming
development that's planned. I understand that, you know, builders and developers have
an incentive to, you know, maintain house values so they can sell and currently, since our
community is still under development, the developer is still head of the HOA board, which
is fine, but they -- you know, they already nitpick on very minor things that we do to our
houses in order to maintain their image, maintain house values, which is fine, but the fact
that they are not disclosing this development to people gives them an unfair advantage
during the buying process for negotiation; right? They can keep the house prices high
without us knowing what's going to go in next door. You know, empirically vicinity to
apartments does drive house prices down. Had we known about this, like my neighbors,
we would have absolutely thought twice about buying in this neighborhood, especially
given that, you know, we are in an era of record house prices for this valley and they are
likely not going to go back down much, probably going to go much higher. So, I don't
want to accuse anyone of deliberate deception, but this is very concerning to me as, you
know, a longtime resident of this valley and a new resident of the Stapleton community.
I think the traffic issue has been addressed quite thoroughly. I would like to know if there
is a recent traffic study, especially if it accounts for the, you know, 70 more houses in
Stapleton and probably about -- actually, sorry, 170 more houses in Stapleton, as well as
KB homes and also why was it not mentioned or labeled in the -- you know, Stapleton
plat so that people could see, you know, what are you planning with this community that
the developer clearly owns together, especially if it was, you know, planned initially in
2018 and they are planning to share amenities with the community that is clearly labeled
with the community that is not labeled on the map. So, thank you very much. Appreciate
it.
Seal: Thank you, sir.
Hall: Mr. Chair, there is no one else online, but may I add to the record that if people
would like to get their comment on record in the file they can comment us -- I mean e-
mail us at comment@meridiancity.org.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Ma'am.
Helms: Hi. My name is Karen Helms.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 33 of 51
Seal: Just before you -- thanks.
Helms: Karen Helms. I live at 469 West Oak Springs Drive in Oakwood Estates. Our
house backs up to Harris Road, which is where the apartments are going to be. So, they
are going to be directly across from my backyard and I guess I wasn't planning on talking
tonight, so I don't have anything to read from, but I can tell you that I have lived there for
five years in Oakwood. I did attend the meeting when Stapleton was being discussed
and I don't remember anything being said about apartments and if that were the case I
probably would have sold my house by now, because they are -- again they are going to
be right behind me on Harris Road and we have had to put in -- or felt like we have had
to put in security cameras now because of the apartments being leased, not being owned,
and I guess -- yeah. Traffic trying to get off of Harris Road onto Meridian -- we are right
in between Victory Road and Amity and those have stoplights. So, I can't imagine anyone
approving another stoplight at Harris, because, you know, that would be three very close
stoplights in a row. But it's extremely dangerous to try to get out and make a left turn onto
Meridian. People are flying down Meridian Road to Kuna and that traffic has just -- it's
not -- practically nonstop to try to get out onto Meridian Road now and make a left and I
guess the other main thing I just wanted to say is that when you -- when you buy in a
community that's houses you don't expect thereto bean apartment complex. I think when
you buy or lease an apartment complex and you know there is other -- you know,
apartments around you, you expect that and everybody's there for the same, you know,
reason. But when you buy in a subdivision like we did and all the people who live in
Stapleton right now, you just -- I just don't believe that's a place to stick apartments. It
should stay houses and as you all discussed in the previous review to give an alternative
is to just put more houses there. I understand the builder wants to make money and they
want to pack in as many people and units as they can, but I think to preserve our
community and Stapleton and all the other subdivisions that are going in right around us,
it should just stay homes. Single story and -- and second story homes I mean. That's
the only thing that I feel is appropriate to be put there. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Ma'am?
Rogers: Good evening. Thank you so much for staying and hashing this out with us.
Like they said earlier my name is Cameo Rogers. I live at 4253 South Chesman Avenue.
I'm a resident at Stapleton. I was not planning on talking either, but I did want to mention
that it was not disclosed. I -- I'm hearing now it's in the CC&Rs. I probably should have
read that better, but it was not disclosed when we bought our homes. 1, too, probably
would not have bought in the subdivision. But what I really wanted to touch on is I am a
first responder here. I have been a first responder for 20 years and I have a huge concern
for the traffic. There are already a lot of accidents on Meridian Road as is and to turn off
of Harris what people haven't mentioned is across Meridian Road there is also another
street that turns on to Meridian. You can turn -- it goes into another subdivision. So, if
you pull out into the median -- and I have seen this happen numerous times -- other cars
coming to turn there are in that wanting to turn left into their subdivision as we are trying
to turn left out onto Meridian Road. I have a huge concern for the accidents that can
occur. We have to go through a subdivision to get to Victory to be able to use the light
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 34 of 51
and as they said people do U-turns at Amity, but Amity is not a U-turn signal. So, again,
it's there -- the traffic there is very dangerous. So, thank you for your time. That's all
really wanted to address.
Seal: Thank you very much. Ma'am, come on up. Good evening. Just state your name
and address for the record.
C.Helms: Good evening honored commissioners and also honored guests. I didn't plan
anything either, but you can ditto me on all those people that spoke.
Seal: We will need your name and address.
C.Helms: Oh, I'm sorry. It's Charmaine Helms. 469 West Oak Springs Drive. I'm Karen's
mother. So, I have lived there since '18 also. I have only two issues. One would be the
apartments look right down in my bedroom. Of course I could keep my shades closed,
but, then, I like to see some sunlight and I like to see the yard. So, that's one issue.
Because we are right there where those apartments are going right in our backyard.
Secondly, Harris Street, that's going to be a bugger. When I'm laying in bed watching TV
every weekend I can hear all the hot rods, all the racers on Harris Street. Now, I can just
imagine -- they must think that's a -- a speedway or something. I can imagine when there
are so many more people and apartments, what that's going to be like. It's just like living
in the roadway. A speedway. So, that's -- that's all I have to say and I ditto everything all
these great people have said.
Seal: Thank you very much. Sir.
Stone: Good evening. My name is Steele Stone and I'm at 443 West Oak Springs Drive.
After listening to everybody's concerns here they pretty much said everything that I was
going to say. I had -- I took some notes and kind of wanted to just add some additional
points to each -- each one of the topics trying not to stress too much on them anymore.
Obviously traffic is a continuing thing you are hearing on Harris Road. Knowing that the
ACHD, with the other developments, KB Homes, L2, Stapleton and I believe one other
development, builders all jointly had to allocate money to improve Harris. ACHD just
completed that last year'ish. At that time they widened the road. They put sidewalks all
the way down. But they did absolutely nothing to address the fact that there is no safe
way to get onto Meridian Road in the four hours in the morning when there is heavy traffic
and the four hours in the evening when they are not there. So, as a precondition that you
would potentially put on them to improve with a streetlight to help mitigate this issue, it's
probably not going to happen given that they just redid the entire Harris Road. So, I just
wanted to put that out there as that's probably not going to be something that can be fixed
in any timely manner. As several of the people in Stapleton here that have represented
they have been misled, I have actually, since my home is actually -- if you can go to the
plat that shows the -- the -- actually, a little bit more of Harris. My house is directly behind
the entrance of Stapleton. So, I -- I am probably the most impacted home when it comes
to traffic, which we know is going to be hundreds of cars over the next three years as this
gets finished and, then, KB Homes right behind it gets finished as well. So, being -- so,
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 35 of 51
yeah, that's -- misled on having this multi-family complex here. I want to be the bad
person in the room and say that I did find in 2021 the claim that they actually were going
to put multi-family homes there and I did see a preliminary plat, but, then, when I tried to
pull it up in the last year and a half it has been removed and it went to this blank spot.
So, initially, I did see it when I first moved into my home, because I wanted to know it was
going there, but, then, it magically vanished from all of their drawings that they had
available online. So, that was kind of interesting. Let's see. Also to -- to mirror other
people's comments about apartments being right in the middle of single family homes,
there really are no apartments anywhere in the immediate area that we are. It would be
very random to just have these apartment complexes. I know it's not a huge facility that's
going in, but it's still -- I'm not sure if it really fits the space. Going back to tie in -- it's
actually not a hundred homes in Stapleton --
Seal: Sir, you will need to wrap up pretty quick.
Stone: Okay. It's 212 homes that are in Stapleton without the -- without the -- the multi-
family. The so-called amenity of a dog park is a joke. My border collie could take five
steps and be across it. It's not really a dog park. They just fenced it off and gave a two
way gate. The roll-up garage doors on the back of the home, that's really affecting curb
appeal. I mean when you are driving through there and you see that -- that's -- I mean it
doesn't look like it's going to be very appealing to look at. Obviously, reflect the reduced
value of-- of homes coming from this being put in. Also when this was approved most of
all the homes that exist there now did not exist. So, there was nobody to come and speak
on behalf of the approval -- pre-approval of this in 2018. Karen that spoke earlier, her
house was built right around that time. My house, which was the last part of her phase,
didn't finish until the end of 2020. So, really there was nobody here to speak on behalf.
And --
Seal: Sir, I'm going to have to cut you off. Wrap it up.
Stone: The solution is not to -- to deny it, but maybe change it to keep the same structure
that they have in Stapleton already, which everybody seems to like. And I don't think that
anybody would really have a concern with that if we were to just keep it the same that the
rest of the development is.
Seal: Okay. Thank you very much.
Stone: Thank you for your time.
Seal: Anybody else? Just raise your hand if you want to come up and testify. All right.
Seeing none, would the applicant like to come back up?
Ruby: David Ruby. 499 Main Street. I don't probably have a lot to rebut about most of
the comments, but I did want to clarify a couple things and I -- I seriously doubt it will sway
the public's opinion behind me, but I think it's good information regardless. The drawings
of the --the exterior elevations of the buildings and the floor plans are --will be developed
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 36 of 51
through the CZC process. What these are, just so you can kind of put it in your minds as
you deliberate, they are townhome style apartments. They are two stories. Each unit will
be two stories. So, you walk in the front door, you will have your living, kitchen downstairs,
bedrooms upstairs. They are only two stories. So, they are no taller than any other house
in the subdivision likely. I just wanted to again reiterate kind of our thoughts about the --
trying to follow through with the development agreement. It's a legally binding document
and that's what we are trying to follow. I'm a little -- one of the comments that was just
made that I'm kind of digesting as I'm standing here was the comment about changing it
to houses for one. I believe -- you can correct me if I'm wrong, but the city required the
density to be what it is and that's why there is apartments here in the first place. That
aside, a vast majority of the comments I heard about traffic and those concerns would be
almost identical with four or five homes with -- with 19 apartments. I mean it's not that
different. I mean -- and, you know, I go to a lot of these hearings and I -- I -- I -- there is
a lot of emotion involved and I'm a homeowner, too. I get it. I mean it -- this stuff is hard
and I -- I usually put out a little pitch that maybe somewhere in the universe someone will
pick it up and -- and educate realtors, because I see this a lot that the realtors do not
disclose this kind of thing and it just -- it leads to bad blood and people feeling like they
have been taken advantage of. That's my soapbox moment. Thank you.
Seal: All right. Thank you. Commissioners, any last questions?
Grace: Yeah. Mr. -- David --
Seal: Come on backup. Sorry.
Grace: Just a question. There seemed to be a theme running through a lot of the public
comments about being misled or not knowing. I'm just wondering if you have any
comment in response to that?
Ruby: Mr. Commissioner, I -- I'm probably a bad one to ask, because I do this for a living
and so I do dig into records and maybe I'm weird, because I do this for a living. But when
I built my last house I went searching and found the plats, found every building permit or
pulled whatever permit in the neighborhood. I would read the life story of the developer.
I -- I just -- similarly -- I mean people are invested in knowing what they live around and I
have been a little helpless in that, because as the architect I don't -- I mean, again, I don't
know -- I'm on one side of this world. That sounds like the sales side, whether that's a
realtor or developer -- I think in realtors -- so whether the developer-- sounds like a lot of
the misleading might be potentially the website -- or I don't know that. I just -- because
the plats I see show-- everything I have seen shows landscaping around here and it talks
about the -- the apartments -- more of them actually.
Grace: And that's where I was wondering if you could help me and -- and put it on -- out
for the public consumption -- is what is ground truth on when -- when -- when was it
publicly available that this was going to be multi-family?
Ruby: I believe when the previous --the annexation and the rezone we are going through.
That was part of it. It had to -- they had to designate up to 24 units to meet the density
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 37 of 51
requirement for this approval.
Grace: Do you know when that was?
Ruby: That's what-- I believe that's what the zone required. Getting a little bit to the edge
of my --
Parsons: Mr. -- Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission.
Seal: Ma'am, please keep your comments down in the gallery. Thank you.
Parsons: Yeah. As I testified earlier, you know, when this project came through we felt
it was a little underserved and we wanted a -- a more integrated, cohesive -- a mix of unit
types. This particular development has duplex style homes. It has single family homes
at one single story. It has two story homes and, then, now the developer is coming
forward with his third product type that he proposed with the original annexation in '18.
So, to Mr. Ruby's point, it is more of a townhome style development than a true multi-
family. Really more of a triplex, four-plex. It is a smaller neighborhood multi-family
development. The reason why we call it multi-family is because it's more than three units
on a single parcel. That's how our code is -- defines a multi-family development. But I
would let the neighbors probably know this already, but there is an R-40 piece of property
directly to the west of this piece that will have 200 plus units on it in the future and that's
owned by -- it's surrounded by KB residents. So, I hope they are aware of that as well,
because they are buying expensive homes in that -- that -- that development as well,
because I live in the area, so I'm very familiar with it as well, so -- and I wanted to speak
to a little bit about the light that -- the signal at -- at Harris. It's not an ACHD requirement,
it's an ITD requirement. They control the timing for that signal and at the time that
Stapleton came through the developer was required to pay -- pay their proportionate
share towards the installment of that signal. So, I don't have the timing for you as to when
that light is going to go in, but there will be lights there. I would -- we probably need to
get in contact with ITD and see when they anticipate that happening. In looking at the
public record, ITD said this property does not abut a state facility, which, again, the lot
doesn't, but the Stapleton development does and because of the number of units that
were involved, neither ACHD or ITD required an updated traffic study. I just wanted to go
on the record there that this is a -- this is a small development. I know how you feel. The
motions are -- are high. We get it. It was planned for. It's actually less than what was
planned for, to be honest with you. It was -- originally the concept plan showed 28 four-
plex units, if I'm not mistaken. This is 19 -- what, three and four-plex units. So, again, it's
-- it's -- Stacy and I analyze these things. Staff looks at it. We go through the contract.
We make sure everything is -- it's met. It's meeting the intent of the original approval. We
feel comfortable we did and that's why we recommended approval with -- with changes,
of course, with -- with conditions, but that's how it works in our world. We verify, we look
at past history, we make sure everything is in alignment with that and we make a
recommendation to you.
Seal: Thank you, Bill.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 38 of 51
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: Bill, question for you. I would wager the -- the 200 unit development would
warrant, you know, a traffic study by step one. Is there --just really roughly speaking. I
don't need an exact number. Is there kind of -- do you have any idea what that line is of
numbers of properties? For example, this is 19. If it were 20 would it have -- you know.
Or is it something more substantial?
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Smith, the threshold for
ACHD is typically a development with a hundred or more units is the threshold for them
in my experience.
Smith: Thank you. And, then, Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead.
Smith: Question for the applicant. So, one thing I have heard -- and I just kind of want to
figure out a little bit what the -- kind of -- kind of order of events has -- has been, for lack
of a better term. I believe -- so, I have heard a lot from the community that a lot of people
said, you know, I learned about this on Monday -- or, you know, I just learned about this.
But I believe you said at some point you sent out some sort of letters that got a-mails
back. Could you help me kind of square the two. What happened then?
Ruby: Mr. Commissioner, yes, we -- what we do is we -- we reach out actually to the city
who helps us with a special vicinity -- within like 500 feet of the outside property and they
have software that picks up every property that's touched by that and they actually send
us the labels and we draft a letter, which I think is included in the record and we invite
them to a neighborhood meeting. And that's when I said -- it was right after that -- two
days after that I received the two letters or e-mails, because I had my address on there
and, then, I went out and hung out at the site for an hour and nobody came.
Seal: Any questions?
Ruby: Which is what I'm required to do. I mean that --
Seal: Completely understood.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Sir, what -- what -- around what date was that, do you know?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 39 of 51
Ruby: I looked at it, it just says -- I think it's May 4th. Is that -- sorry. It's right here on
the -- I just saw it when I was sitting back in there, because I was -- yeah. May 4th. I was
like, wow, it's over two months.
Smith: Thank you very much.
Seal: All good? Okay. Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate it.
Ruby: Thank you.
Seal: With that I will take a motion to close the public hearing for File No. H--2023-0033
for Stapleton Apartments.
Starman: Mr. Chairman, before you do that let me -- I don't -- let me just take a minute to
brainstorm with the Commission collectively.
Seal: Absolutely.
Starman: So, there was a -- you made the announcement earlier of our technologies,
such as Zoom and you had at least one speaker address that issue as well. The
testimony received tonight at the public hearing that was conducted tonight complies with
state law and with the city code. So, you know, the Commission can close this hearing
and you can proceed with your action. I just want to make it clear to the audience in
particular, but for everybody that once the -- once you close the public hearing, however,
the record is closed and you are in deliberation. So, we are not able to accept additional
e-mails or telephone calls after that. That won't be part of your deliberation. I just want
you to be aware of that. You are -- that's perfectly fine within your purview and you are
able to close the hearing, but I just wanted you to be aware we are not able to accept e-
mails tomorrow morning, for example. So, if you wanted to be able to do that, the solution
would be to continue the public hearing and allow the hearing to stay open. But that's not
required. I just wanted to be clear on what your options were.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, do we have a --
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead.
Smith: I guess a question for Kurt -- and I guess for -- for Joy regarding if say someone
was, you know, planning on -- on attending via Zoom and they -- maybe they sent the
e-mail that Joy provided something. Would we be able to, I don't know, take a short
recess and then -- would that -- would we be able to have that in the public record, those
e-mails that just recently came in or is that kind of outside of the scope of normal
procedure?
Starman: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Smith, if I understood your question correctly
-- let me kind of paraphrase. Is your question can you take a brief recess, see if we have
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 40 of 51
received an e-mail, see if anyone wants to make -- or send an e-mail very quickly and,
then, you can consider that when you return from your recess. Yes, you can do that
before you close. But don't close it. If you want to do that don't close the public hearing
yet then.
Seal: Understood.
Lorcher: Or if we could close the public hearing and make a continuance, so that other
people can -- do we close the public hearing then and, then, do a continuance for other
people to comment?
Seal: We would leave -- a continuance comes as part of the public hearing process. So,
we would leave it --we would not close the public hearing, but we would do a continuance
during that. But -- and that's -- I guess my question to you is what -- I mean do you guys
feel that we need to continue -- and, you know, I can't make the motion, so you guys are
going to make the motion on this.
Starman: Maybe to help the Commission with that discussion out there, if the City Clerk
has additional information about this -- my recollection at least early that we only had two
people that attempted to even watch the proceedings via Zoom. We don't know if any of
them intended to even testify or not and they were notified that they could come to City
Hall. So, from a legal perspective you are fine. I don't know if we had any additional
people come on Zoom after that occurred.
Hall: No, we did not and no one has e-mailed me during the meeting.
Starman: So, that's just facts for -- to help you through discussion.
Seal: Okay. I understood.
Lorcher: I'm not really sure if, you know, the additional comments from the neighbors
would be any different than what we have already heard. It was a broad -- it was a broad
list of concerns and even if there were two more e-mails I think we have enough
information to make a decision.
Smith: I -- Mr. Chair. I tend to agree. I think it's just striking the balance of information
gathering on our end and, then, also just kind of allowing people to -- to say their piece
on their end. I -- I don't think I would be, you know, wanting to continue this to a future
meeting. But it's just a question if we want to -- say if there is someone who is just really
burning up, but they have to watch the kids, you giving them, you know, five, ten minutes
to -- to send something our way to -- you know, to -- to give that -- that's -- you know,
don't feel like very strongly one way or the other. That's just an option I wanted to just
surface in case. So --
Seal: Yeah. I mean the -- the two people that were on, one of them dropped off as soon
as the last hearing was done and so the other person very quickly thereafter. So, I don't
know that they were even on for this, to be honest. And no e-mails have been received.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 41 of 51
So, I mean -- I'm -- honestly I'm comfortable closing the public hearing on this one.
Lorcher: All right. So, in that case, Mr. Chair, I motion that we close the public hearing.
Seal: For File No. H-2023-0033?
Lorcher: Sounds good to me.
Seal: Do I have a second?
Grace: Second.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-
2023-0033. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay? Motion passes. The public hearing is
closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Starman: And, Mr. Chairman, can I interject one more time on --
Seal: Absolutely.
Starman: -- the topic that came up on a couple of occasions. The applicant in particular
brought up, that Mr. Parsons described as well as -- for this inter -- interplay between the
development agreement from 2018 and your proceedings tonight relative to the
conditional use permit. So, I don't have the benefit -- I didn't have the opportunity to
review the development agreement prior to tonight's meeting, because I wasn't aware this
would be a topic, but I was able to skim it as you were -- having receiving testimony and
-- so I don't have the benefit of looking at the entire record and I only had the time to
quickly review the development agreement, but my tentative -- I'm just going to give you
my initial thoughts on that. So, not a legal opinion per se. Preliminary thoughts. And that
is that I can understand why there is some -- may be some ambiguity here and why the
applicant may feel the way the applicant feels that I thought we had an agreement from
2018 and that's what's binding. I don't read the agreement that way and there is two
relevant sections that I just want to point out to the Commission. Well, three, actually, by
extension. The first condition is five -- that are relevant to our discussion is conditions 5-
G. This is site amenity. This is referring to the entire annexation and this includes all
phases, including the multi-family parcel or area you are talking about today, as well as
the other phases. The site amenities shall be provided within the development per those
described in Section 7.D. Comparable amenities as determined by staff may be
considered as substitutions. So, the applicant -- paraphrasing what Mr. Ruby had
mentioned earlier that -- I think the applicant is reading is that that is the maximum the
city can require. That's not what the language says. The language says you -- you will
build -- when you came to us to annex you said you were going to do certain things,
including certain amenities and this provision says you shall build those amenities. It
doesn't say that's -- that's the only thing you are ever going to be required to do. It says
basically you are going to do what you told us when you said you wanted to annex.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 42 of 51
Coupled with sub I, which is the other relevant section, says a conditional use permit is
required to be submitted and approved for the multi-family development prior to
application for certificate of zoning compliance and design review, which is what we are
doing tonight. By definition. The conditional use permit process, under state law and the
city code, the whole purpose of a CUP process is for you to provide conditions that
mitigate the impacts of the project. So, if that--that--that provision wouldn't make sense
unless it was intended to give you, the Commission and the city, the intent--the possibility
of applying conditions to mitigate negative impacts of this project. So, my conclusion just
within the four corners of the document and reading that language in a very sterile
attorney-like way, is that, you know, there is -- you have to -- the applicant is required
by this development agreement to build a minimum number of amenities and those are
specified in the document via an attachment. But it also says you have to do a certificate
-- conditional use permit for the multi-family and by definition that -- that means that the
Commission has the ability to apply conditions or place conditions that are needed to
mitigate the impacts. There is no other reason why that condition would be there. So, I
think you have the ability to do that. I will close by saying I understand the applicant's
perspective that, hey, we made a pitch in 2018 and it had these certain amenities. Our
impression was we will do that and we are good. So, I -- I understand that, but if I just
look at the -- at the sterile language of the document it doesn't say that necessarily.
Seal: Okay. And appreciate that input. Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I had a question for staff. In 2018 when this was annexed and rezoned and you
mentioned that in order to meet its density requirements. Multi-family housing had always
been a portion -- a part of this project. So, if the community is saying, yes, we want to
see it developed, but we would rather see single family housing, from a density standpoint
and city code, that's not -- it's not eligible, is it? It needs to be multi-family housing in
some capacity? And when we say multi-family housing -- a townhouse is a building like
a house, except it's super skinny and it's connected to two or three other ones together;
right? It's not a huge apartment complex where it's two stories and everybody has a
balcony. So, I think the perspective of what the unit looks like needs to be addressed
here as well, because if you have a two-story house it's just like your two-story house,
except it's super skinny and, then, the guy next to him doesn't have like a walkway in
between. They are connected. So, to carry out -- sorry, my little rant.
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, I -- I like this discussion tonight,
because it is to -- kind of the discussion tonight it's -- it's all discretionary; right? And I say
that because at the time that someone comes up with an annexation and a concept plan,
they don't have it fully vetted as to the open space, the amenities, the parking and so
that's why we add that condition -- come back and do a CUP, because that's where we
are checking for compliance with the multi-family standards and those things. So, even
though it was the intent possibly to get 28 units, the reality is when you look at the size of
the property and what code requires, it's not realistic to get that. So, that's why you see
a decrease in that density. So, there is always a little latitude in our code that says you
can reduce your density somewhat. So, when the developer came through there was
actually more -- and I -- I did go to the website for this development just to kind of look at
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 43 of 51
it -- it showed five buildable lots in that area -- in that corner. But it was probably their
intent at the time that they would build each one of those multi-family units on a separate
parcel. So, it looks misleading that it was going to be single family homes when, in fact,
the city had approved it conceptually as a multi-family development. So, today we are at
the reality that 28 units can't really fit on this property, unless they went vertical, you know,
three story apartments. So, again, what they are trying to do is turn the architect loose
and say design -- this is your parameters, here is your parcel, design us a multi-family
development consistent with our plan and David goes out and -- and digs into that. So,
yes, we have some wiggle room to manipulate some of that density, if you will, per the
code. So, when the final plat comes in the applicant has -- they may have showed five
multi-family lots here, they have the ability to show one, because the lot doesn't correlate
to density. The density is correlating to what you are acting on tonight and what's
specified in the development agreement. So, in this particular case you lose a few units
-- they may have made up some additional buildable lots elsewhere and it kind of
averages itself out. So, again, that's where Stacy and I come in, look at that, analyze that
and make sure that they are still being consistent with their conditions of approval and
their contract and that's where we landed tonight, that we find they are.
Lorcher: But one of the conditions we can't make is to change it to single family housing.
Parsons: That would require a modification to their plat and their -- their DA.
Lorcher: Okay.
Parsons: So, they would have to resub divide it or, essentially, do a five lot -- put five
single family homes on one parcel. Still meets the definition of multi-family, but to me that
wouldn't be the intent of the original agreement.
Lorcher: Okay. Thank you.
Starman: Mr. Chairman, if I could just add one additional thought, which is very similar
to your last hearing. That's essentially what was just discussed. But to Mr. Rudy's point
earlier in a different sense, there is a development agreement that applies to this property
that was done at the time of annexation. It contemplates multi-family explicitly in the
concept plan and elsewhere in the verbiage. So, there is a certain entitlement for this
property today. It's subject to a conditional use permit, but once --just like our last project,
we really don't, as a city, have the ability to say we changed our mind and don't build
anything or build something different. That's really not a possibility without incurring legal
liability for the city.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Grace.
Grace: Well, just -- just on that point, I want to make clear I think that -- I think the term
misled is a really hot button item here and while you may have been able -- while you
may have looked at the -- at maybe a map and thought something else, there seems to
be -- unless I'm wrong -- plenty of documentation and, you know, summary in the record
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 44 of 51
to demonstrate what this was always going to be and that's why I asked Mr. Ruby -- tell
me when it became public that this was going to be multi-family. I want to -- I would like
to know that, so that I can at least have some ability to say, well, it's been this way for
years and I understand the frustration from folks who don't have the time or maybe the -
- the expertise to look through a public record and -- and -- and the city files and things
and they believe that they -- this is not what they thought and I appreciate that, but that's
what I was trying to drill down on is it sounds like that's what it was going to be, though,
and so I -- this conversation I really appreciate the -- the back and forth.
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, if I could just give you a little bit more
history on this property and -- and to the residents, too, because I am definitely sensitive
to what -- what they have to say tonight. But, believe it or not, the developer actually
wanted to do all single family here and as part of our work with them and --we requested
that they add that multi-family component. So, I just -- I just want to go on the record that
that's something that we encouraged, planning staff did, as part of this project to -- to get
that density up a little bit more and get them in alignment to what -- what we thought was
appropriate on this particular property, so --and they--the developer put it there, because
they knew there was another R-40 piece next to it. So, they thought that made the
adequate transition and density as they transitioned to this single family. So, that's kind
of some more food for thought on -- on how this all kind of transpired and happened. But
to Commissioner Grace's point, this was always on the books from when it -- when it first
got noticed for public hearing in 2018 it was always disclosed that there was a multi-family
lot here.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Yeah. I just -- I think it's a transitory density as well. I think that was the word I
have been looking for. I think it's -- it's critical to remember that, hey, this is -- am I on?
Am I? Okay. All right. Just -- I will just have better microphone technique. Appreciate
that. There we go. Is that better? Okay. Awesome. Yeah. I -- I think it's -- it's just -- it's
critical to remember that there -- this is -- is zoned and -- and it's in the -- it's in the future
land use map as high density residential and I think, you know, that -- that transitory
density is helpful. I think that, you know, when there is going to be 200 homes in the
development to the west, 150 to 200 homes, something like that, it's helpful to have some
sort of, you know, lower density, high density residential -- you know, there is -- having --
having some kind of transitory where it slightly gets more dense over time -- I would rather
have that than it, you know, go for transition from single family to immediately, you know,
much more dense property. So -- so, I get that -- and as someone who lives on Meridian
I get the -- especially during rush hour. I live right near Settler's Park where it's down to
one lane each way and if I have to turn left into my neighborhood it's -- sometimes I'm
sitting there and I'm causing a backup behind me for five minutes, because I can't find a
way to turn. I get the frustration. It -- it -- it's -- it's rough sometimes. But, you know, it's
-- I think this is a good fit and a good project for the area. You know, ITD said that it
doesn't need a traffic study and I think that it makes sense with it being kind of the small
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 45 of 51
-- you know, I think when you look at the alternative of traffic studies for, yeah, kind of a
lot of small different parcels you get something like California where San Francisco has
built eight homes this year I think last time I checked and -- and prices there are -- you
know, it's -- it's so unaffordable to live there. And I think that's something that -- it's
important to balance the livability, the responsible growth with kind of, you know, fitting
into the community needs and keeping -- you know, matching the --the demand that there
is to live in Meridian and I think that that's, you know, important to remember, that multi-
family is coming in this area. Having this transitory density it is good and, then, also just
to hopefully give some people an outlet if there are red light concerns if there are, you
know, speeding concerns. I believe in the state of the city the mayor said he wants to --
there is a plan to hire more police officers, but, you know, Meridian Police is always there.
For cut through traffic
ACHD is always willing to do a -- a study. They are also looking at maybe reducing the
barriers to getting I think speed tables is what they are calling them. There is specific,
you know, traffic calming. There are a bunch of things that -- I think, actually, most of this
is -- some of this is ITD, but there are a lot of things that we can do to calm the traffic
issues within the neighborhood. Crossing the street, et cetera. So, I just -- I'm a little bit
on a soapbox here, but I -- I really empathize, as I live on Meridian and I have seen this
kind of stuff, this -- these traffic concerns. But I think this is a good fit for the area. I think
it's a good transitory density into larger development and -- and as much as that
information asymmetry, that not knowing is bad and as much as we need to probably
improve the -- you know, so people don't need to do a ton of research. I don't know that
that's a good enough reason to deny this.
Seal: Yeah. I was going to say as far -- as far as the -- I mean the stoplight from Harris
Road onto Meridian Road, I'm -- you know, I'm sure it's needed, I just don't know when
ITD is going to get to it. That said everybody that bought a home in there understood that
when they moved in, so -- I mean that one was pretty obvious I would have to think, so -
- I mean you all turned in, you all looked at the places you were going to live, so, you
know, is it a hazard? Yes. Is there something that's going to be done about it? Yes.
There will be a stoplight on Meridian Road. So, when -- when it's going to be put in we
are not quite sure, so -- but that's something that--you know, ITD, they own the highways.
So, if-- if you are interested in knowing when that stoplight will put in, please, contact ITD.
So, you know, unfortunately, we -- we can't do a lot about roadways here, so -- we don't
own them. The city doesn't anyway. It's -- you know, as far as, you know, the developer
or, you know, whoever being deceptive about this, if the entire community feels that way
-- I mean there is -- there is legal avenues to approach that. So, you know -- and I mean
if the entire community feels that way I recommend that you look into that. You know, I -
- I mean I want to carefully address the stigma around apartments as well. So, I mean
these aren't apartments, they are actually kind of more of a townhome thing, but just multi-
family developments in general. So, have a stigma tied to them. So, I have kids that live
in apartments, so they are pretty decent human beings and trying to take care of stuff. I
realize there is people out there that don't, so -- we have owners in our subdivision that
don't, so I don't think it's fair to tie to multi-family developments that there is going to be
nefarious elements in there. So, I mean I think that we have all seen developments
everywhere that -- you know, these people exist everywhere. So, it only takes one or two
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 46 of 51
people to kind of ruin it for everybody, so that's kind of my soapbox moment about that,
just because -- it's really expensive to live here. I mean one of my children don't -- doesn't
live in Meridian anymore just because can't afford it, so -- and that's in a rental. That's
unfortunate. But as far as the -- as far as the development, it's -- I mean in front of us, I
mean my big concern is -- you know and -- and I usually defer to supporting staff. I mean
I generally don't vary from that very much. So, I think as staff has pointed out that some
things need to be done in here, then, I will support that. I mean I -- I agree if there is only
one --you know, if they have -- like the last application you have one place, multiple trash
bins and things like that, then, that makes sense to have a centrally located just as long
as there is more than one opportunity to -- or more than one receptacle to put stuff into,
so -- as far as the parking -- I mean if you are having trouble meeting the minimum --
come on. I mean just put some extra in there. It's not going to kill anybody. So, you
know, I mean -- I don't know. My -- it's -- I always think back to my dad, you know, he
always told me you are never going to get anywhere if you just want to meet the minimum.
So, be willing to give a little bit. So, as far as the amenities I understand the gray area in
it. You know, the one thing I don't want is some kludgy little thing that's just thrown in
there at the last second in order to kind of satisfy some requirement where, you know,
you get this little five foot area for a dog park or something along those -- those lines. It
would be nice for something to be meaningful in there. You know what I mean? I think
that there are some common area in here that would accommodate something that would
be usable by the folks that are in here. That said, I would be more interested in seeing a
walk -- you know, some kind of traffic mitigation that allows people to get across Lone
Pine Way to get to the other parts of the subdivision where there are better amenities,
because, honestly, I don't see that as a -- a bad alternative and I think that would help
with the safety overall of the -- you know, the entire subdivision, to be honest. The one
thing that I do like about it -- I know some people don't share this feeling, but I do like the
-- the storage units, to be perfectly honest. So, we just -- we see a lot of stuff comes in -
- come in where, you know -- and generally speaking it comes with garages. So, people
that have garages like to, you know, park 40,000 dollars worth of cars outside to stack a
thousand dollars worth of stuff in their garage, so that's never made sense to me. But I
do like the fact that these have storage that's there. We are finding that some people
move into the community, they are looking for a place to live, to rent while something's
being built, so -- I mean it's very conceivable that the very people that live in these
apartments are going to live in your neighborhood right next to you, you know, eventually,
so -- and the fact that there is storage that comes along with this, that's something that's
going to be highly sought after. I mean a lot of people move here and it's taking six
months to a year to build a house, so they got to live somewhere. I mean there is some
other things that I like about the layout of it. The fact that the density did come down is
nice. I mean it's almost -- it's part of a bigger project, but this little -- this piece right here
would be what we would consider in-fill at some point in time if it didn't get flushed out,
you know, with this, you know, basic element of it -- or basic design of it, so I can
appreciate what -- what -- where it's at and the -- you know, what it's doing. That said I
don't see anything -- you know. And I understand the traffic problems and everything. I
mean you heard me on the last one -- on the last application, so not happy with where
the city stands as far as what we can do about the roadways. We don't own them. We
don't have a lot of sway in them to say the least. So, we are not included in any kind of
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 47 of 51
approval for a roadway system through ACHD or ITD. So, I find that to be an unfortunate
part of the way that our government is set up. But that's not going to be solved tonight.
So, I will quit rambling on and let somebody else talk or make a motion.
Grace: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make a couple comments and -- and I would --
would try to do so without repeating what -- what you said or what Commissioner -- the
other Commissioners have said, because I do agree with -- with a lot of that. I like the
town homestyle. We don't control the streets. I mean I know some of this was said, but
it's worth emphasizing. And I'm really glad, Commissioner Seal, that you said something
about the -- sort of the characterization of folks who live in apartments, because it was on
my list of items to address and I guess I won't say anything more than, you know, they --
I -- I have a daughter, too. I have a -- a professional young daughter who cannot afford
a home and she lives in an apartment with her family and I know other professionals and
they pay higher rent than I pay mortgage and so these folks are just trying to -- trying to
get ahead as well and get started and they didn't come from out of state and -- and were
able to sell a home and buy a single family home here. They grew up here and they
struggle. So, I would be -- I would welcome to call someone like that and other people I
know -- other families I know to call them neighbors and -- and what they have done here
and -- and coming down in the -- the units and -- and making them the -- the townhome
style, I really like that. So, again, without trying to repeat what's already been said, I will
be voting in favor of this.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Smith?
Smith: Mr. Chair. Yeah. I guess the only thing that I am -- I think maybe we should
probably identify before a motion is made is kind of how we want to approach the
amenities issue kind of more specifically and others discussion of -- you know, I -- I guess
the question is -- is on Lone Pine is that -- since that's internal to the development does
the developer have control over that? Are we able to actually -- you know, is there any
way to have a provision in the -- in the CUP that they have some sort of crosswalk or
something like that across the road? Because, if not, where my position is -- is I -- I --
probably think that they should have -- if -- if not that they probably should have an
additional amenity. I would also like for it not to be thrown together, but even if it's just a
bike repair station I think that can be a valuable amenity for a community to use and I
would like for there to be an additional amenity that can be accessible by the entirety of
the community, if there is one, not just the storage sheds. So, there is -- those are just
kind of my thoughts there. I don't know, again, what we can require in terms of
connectivity to the other amenities. So, I -- I mean if there is any thoughts around that.
Seal: I will kind of throw that question back to staff a little bit. So, if we modify nothing
and we are speaking to the -- pretty much to the parking, the trash receptacles, and the
amenities, if we make no modifications at all, essentially, I think what that does is we
support. What staff has asked, which is basically add the amenities, put more trash
receptacles in and add the parking required. Is that correct?
Hersh: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, yes, that would be correct. Staff will work with the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 48 of 51
applicant on the additional amenity to add to the site if you would like to keep it the way it
is with our conditions.
Seal: Okay. So, with no modifications then -- and that's kind of the statement I made
before is where -- generally speaking I try and support staff and -- and their
recommendations. So, they have -- you know, although we have spent a lot of time on
this tonight, they have spent a lot more time on this.
Smith: Mr. Chair, I guess the only -- in that case the only thing I would add is I -- if we
could --what would -- I guess make me say it a little -- ma'am, I appreciate that. I'm -- I'm
trying to. I'm -- I'm trying not to get the mic in my mouth, but I appreciate that and I hope
this is better. Where I was at is I -- I would hope that -- if we could modify to ask that that
second amenity be accessible by the entirety of the subdivision, something like a bike
rack or something that isn't just closed off to new developments, you know, hopefully to
just provide some kind of additional benefit to the existing residents and things like that is
the only thing I would maybe consider modifying. But I -- that's I agree with that. I just
wanted to see if there is anything we could do about the interconnectivity, but --
Starman: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Smith -- and I'm going to ask my planning
colleagues to comment on this as well. I'm a -- I'm a bit hesitant to go -- go down that
path in that -- you know, the reason we are doing the size of the conditional use permit
for the multi-family parcel -- to the extent the condition sort of now kind of bleeds over to
beyond those boundaries to other parts of the overall subdivision, I don't know whether
that's within your purview tonight. You know, your conditional use permit applies to this
particular use being proposed, not to adjacent phases of a broader development. Mr.
Parsons, do you have thoughts about that?
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, I think for me the only thought I had is
the fact that if the development agreement -- the findings are gray and, technically, it's --
it's -- those are to be shared and that's how I get there. But to your point, I -- I almost like
where Commissioner Smith is going about adding the bicycle repair facility or something
like that, because it doesn't take a lot of area up and it does kind of contribute that extra
value to the community in my opinion, because you are going to have multi-use pathways
in the areas, you are going to have a park, you know, I think that's a -- that's a good
balance striking that -- that balance. Whenever we are talking about improvements to
roadways or linking open spaces together, I get-- I'm -- I'm -- like legal I get a little hesitant
on that, because we are always at the -- I don't want to put you in a situation or give the
neighbors expectation that may not be realistic because of who we have to work with and
try to get those, because it may not be approved or maybe an obstacle that the developer
will have to go to to get a crosswalk. I don't know how all of that works with ACHD and
whether or not they would support -- although I do like that -- that idea. It makes a lot of
sense if you are -- if you are going -- you want to take credit for something, then, lead
people to --to that amenity. I really like that suggestion, so, again, we are going to default
to you. We have our recommendation. You have our conditions of approval. You have
heard the -- the testimony tonight. CUP is your purview. You can require things to
mitigate some of the concerns you heard tonight.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 49 of 51
Smith: Mr. -- Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Question for Kurt in terms of the legality. Would it be possible to maybe say an
amenity that is not enclosed, because it seems like most of the things on this list that are
-- would be kind of the -- would be limited to the existing -- to this present CUP, residents
are -- you know, enclosed storage and -- and things like that. Would it be possible to say
something like an amenity that is not enclosed? Because, obviously, trying to strike the
line between publicly accessible, meaning with the entire public, versus -- I -- I guess I'm
just spitballing some -- some ways to -- is it possible to even do this even if -- if we want
to?
Seal: With something like easily accessible to the entire -- oh, I was going to say -- you
can't say subdivision. Easily accessible to the entire community. No. I mean --
Starman: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Smith, so my -- my concern is the same in that,
you know the condition applies to this project. It's not really -- the Commission is not
intended --the purpose of the CUP is not intended to put amenities or mitigations in place
that's going to benefit a neighboring parcel or a different phase of a subdivision. Mr.
Parsons makes a fair point that the original development agreement does contemplate
shared amenities and things of that nature. So, that's -- I like that thought as a reason to
-- as to word the condition in that manner. My general -- my -- the safest place to be is to
have the condition apply to the multi-family development area period and leave it at that,
which is sort of how the conditions are worded today. I think if you wanted to go a little
bit beyond that -- I don't want to wordsmith with you -- wordsmith with you on the fly, but
maybe it's something that says something to -- to the extent practical, to the extent
possible, you know, make these -- make these amenities available to the remainder of
the subdivision consistent with the provisions of the development agreement, something
of that nature might be -- work a little -- little less of a safe harbor, but I think because the
original DA did contemplate shared amenities that makes some sense to me, to extent
practical, consistent with the DA, you know, the amenity will be available to the overall
develop -- the original development that's covered by the original DA.
Smith: Sorry. Taking notes.
Seal: That's okay.
Smith: In that case, Mr. Chair, I think I'm ready to make a motion.
Seal: Feel free.
Smith: All right. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
approve File No. H-2023-0033 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July
20th, 2023, with a modification that the developer to the extent possible -- or to the extent
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 20,2023
Page 50 of 51
practical. Ensure that the additional amenity recommended by staff is accessible by the
remainder of the subdivision consistent with the original development agreement.
Seal: Is there a second?
Grace: Mr. Chairman, I will second that.
Seal: We have been moved and seconded to approve File No. H-2023-0033, Stapleton
Apartments. All in favor, please, say aye. All opposed?
Lorcher: Nay.
Seal: Okay. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: All right. And with that I will take one more motion.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair, I motion we adjourn.
Smith: Second.
Grace: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded we adjourn. All in favor say aye. None opposed.
We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9.10 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. )
APPROVED
8-3-2023
ANDREW SEAL - CHAIR MAN
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK