The URL can be used to link to this page

2007 10-18• Revised 10-16-07 '~-, ;~ -- MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING ' REGULAR MEETING "° '' AGENDA a ~~; City Council Chambers `- 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho r ` Thursday, October 18, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. ~' ~, `J "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, ~; all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected ~' ' to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." ~~ ~' 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~' ` X Tom O'Brien _O Wendy Newton-Huckabay _X David Moe _X Steve Siddoway X Michael Rohm -chairman ~~ - ~~. ~? ~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 3. Consent Agenda: ~- . .'' A. Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning and Zoning ' ~' Commission Meeting: Approve ~* `~ 4. Continued Public Hearing from October 4, 2007: AZ 07-012 Request 5 for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C-G zone for R, ~' ~' ~' Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of ~~~ ,i ;_, N. Eagle Road and E. Fairview Avenue: Continue Public Hearing to ` ~~``~'~~ November 15, 2007 E; ~~ 5. Public Hearing: RZ 07-014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R- fi . 8 to C-N (13.59 acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh by °; `; Kasterra Develo ment, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory p ~,' ;~. ,; Road: Continue Public Hearing to November 15, 2007 '~ ~ 6. Public Hearing: PP 07-015 Request for Preliminary Plat for 518 lots ~ " consisting of 443 single-family residential building lots; 1 residential ~u- .: building lot consisting of 32 apartment units; 8 residential building lots ~.; : . ~j -- consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of ,' commercial retail on the 1St floor with 12 residential lofts on the 2"d floor; 9 A~` commercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 civic/social hall lot, 46 ,; ~~, - common lots and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres in C-N, TN-C, TN-R and R- -'w 8 zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. '`' Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, ~ ~`° please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. r° ~ ~ t l tl ~ s ~€ ~ ~~+ 7 ~-' ~ : '-~ } ¢,~~ r~`~"« ~ ~ ~ } ~~~~ ~ ~F~ ~ ~( r9`'S 'b ; ~ - ~ .n~#''d~ ~~' ~~ ~ ~~ ~ .} ~., l~' ~5 $}i, fir" 'r ~,'x7' ~' ~ g ep ~'t:r~ia ~a a~_ r - )[ ? tes ^e ij~ ~ Y ,O,z~ R 4 YY{ ~~d l T 'tG ~ ~ , s ~' ~' ~' .a `'~~ ~ c '?:a `.: C ~ t Tt ~ ~ , F ~ ~~~' } ..i ~. a~ ~~ ~~~ I n S~ fI N 1~ AA a t ry k ~` t ~ ,~ t i ~ ~k ~ ~~.h ~'F ~ 1 t 7 99 f -- ,~h }} ~~'fi 1 Y 4, ~ F ~. 5 ~:r k i ~ ~~ Z 4 tih~ Nf ~4~'J: h i t ~ 'fit'..' ~ a~- c '~, R' - ~ t _ ~ r ~ Y ' xb ~ ~l y~p~c~. ,~ S ~~ ~~~ ; ~~ a ~` ? ~x ,e,;;' vx,i .~ ~ i i ~ 4 ~'~'~`.Sr. y @~, c ~ v~ ~ n • Revised 10-16-07 Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: Continue Public Hearing to November 15, 2007 7. Public Hearing: CUP 07-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to convert the existing Caven home into acivic/social hall in an R-8 zone for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: Continue Public Hearing to November 15, 2007 . ~~ ~ 8. Public Hearing: AZ 07-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 ; ,. ,;~ acres from Ada County RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by , ~~ Equity Development -1235 E. McMillan Road: Continue Public Hearing "," to November 15, 2007 ~' ~~ 9. Public Hearing: PP 07-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development - E 1235 E. McMillan Road: Continue Public Hearing to November 15, .:7s~:., 2007 '~ 10. Public Hearin RZ 07-016 Re uest for Rezone of 3.66 acres from R-15 g~ q ., ~~ ° ~ zone to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle ` ' Road: Recommend Approval to City Council ~_ r 11. Public Hearing: PP 07-016 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 38 t `A"` single-family attached residential to#s on 2.81 acres for Gramercy ~ ~ '"~ Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. `~`~ ~ Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Recommend Approval to ~~ ~` y Cit Council 12. Public Hearing: CUP 07-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 32 ,` multi-family dwelling units on 4 lots in an existing R 15 zone on 2.93 acres ~~~ for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Recommend -~ `=;-_ Approval to City Council ~x 4 "~y_ : '~ ~, ~ 13. Presentation: Landscaping Requirements of the UDC presented by ~~~ Caleb Hood (Time Permitting): Presented Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, j please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. c wyy7f~gC ~~~ „~ %j 1 t ~ 1 _j ~ }~ L ~,,,1 ~~. `p ~d:Y~ 3 ~i'~,+ t d,, `"~ ,.era ~.~%~~', ~.ir~'~~*~it. ~`~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ . _ _ ~ ~ ti `sg: • • Revised 10-16-07 E IDIAN~- MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING 1 p A ~ ~ REGULAR MEETING AGENDA a City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, October 18, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." ~'~~~~~' 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~: w - Tom O'Brien ~ Wendy Newton-Huckabay . David Moe >'e- Steve Siddoway ~ - Michael Rohm -chairman ~. -, ~~, ~a ~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ~ /~ ~~j' ~ ~ : ~ ~ 3. Consent Agenda: ~~~ ~~'~d~-~~. ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ `~ A. Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning and Zoning ~-,:,, ,, Commission Meeting: -' -= 4. Continued Public Hearing from October 4, 2007: AZ 07-012 Request ~ r;_ r,_ for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C-G zone for E ~ Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of ~ .' N. Eagle Road and E. Fairview Avenue: ~®~ 1~t8° ~~~ ~• r q,~-~- ~~'~ ~'~- ;: 5. Public Hearing: RZ 07-014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R- ;. ,. -., ~' ~ ` 8 to C-N (13.59 acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh by ~ Kasterra Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory ' ~ ,,, Road: ~~ -~'~ ~ ~v~1 ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ /~ ` I ~ ~~ ~ , ~: .:: 6. Public Hearing: PP 07-015 Request for Preliminary Plat for 518 lots , fi ,; ;~ consisting of 443 single-family residential building lots; 1 residential building lot consisting of 32 apartment units; 8 residential building lots ~` consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of - _:' ~~ _` n commeraal retail on the 1St floor with 12 residential lofts on the 2 d floor; 9 commercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 civic/social hall lot, 46 ~~' common lots and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres in C-N, TN-C, TN-R and R- 8 zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. . ~ Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: ~~~ ~'~ ~ X.~®~ ~ ~ ~'=:?~'~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. h - . Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 1,.. : F:..; ... ~ ~' 1 +n~~ _ •s ,~,. f~.f ii ~ '~ ` r ~ ~~ o~ ai; t ~~' ,p `~ ff ~i.. _ k -- , ~. f Z t~ ,~ e S 4 +3$+F S J "r K ~ ~F ~ ~' -~~ .. is ~ ~. ,S ~ {'"i~ v ~~~~ '~ "~ 'ri~°*~~1~ - -- t ~~j t ~ -i .~~ ~~ :~• , r c °~ ~'M""yC.. ? _ - ...r asyr.ra '~ ~ S ~- ~ J R ~ ~. .- t ~, day' '!` a yyyyyy ,~ f t l '- 4 - ~~' S -._ r ~y~ ~kz„'~ a aYAy.~ Y~ Yr ~~'1 ~ l.t ` ~A li• .FI tti'y..f~ _ r ~~ C ~ it '~ z ~'.. 4s m ,~~ , n r c tot +'~`r" ' ~ ~y- ~.. },fs ~~ ,i - ~ r{ ~ k ° FC F';• t ~, ~~. Y' ~ S ~ s i 4 rtrt,e~,e~ ~' ~~,j '~ - 4 ~ f ~~ ~: rk~, ' F 'til L ~. ~` • •` ~~ i~ ';~ Revised 10-16-07 ~. : it :;; ~`'.^S 7. Public Hearing: CUP 07-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit ~,'., approval to convert the existing Caven home into acivic/social hall in an R-8 zone for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory Road -/~ ~ , 1~~ ~~ ,.. ~ N ~ '~ ~ 8. Public Hearing: AZ 07-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 acres from Ada County RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by ~~ Equity Development -1235 E. McMillan Road• ~ c~ k _I 9. Public Hearing: PP 07-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 ~". ' ~ single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development - '` 1235 E. McMillan Road: ~~.,~'~ ~ ~o~ ~ r j~ F, 10. Public Hearing: RZ 07-016 Request for Rezone of 3.66 acres from R-15 r p " ~ zone to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle ~ Road: 5 `~ ~ ~`L !( ~Ci~~o~ S - ~ ~~ ~' :: ; 11. Public Hearing' PP 07-0'~ Request fo P ~liminary Plat approval of 38 ~~ ~~'b~ single-family attached residential lots on 2.81 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. . Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: ~ a . S 4~ r t~' 12. Public Hearing: CUP 07-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 32 F, ,'.,,j multi-family dwelling units on 4 lots in an existing R-15 zone on 2.93 acres ;• ' ', for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of E. Overland Road and we 'off S~E~ le Roa ~~~~ ~ r~ ;,~ 13. Presentation: Landscaping Requirements of the UDC presented by s a Caleb Hood (Time P/e1 remitting): ~ (~~~ r ~~r~ s,, ~ ~~ ~~~ ~:. ~• ~,. -'' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 2 of 2 c?'.;i!'~f All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, <<~: ; ' `1 please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ..,.'~~..-sc ~ ~ !µ, v: ;~"~ .,y, 1 I jYj. ~ '1'• ° i tpp~t ` ~, :•1~r `. '4 4 ~'9P j~ { ~5 1 7:. 1 I ~ ~ i ] 3 ~' r., r . ~ ,... ." • r ,. .. 4 .. .. I _ i ., .•' :7t R ~: '.. r.... ..... ~ 4 ' ~~i.. '+1&r. .: n.. .~ .. .r. e~~;A~ ;. -, s ..:' g {Y . .l. .. .... .... ..,. n ..... i.. . .... .,^,' ... ~ .. ~ .... .. ....... r.. .:,.,..: •. ., ~ ~.. ....... ... 1~.: rg;... v "`-av ..$............ ~.. b. .. ..l... z#. n.. .. ...:....._..,. ,~ Gds: :.x e,. .~... ~~ :~. ., ... • r. ...> .. .... ..... ..... .. ......1. .. .. i . .. f_ .. } ~ ~.~; . .. , ....~. a . .. . .... ... ._ , ..t..... .... .. 1 .... . •~x- '~' ai .. :a~.r, w,,~„.~ .:~i. 'k... "t. 'r' ~ ~~ A.. ,1' ~!° ~i r: I ~ i'~fy.";e>>"~~C1S,b' ,. , [ ^~ v' nr _ < s. M ~4:t: r'.I:Y~ +n_+ fi~"~:'~:' .rnl:. 1 sl a. !•' ~r~rl'.. '••r. }. ... ... .,:.. E ` ~.r '+- : •'+±' 1' ~' ' lx I+~ ~~. ~•. . n •.> _ ~. , ;._ ..1,. . . 1:: .. .. .... ..... •1.. ~ A 41 ~ r a ~:~v i -~ ,a.,f.-~°:~. `mggr `P" '"' { . • A.). , ~.:"~~.~ya.:.~'ijr~,• •.l •I i•~~ . Zy , tA", nS'n'''' : 4. ,,, .. .• ., +f .: '. ,'. ;.>* `2• ~ `#!.• ~ -i:=`_ is ° r ¢r. S.I• ',tr4 .'Tiy ~;•Yy:,s :~...i~:fi~~~~{±: ~. • .. .t .. .:. :,: L ` .; ,' w• ... t~ ...:; i 7 f .t:• :. .:..., v I .... .. .. ........ .....a ....... ~ .. .....F.. .e. :. ,.. is a..: i . ., .,: i e ::.. .. .: ..:. .,... (~: ... , > . ... ..... r .: .. .. :. :':~ : .. .:..... .. ... .: ..... ... ~ . .. .. ~ F~SY. :: f .. .. .. , ... 4 ,: ., .,.. °;: ~~:::~ ,. .. a~ T.., . .rs, _.. r. „ .... .. E.,,, ~,..... , . ~' .~ ....... .;;K _ ;. :~ ,..,, r:....t...,_..,,.... ,, .,.... .:..,.. ,. .:.~..~ .r..::,. .. , .t..,... ......:~...,. C j1 : ... ... l _ t .. ..... .. :.... ... ...: .: ~ .. ... .r ,. .. .,..... ,...,~,....:.~...: ~.. ... ,.ar ,, ,. .. .,..i.....Y,. .. :. .. .. ~....:.:• . ..... ....... .... .. ..., .. I. _. ~:al~ ~3 ....m .4a. .... t ...... . ... r- ... _ .... .. : •~;. ~}.. . .. .. ........, .r ... ....~.,...» K.. .. ..... r... .: ..... s . ~:i `fir' ...... ....:... ..... ...... .. .... .... .... . ... .... r....... .. r'.',;' .r. .. , ,r _ - - ~°~~~. ,~. .. :{. x' ~ ~' m ;. ~~,,, tq ~. ., •E:.' w. .. `; Y' .,. ..:r. , . ...... ............,... .....,. ..: - ' i + I ::St < 4 s ~~'y- ~ yea. ~ i . AI ,ti ~ ry I ~ . -~, . 4. ... - +~-,. • :,; , . .; .. r ``~ ., `.x.: = -• .; r ".` a : .,:•:. - , h: 'r ~~. ,. ~.. .y r r ,,$ •.. ,z •", • ~'~ :!. p ..; ,.,. .......... :....l .r 3~ ~:. . r.. ..: .,„:.. ~!~o.. s:. >m,.....1 ...... ,. r.....a.>i . ... S •.. i.~ . ! ...rP r .a. .;i~~"-'.~~~.~`•,~.-'~~"~. ~,`k'i...:r.~ `:'ti {~_ , ..... .... ...... ,,.. ... ........... ... . . 7i. ' r .~... ........ ~. ,...,. .. ...'t ... ... ..... ... ... c ... .k. ....: '~:,:: .. .. .~.. ... ..... .a n... .. .. E.. ... .. ... ....,. I 1° .~~~~. va ;', ;> ;. ; ) :~:;; , i.. ': e•{. ,. ... ] ..,.... , . ...... . ,.... r. !. ::~~•. e . .... i r.. .....: .. .. , 1• i.. . ......~ ... ... ... ...: ..., .a .. ,~.. .: i• :...i,,.. ,t.t, .. ........... ... ...~. 1,,: :. ii.. ~.~...,.':: w :. .. , . .. 4'C. .... .... 3' ... ... s . ... ..:. . . .: ...:... . :. jr: .4':'~~te r 'nw'• .... ,. ~.......... k. ... . l..rr..: ..,:.. :. .. .. ., ... ... .. d. •:: . ... .. i.. .: a ... ... .. .: ?i .. .. .. .. d.. .. :F.' ... . ..1 . .. .Yr ..... .. .. .. 7 .:. ~. . . .!. .. ., r r .3v i'..•'.' . ...... . ~-..5 .. ... ... .. ... .. .. ,. .: r•. •' .r': ... , ,.. .-, 1 '(< Ir,: Y.A. ~ .:Y:,'. ~'~"; .3?~. ,.fi, v.: ,. '~-.; ~. .r pry`.:,, i. s r:.l rl { ';t r{",:K ~': _ - ~' i~ I'.~ a:. .~.a is 'I' I. .~ . i 1 ~' ¢. .. k r I - .._ r }w .. , ... ... _ . . ~~' ~°: ' ~'~'..k'' .. ..... ... _ 0 ~. E IDIAN~^' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING 6 ,~ ~ ~ REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho ~..;~ Thursday, October 18, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. Y ~ "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn Testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter.." ',' °~ 1. Roll-call Attendance: 3 ~" ~ Tom O'Brien Wendy Newton-Huckabay David Moe Steve Siddoway ~` Michael Rohm -chairman ~~ ,.~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ~~ i 3. Consent Agenda: °": `_," A. Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning and Zoning ~~, - Commission Meeting: I 4. Continued Public Hearing from October 4, 2007: AZ 07-012 Request ~ ~ ;';1 for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C-G zone for ~i Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of ~..; N. Eagle Road and E. Fairview Avenue: '~ -'> 5. Public Hearing: RZ 07-014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R- ~ ~ 8 to C-N (13.59 acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh by " { ~ V Kasterra Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory -;~ Road: ° 1"'~ 6. Public Hearing: PP 07-015 Request for Preliminary Plat for 518 lots consisting of 443 single-family residential building lots; 1 residential `~'" building lot consisting of 32 apartment units; 8 residential building lots f,~ ,' consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of ~`t ` commercial retail on the 1St floor with 12 residential lofts on the 2"d floor; 9 ~~ i. ' commercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 civic/social hall lot, 46 ~~ ~ " common lots and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres in C-N, TN-C, TN-R and R- ~ ! 8 zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: ,'? , Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 1 of 2 `~ ~ " All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. A d iri d ti f di biliti l t d t d t d/ h ri nyone es ng accommo a on or sa es re a e o ocumen s an or ea ng, ~°: ~." .~ please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. t., ~ ~'~~. _ a *. t~ ~ =sr~~; ~l' •C~- L~F. yy~ ' }/ES '' ~~ S i S ~ ~ ~~~2 > ~ x - ~~ ~ r: t ~' 'd~ fJ1~ 4 i I "~" ~ t. ' - ~~ ~~ ~ ~. `c ,4 ~'7L y i~ ~' ~ ~' r 1: ~ ~ r t r ~ ~ i' u~ ' ~r~rr ~q~ ~>z Y$r~; -.fc !Tk~~if~ r ~L ~ a j a t f 3 S ~. r ~ t ~ 5 i ~~ f ~ "t Bad ~;~; „~ v. ,`~ 1 ~~ ~ s ^7T ,~ r ~~,t r • 7. Public Hearing: CUP 07-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to convert the existing Caven home into acivic/social hall in an ~-~~ R-8 zone for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: 8. Public Hearing: AZ 07-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 acres from Ada County RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development -1235 E. McMillan Road: ~~~ 9. Public Hearing: PP 07-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 ~`3 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development - 1235 E. McMillan Road: €` ~:; ;. ~;~~I Y' ~.' ; i ~z~; ,; ,. ~,;,,; s_ . ~{ t~=~_~~,' ~~; {,,_ f.` j'r ~:, ;. ~~ 10. Public Hearing: izz 07-016 Request for Rezone of 3.66 acres from R-15 zone to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: 11. Public Hearing: PP 07-016 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 38 single-family attached residential lots on 2.81 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: 12. Public Hearing: CUP 07-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 32 multi-family dwelling units on 4 lots in an existing R-15 zone on 2.93 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - October 18, 2007 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. d ~ ''fir, -3" L rrI y ` f~1 L k .~i~ ,Y,E` ~ft L i 4 - s > v? ~+; } h" ~ '~ }iY~ _ ~ 'r; , _ A ~ ~• T'S~ }~ t ,,Tarfr_~' ,~t~Y ~c ~ a~._ ~'k~~1. +A ~ u ~ ~~ ~ ~ dt ^~iC: F ~- '. v~ ~ ~' r. ~ ~'~ .,, ~t~ ?s; Nom? " -E.`~t ~ ;. 4~ rrA ~` '3'~krn, 4~ ~ ... ~~ kt J +„ k .~}~^ ~ r +, ; .x rts1~ .fig r~'f~{ 1 ,. '+_. ~~ ~~"~ r r Y^t'~ .y:'Y'.1: ' l ~ ~ -' i.F ,~~T ~r Y` ~ '~'!~.. s. _ _ Broadcast Report DatelT(me 10-15-2007 12:42:12 p.m. Transmit HeaderText Cltyof Meridian Idaho Local ID 1 2088884218 Local Name 1 Llne 1 `P ` Local ID 2 Local Name 2 Line 2 ~' '. ,, ; ~: ~r ~'': ~:;-:, ~4 I~f ~~ -' ,~. ~:: ~~ ,( , ~` S%' ~~ 5;', ~~ 4 ~` ~a ', }~.3,' iC n~ ~~ .. ' . This document :Failed (reduced sample and details below) Document size :8.5"x11 " ~(~I~sC ~'osf ~ ~~G'~ No~c2-~"h~ t C~i'Y't E IDIAN~- I1~ERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZQNING 1 o A ti C REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Cumbers 33 East Waho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, Octob®r 48.2007 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, aN presenlatlons before the Mayor and C/t}+ Coundl are expected to be truthful and banes! Zn best of the ability of the pre~nter. 4. Roll-calf Attendance: Tom O'Brien Wartdy Newton-Huckabay Davy Moe Steve Slddaway Mtcalael Rohm -chairman 2. Adoption of lire Agenda: 3. ConserrtAggnda: A. Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting: 4. Continued Publ(c Nearing from October 4. 2007: AZ 07-042 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RtIT to C-G zone for Metidtan Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of N. Eagle Rood and E. Fairview Av®nue: 5. Public bearing: RZ Q7.014 Regt~t far a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R 8 to GN (13.Sg acres) and Tit-C (16.49 acres} zones for Cavanaugh by Kasterra Developmeftt, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Vtatory Road: 6. Public Heating: PP 07.5115 Request for Preliminary Piat for 518 iota wnslsdng of 443 single-famtty resldenttel building cats; 1 residential building lot consisting of 32 apartment unfts; 8 residential building lots consistng of 81 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of txunrrterciai retell on tl~ 1a floor troith 12 lesidental toffs on the 2"d floor, 9 commerdal buNding late, 1 sahaol building let, 1 civfclsoclat hall tai, 4B common bts and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres In GN, TN-C, TN-R and R- 8 zones far Cavanaugh by Kest®ra Developmetst, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Read and E. Victory Road: thteridian Plan arai 2onhrg Comm~sion Meeting Agenda - O~bsr 18.2x07 Page 1 of 2 Ap rrmt pmserded et puD&c mssgrego shall traoorrea properly of the CHy~ Meridian. Awe deed aauorranadatlon for dl~b9itla9 rotated to dorasnants entlfor hearing, pleaea context the Coy C~rlc's 4FlEoa ~ 88&AA33 at least 4B hours prror to tho put~ic nteotirg. ~::; , ~ ~. ~ ~~~, ~ - rY ~rl e s r~ ~ ~d Y ~ t `~ ,tf 1( ~.!( ~R t.' ~~# [ + t ,~ 5~~r #F +~ ~ T^~ i ~~4 4 ` Y ~~ ~. a ~ ~. ! y'yy r C T~ 4 '~ Tntal Panes Scanned ~ ~ Total Paces Confirmed : 36 No. Job Remote Station Start Tlme Duration Pages Llne Mode Job Type Results 001 198 3810160 12:17:29 p.m.10-95-2007 00:02:12 2!2 1 EC HS CP9600 002 198 8989551 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:34 2!2 1 EC HS CP19200 003 198 2088848723 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:37 2/2 1 EC HS CP24000 004 198 8886854 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:25 2!2 1 EC HS CP31200 005 198 2088985501 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:32 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 006 198 8467366 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:27 2/2 9 EC HS CP28800 007 198 8950390 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:27 2!2 1 EC HS CP28800 ~ _f j :}~.. '2~ µ g ~ ~t.~ b - y.:< ~: _ e~~ . ~;- ,~ `4t _ ~, t i+ ~ [~ Vi F t i! r~( ~~_ y~` k . ~' t+e t, l t 5 .~ t ~f ~~ ~ 1 .~. !~ 1 `x.. . ~F ~; ~. ,~ Date/Time ' !. Local ID 1 ~~~` LocallD2 s,; i' -' , . t `~ Broadcast Report ~ 10-15-2007 12:42:18 p.m. Transmit HeaderText Cltyof Meridian Idaho 2088884218 Local Name 1 Llne 1 Local Name 2 Line 2 No. Job Remote Station Start Tlme Duration Pages Line Mode Job Type Results 008 19S 208 888 2682 12:17:29 p.m. 10-15-2007 00:00:26 2/2 1 EC HS CP33600 009 198 2083876393 92:17:29p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:53 2/2 1 EC HS CP14400 010 198 287 7909 12:17:29 p.m. 10-15-2007 00:00:25 2/2 1 EC HS CP33600 011 198 2088885052 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:26 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 012 198 8881983 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:30 2/2 1 EC HS CP24000 013 198 2083776449 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:53 2/2 1 EC HS CP14400 014 198 4679562 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:29 2/2 1 EC HS CP26400 015 198 8886700 12:17:29 p.m.70-15-2007 00:00:00 012 1 -- HS FA 016 198 8884022 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:01:34 2/2 1 EC HS CP14400 097 198 3886924 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:35 2/2 1 EC HS CP24000 018 198 8841159 12:17:29 p.m. 10-15-2007 00:00:26 2I2 1 EC HS CP31200 019 198 8840744 12:17:29 p.m.10-15-2007 00:00:29 2/2 1 EC HS CP26400 E ~ '' Abbreviations: `~ HS: Host send ' HR: Host receive ._~ ' WS: Waiting send ~,- . ~.~` i :;I s„~.r;> f ,. I . ~ Y ;. s ' S , ~~: 'l S' r'>')'~- 1 [ ; a "_ _~ c ~.'; I~ PL: Polled local MP: Mailbox print TU: Terminated by user PR. Polled remote CP: Completed TS: Terminated by system G3: Group3 MS: Mailbox save FA: Fall RP: Report EC: Error Correct 1 ~ ' i ~ ~ ' ~ ~. F ~ ~. "~ F ~ t J {'4 /S~.l ( ~ `y }_~%• .y -fib G6 hJJ ~' ` .~2d i Xr F 3 ~ ~ z I. ~~' - 7S~ ~4 n ~ ~"' ` £ '~ ;~ 4 ~t~ a ~ ,.~ r ~. w F ~ . ~(~ ~ ~ ~` ' ~~-~~i 7 A.~hv F I _~ ~ ~.e ~~~5~ - ~~r' r ~ y~f-~ 1 ~Y"tr ~ _ f . 4;, 5 8 ~ ~ r._,i .:~:~!~a, r.f..~ 1 w ~ } { 34 ~~ { ~' ~ ~ ~ ~~~ i ~~ ~f' `~ DateJTlme ~' Local ID 1 '`"' Local ID 2 ~_ ~$ #4 ,~. ;, ~. ~_. _3C1 .~ ~ `;:, s~,.` ~K ~ . ~', . ~' ' ~~~"~s= '~' . °' I'~9 ~:, ~~ f -> ~, '. . -, ~, . .. ,~ 10-19-2007 2088884218 ~' Broadcast Report 08:58:20a.m. Transmit Header Text CltyofMeridlanidaho Local Name 1 Llne 1 Local Name 2 Llne 2 This document :Failed (reduced sample and details below) Document size : 8.5 "x11 " >~tsea ><a>lr~o~ C~iyl E IDIAN MERIDIAN Pi.ANN1NQ AND ZONING I a A H 0 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City CoumN Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenuf3, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, Orlober 18, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. °Atfhough fhe CJty of Merldlan no langfar rarlu~as swum tesKmony, all presantatlons before fhe Mayor and Glty Cottncll are expected f0 ba tn~rfu/ 8nd harest t0 ba81 Of fhe ablllty ~ Li)e plaSenfal. 1. Rall-calf Att$rulancg: Tom O'Brten d Wendy Newton-fittokabay David AAoe ~ x- Steve Siddoway Mtchael Rohm - chafrntan11 _L.. 2. Adoption oohs Agenda: ~+~- /s' A~r'o/~. ~fr'"~ °~ r 3. Consent Ag®nda: Va~~~ 6ov-r.~.. ~ '~ ~ ~~~ A. Approve iNlnutes of October 4, 2007 Pianrting and 2:oMr~ Commission Ariseting: 4. Gor-tinued Publtc Roaring from October 4, 2007: AZ 87-072 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 268.39 acres from RtJT m C-G zone for Meridian Town Center by CentefCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of N. Eagle Road and E. Fa~~-'~nue: /~OV l5~' irI~d ~ (3~' 5, Pubflc Hearing: RZ OT-014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R 8 to C-N (13.69 acres) and TN-C {16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh by Kastena Development, LLC -SEC of S. INaftdian Road and E Vlctary Road: ~'ol-.~''u~ ~ ~(.totJ JSvt- S/M /.~ t 1 att!i~~ 8. PubNc Hearing: PP 07-095 Request for Praltliminary Ptat for b18 tots consisting of 443 strtglefamNy r+asidential building Sots; 1 restdentlai building fot consistlrtg of 32 apartment units; 8 residential buUdl~ tots conslstirtg of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots wnsisttng of comrnerclal retail on the 1"` floor with 12 rostdarrtial lofts on file 2n° floor, 9 otunnrercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 ctvldsof~al hail lot, 48 common lots and 6 other lots on 177.43 acres in G•N, TN-C, 7N-R and R- 8zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development LL -SEC of S. Meddlan Road end E. Victory Road: ~+'~'~ -fo o/ !S- Maddian Plarodrq and Zat><ng Camm~on Mesttng Agmrda - 0 1$, ~7 Page t of 2 Ali materTsle presented et putdc meadngs shell beaWne property of the Chy of Meridlart. Anyone d~dr~ exammodauon far dtaeDni6es relaD~ to dacwnerda errdfar hearktg, please conbsctt she CIty Clerk's flea at 898+i4S3 at d8 hours pr~r' m tF~ pub1~ maeBng. Total Paac±s Scanned ~ 2 Tntal Panas Cnnfirmad ~ 3[i No. lob Remote Station Start Tlme Duration Pages Llne Mode Job Type Results 001 231 3810160 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:02:34 2!2 1 EC HS CP9600 002 231 8989551 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00:40 2J2 1 EC HS CP19200 003 231 2086848723 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:31 2J2 1 EC HS CP28800 004 231 8886854 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00:31 212 1 EC HS CP28800 005 231 2068985501 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:36 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 006 231 8467366 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:31 2J2 1 EC HS CP28800 007 231 8950390 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00:31 2J2 1 EC HS CP33600 ~ . ,~a. s,^.' C~' ''3' .a t ~ FY4 ~ -y; ~ ~., 3 ~r ,st t ~' ~~ n, _ ,. } i '~ ~ ~ s ?~"~'* ~~ yy~~~ .e. ~~~~ ~~~ ~~31 4 uir~ F yrj i i ~. ?{ ~ ~~ , A ~ ~~ p.r . i ~ t d~ 3 r_:s, iv ~ ~ ~ sz } ~'!, -_- Y 'S f~ qq.~,,~~b~ .i r ,~~. ~. 1 ~ M 5t,~ t.. ~~ j. 4. ',i !r .. :Y ~h - ~ w .R , ~~:: n { :.k'~t ~:~#V t * t ~.r. ` ~ ~ k L _ ~: ,,, e!'~i ;~ ~, y.' k~ L S i~~ t.~ ~ .. ar ` ,,_ r ~ ~ N•i-~ t' -' Date/Time Local ID 1 LocaIID 2 =a !> ;; ,~ ,. broadcast Report - ~ 10-99-2007 08:58:27 a.m. Transmit HeaderText Cltyof Meridian Idaho 2088884218 Local Name 1 Llne 1 Local Name 2 Line 2 No. Job Remote Station Start Tlme Duration Pages Llne Mode Job Type Results 008 231 2088882682 08:30:45a.m. 90-19-2007 00:00:31 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 009 231 208 387 6393 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:01:00 2/2 1 EC HS CP14400 010 231 287 7909 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:31 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 011 231 2088885052 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00;30 2/2 1 EC HS CP31200 012 231 8881983 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00:33 2/2 1 EC HS CP26400 013 231 2083776449 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:01:00 2/2 1 EC HS CP14400 014 015 231 231 4679562 8886700 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:35 00:00:00 2/2 0/2 1 1 EC -- HS HS CP24000 FA 016 231 8884022 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:01:50 212 1 EC HS CP14400 017 231 3886924 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00;33 2/2 1 EC HS CP24000 018 231 8841159 08:30:45 a.m. 10-19-2007 00:00:32 2/2 1 EC HS CP28800 019 231 8840744 08:30:45a.m.10-19-2007 00:00:31 2/2 1 EC HS CP28800 Y~ . '' Abbreviations: °`'ti =~ HS: Host send HR: Host receive ~~ '. E' !. ;:1 - ' WS. Waiting send . I ~. I;-.' s-~ `I 4-_ .. ~':°_ t' .., '. ~1±'' t'` .,~f. _,.~.. S . , ~, ~~ PL: Polled local MP: Mailbox print TU: Terminated by user PR: Polled remote CP: Completed T5: Terminated by system G3: Group 3 MS: Mailboxsave FA: Fall RP: Report EC: ErrorCorred ~' ~ ~.' ~ ~ - ~ t J~ :~". ~~ t.. !~~ ~~~ ,~~j F Si.. ~ y _. ~~ ~ j ;, ~"~= ? , t~ i~t 3 ` r. -«t I , y ~ -~,. y~4 ~CS.~7y5 z ~ r e 1j v~ ,M{y ~ ¢ E ~ Y".. ~ .1, ,~_~~.., .. } r= ~ ~ i ~ y ~ *,~i t ~ ~~~~t' rw , 3 ~, } ~ d Z t ~ ~. . ~ i as y ri ~,~ ~~ l ~y~ 1~k~k jjjga@~~' w. - R ~ ,j9~~ t. ~ ' ~ ~' ~ ~`, ~' '~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ r ~ a?(' K: ~ ~lk"~ ~ljb ~ "~ ~~ - r 4 4' u4 tF +~ '~': ~ ~ . ~' .h k'; } i ~~~~,, STS ~ ~~~~~~ ,.~~~ f,~~, 1 ~ v. ~ 1 ~ s ~~ 11 a st. f 1. G' ~ ~ ~ i ~ .~ . aal~ x t~, x ~y~~a~ ~.. 9., .... .. ~~ i. '~~c.. .... _ _- . ~~. -.. - .. `, ~~ ® • ~'; Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting October 18, 2007. _` Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of October 18, 2007, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm. Members Present: Chairman Michael Rohm, Commissioner David Moe, Commissioner s '_~' ' ~ ~ Tom O'Brien, and Commissioner Steve Siddoway. ~; ~.. Members Absent: Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay Others Present: Ted Baird, Nancy Radford, Caleb Hood, Scott Steckline, Bill Parsons, `~ and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: ~~~ ' ~ ,. Roll-call '` X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Tom O'Brien X David Moe -Vice Chairman Steve Siddoway X Michael Rohm -Chairman ~' ~ Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like to call the regularly ~ ~ ~' scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order and begin with the roll call of attendance. ~~~ 4 ''' ~ Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: '_ '~ ~` Rohm: Before we adopt the agenda there are quite a number of changes to the agenda ~ tonight and I will start by going through the changes and the first change is Item No. 4 ry s ~ on the agenda, the Meridian Town Center. That project will not be heard again tonight. It will be continued to our regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th. So, anybody ~~ here to speak to that project tonight, it will not be heard. November 15th. The second `~~ project that we were to hear tonight is the Cavanaugh project and it, too, will be continued to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th. Boy, they are dropping like flies out there. And the third project that we were to hear tonight, the ;,~ `~ Matador Subdivision, AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017, will not be heard tonight as well. And it will be also continued to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th. So, the ~` only project that we will be hearing tonight is Gramercy Townhome Subdivision. That's f ~ the only project we will be hearing tonight. ` •i ~:°! ~ Hood: Mr. Chair, if I may real quick -- and I didn't talk to Mr. Forray before, but if anyone's here to discuss the Cavanaugh project, he is in attendance and maybe can answer some questions, if there is anyone here that wants to talk in the back, as well as ;' similar to last time, the Meridian Town Center applicant is also here and I did see him ~- take a group of folks to answer any questions or concerns they may have about their ~`~~ project. So, if anyone's interested about those two projects, those applicants are here. ,, . ~~i ~.: v,,-; .:. ~~;` ~ €~~ t ~~~, 5,:. ,; ~+ F ri :. ~ ~~, `, ~~ ~f` 7~T `~~ ~ ~ "' ih~~'~~. .. h 7., a vy ' ~ .~ ff~~''~~' 4' k~ ~t. S'.> - ~~. ~ ..~~ 1 u~l ~~ ~'~r ~ ~ F t ~{ 1 ~cJ'~ ~7 ~1,', .{ f ''; l ~~r SH «'; r F5 +~~ ~ 1' .M r}~' r . f "'~ 'i # i~ ~, yyr" ~' ` ~; y ~? kU , ~ ~ x .y;~ fg~i ~~~~ 3~ ~'* ~ +f r . 7F ; Y,t ~ti iC f' d ~~. ~`" ., ~~ 4 ~': ~ f t4 r ._ . , r ® • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 2 of 29 Rohm: Thanks, Caleb. With those changes, could I get a motion to accept the agenda as amended? ~ ~:= Moe: So moved. O'Brien: So moved. Siddoway: Second. '' Rohm: All right. We have got a couple of motions and one second. So, all those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? ~:- 'G ,s MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. ~~ ~~ ,~,, Item 3: Consent Agenda: h~ _~ A. Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning and Zoning _` ~ Commission Meeting: ~ ~ ';: Rohm: The Consent Agenda. We have one item on the Consent Agenda, the approval g: ;~ of the October 4th, 2007, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes. Any ~~~- , additions or corrections? '~ Moe: I have none. Siddoway: I have none. ~ ;:„~~ k'"~'' ~ Rohm: Could I get a motion to accept the minutes as written? ~..;. ~~~~~ `~~~ ~ Siddoway: So moved. ,, Moe: Second. ~~ Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes. All those in favor say ,~,;~, aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. `"``°''`' MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. ~t . ',, Item 4: Continued Public Hearing from October 4, 2007: AZ 07-012 Request '~ for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C-G zone for ~~~'~~~~ '~ ~' Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC - NWC and NEC of N. Eagle Road and E. Fairview Avenue: ,!; s , ~ ~ Rohm: As a formality, we have to open each of these items to continue them and so it ~ ~ -:;;, will just take a couple minutes to get that done. So, at this time I'd like to open AZ 07- ;_ ~::: ~; ti ~. w S:, ` ~S4 a . ~~ ~~ r ~'r ' i 'ti~isily~~y~~~, t { . y'-,r ~~~~~ ~ 4 ~ t, ~ 1 ' - ~,;.. ~ t,~. g: r 7~.' f'. t ;~ ~ S ~ 1 Y ~ ~ 1 t x k ' 4j~~, 5~ ~ ~„ t s ,r j ~ ~ Vet. ,~ , Tr.i :~` gJf a: d ~,~ `'r ' 1' ~9;fir s~'L°~ ~ f q~X 4 .T 1 ~ „" ~[.~ ~. try ~ ~~ri W Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Commission October 1 S, 2007 Page 3 of 29 `/ ~ 012 for the sole purpose of continuing to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th, 2007. € ' Moe: A motion? , - Rohm: Could I get a motion to that effect? {{ ' !~ ~ 7 Moe: So moved. ~_`' O'Brien: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item AZ 07-012 to the regularly E~ ' scheduled meeting of November 15th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? E: Motion carried. ,:. } MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. `~'`' Item 5: Public Hearing: RZ 07-014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from `~ ! R-8 to C-N (13.59 acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh 4 by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory E Road: ~,:-:~~ -.;~:.; Item 6: Public Hearing: PP 07-015 Request for Preliminary Plat for 518 lots consisting of 443 single-family residential building lots; 1 residential ~` ``' -, !. building lot consisting of 32 apartment units; 8 residential building lots consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of commercial retail on the 1St floor with 12 residential lofts on the 2"d floor; 9 ~,<< commercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 civic/social hall lot, 46 common lots and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres in C-N, TN-C, TN-R and R- 8 zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. `~ _~ ~'-' j Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: - Item 7: Public Hearing: CUP 07-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to convert the existing Caven home into acivic/social hall in an R-8 zone for Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -SEC of S. Meridian Road and E. Victory Road: ~~~,;°; Rohm: At this time I'd like to open RZ 07-014, PP 07-014 and CUP 07-017, for the sole ~;~~''' purpose of continuing these items to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th, 2007. ? ;,. ' '~ O'Brien: So moved. Moe: Second. ~ ~~a ~. a ~ f-. '~~'^ u.~,~~'., v 4 ~ ~ S`_ _ v'. r., ~U ~' ~ ` . ~n~~,.c ~~ ~ ern' ~ ~ ~_~~ r ~, ~. -'. ;,; '~. tip, ~ .; ~, ~ ,, ~ r~ "~ ~ r n~+~n r .3~T v y~~f,S~r ~~~{ ,j~.,. H'{~{ 1 r r i+ ~ Y t, ~ T Y tc~ 1 9 ~' K'k s i z' ~ l~ ~.~ a rek~tiE Grp f ~ ~ " ~ - wY Y \~~;~ r~a x~r ~~ r. x ~ ~; h ~ k p ' ` 'rte', ' ;- t ~~ ,~ti ~~ a» Y, ~' f~ o ; v 4 L hr ! 3` 7~C ~ c„twaX .+ ~„ g~ ~ t > ~~ r ~ S_ .. c yy~~~~~~,, cc s /~ pis ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~``~ ; ~ 6 w ~~,~ ~' Cz n ~ Lir eM1 C-`htVPr ~~ k ~ 14,E ~ S' S ~~ - ~S ~ _'. ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ > ~~. ~~x,., --'~r`r` "y ,~ ~,~ ::" . • ~,^{ ~~ . Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 ' Page 4 of 29 5 I ~ `~ Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Items PP 07-015, CUP 07-017, and RZ 07-014 to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. r MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. [szs Item 8: Public Hearing: AZ 07-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 acres from Ada County RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by >,' Equity Development -1235 E. McMillan Road: e:: ~' Item 9: Public Hearing: PP 07-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development - ~ 1235 E. McMillan Road: f ~'~ Rohm: At this time I'd like to open AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017 for the sole purpose of continuing these items to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th, 2007. ~''~ O'Brien: So moved. Siddoway: Second. ` ~ Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017 to the regularly scheduled meeting of November 15th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. ,;: MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: We might have a record tonight. ;~ Moe: No. :;~ Item 10: Public Hearing: RZ 07-016 Request for Rezone of 3.66 acres from R-15 ~;' ;i zone to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Item 11: Public Hearing: PP 07-016 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 38 single-family attached residential lots on 2.81 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: CUP 07-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 32 multi-family dwelling units on 4 lots in an existing R-15 zone on 2.93 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road: Se j ~i L s` 4~«`Y+~ t r~ir. ~ k = ._ 7~ . 5~~~ ~ { ~+ r 5 1 `. i .s' ~~,~ r. »~ ,:. 4 ,~ '° s K r,.F.ri . ~` e f'~; ~+ ~;; a ~f ~, ~ 1,~~-_^ ~ ~' .._. _...3 ~' ` r r rr~~~fi ~a' ~+!r ~ sip f ~ .~` ... iN ~ A;:~.-. F xt.~`~~ , 3 ..ti ~x "r`S'~,' Fv ~` ?' - ~~r ~ e" ,~ .}; ~. ~' i~~4 - ti ~_ 4j~. ~r; ` .~. -~ ~~, :~~ ~~ 4f - , W5 ~ _ R '~+~; .~ .i ~ ~ "' Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission ~~,;. October 18, 2007 Page 5 of 29 w'~ O'Brien: Mr. Chairman, I have a question on the next item. On Item 10 there seems to 4:: be a discrepancy on the zone numbers on PP 07-018. I believe they have it down on the item as PP 07-016. Is that a discrepancy? There are two different numbers. Eighteen or sixteen. On the applicant -- ~~ Rohm: Well, just a second. Staff will respond to that. ~,L ` Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, that is correct, it is supposed to be PP 07- 018. ~ ~ k Th ' ~ you. Brien: an O ~' Rohm: Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. At this time I'd like to open Public Hearing RZ 07-016, PP 07-018, and CUP 07-018 and begin with the staff report. ,t: , Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The applicant is requesting rezoning of 3.66 acres from R-15 to TN-R zoning, preliminary plat for 38 residential building lots and Conditional Use Permit for multi-family developments in existing R-15 zone on four separate lots. The applicant is proposing a unique product ::;~:T- mix for this development. The development will include 32 multi-family units proposed ~''' to be platted as condominiums in the future and 38 townhomes with alley-loaded ;; ~ garages, with the first floor work space, allowing the owners the opportunity to work from home. The site is located approximately a quarter mile east -- or west of Eagle Road and south of Overland Road. The property is bordered on the north by vacant land, which is also part of this same subdivision known as Gramercy. You have EI ~':1 Dorado Business Park to the east. Mountain View High School to the west. And, then, Thousand Springs Subdivision, zoned R-4, to the south. This property was previously ~ annexed and zoned to R-15, preliminary platted, and a portion of it final platted as part ,' 1 of the Gramercy Subdivision, for a mix of commercial and residential lots approved in 2006. At that time as well, all of the preliminary landscaping, the amenities for the site, and also the access to the subdivision were all approved at that time with the Gramercy Subdivision. Here is an aerial view of the site. Again, you don't kind of see -- as I go farther along in the presentation I'll show you which specific lots will be platted and which ones will be subject to the multi-family development. Moving onto the site plan. ' ~° ` These two lots here are what are scheduled for the preliminary plat, for the 38 lots in the ~~°`~ ,` 5, ,. ,:~ townhome project, and the four out parcels are for the multi-family development. Staff ; is generally supportive of the site layout for the proposed development. However, staff is recommending some modifications to the site plan for compliance with the UDC. UDC 11-3C-6 requires multi-family developments with more than one bedroom to have two arkin s aces er dwellin unit in a covered ca ort and garage. If the multi-family rp P 9 p p 9 units are platted for condominiums as indicated, the applicant will be responsible for providing a 20-by-20 pad in front of the garages of the proposed buildings. UDC 11-3C- 6 requires all single family homes to be provided with a 20-by-20 garage and a 20-by-20 ~`~a parking pad. So, here, again, is the plat. It will show -- they range in size from 23 -- 3,375 square feet, all the way up to over 6,100 square feet. This is the access, the ~a ~~ .~= '{ 1 . ~ b i.>~c- ~ h4,, :Y r+`a {` ~':: , ~'~ i ~~~ , H~~ `~ ~x. ~y f t;~ ~ _ ~_ ~ ,~ ~ 4V~ x. ;~_ ~ i ,. ~~} ~,' ~. ~~~~~ ki ~',if ~.R. :~ ,~ } ~ :1 ® • s`' Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 6 of 29 -, private driveways. And, then, this is where the alley is and they will enter into the -- the ~''~` proposed townhomes from the rear. The site plan isn't really very good to really get ', some detail on here, but this is kind of -- you can kind of see the building footprints here. r';~ Here is the access into the development. Here is where the condos begin -- or the multi-family developments will be and, again, as mentioned, they are slated to be condominiumized in the future and these will be the work-live townhome units, which ~`=' are three-story buildings. These will be two-story. You can -- it's kind of hard to see, but if I can keep this red dot still, that's where the garages will be in front of the units, the ~f ;; multi-family development units, and they do meet the requirement of two -- two carports. They are a garage. The applicant is also showing some visitor parking on the multi- ~' ~ visitor parking, some here. This so there is some additional parking here family site ~` ` , , floor, too, has two stalls and that also has two stalls. UDC requires the minimum size ` standard size requirement for those as nine by 19 and the site plan submitted by the applicant indicates those would be a nine by 17. Code does allow that to be shrunk by two feet if -- or overhang if you add additional two feet to either the sidewalk or adjacent landscaping, so -- provided that they have a minimum of two feet overhang for -- with ~,~ landscaping, staff can support those parking stalls. There is -- excuse me -- there is a.. ~ only one public street serving this portion of the Gramercy development. The Meridian ~ ` Fire Department has commented that they need an additional ingress and egress point ~I ` into this area. Ideally, the vehicular connection would occur between the school and all of those proposed dwellings. However, if this requirement were made now it would ~; : cause the applicant to redesign a portion of the project to accommodate an access to . the west. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council decide where the ±- ~~ emergency access should be provided. Preferably, as I just talked about, it would -- ~~'"'~~:~ ~ connection would make sense to do -- to connect to the high school on this site, but in } ';, ; talking with the applicant and she's been working with fire, too, they have been talking r=; ~ ~.i either in this portion of the development and -- or this portion of the development for another access point, because right now this is the only real access road into the . ` ~ development. So, I'll let her kind of explain what she's -- how she's been working with ~. °'~ ' fire and where they kind of decided to come up with that additional access to the development. As stated earlier, all the landscaping -- perimeter landscaping and ~ ~; ' subdivision landscaping has been approved with the Gramercy project. The applicant is ~``'~ ! proposing to sod -- what they submitted with the application is with the townhomes they Yti -:_>' are proposing just trees and sod at this point. Staff has kind of conditioned them to "e~ ~'''I ~ provide additional trees in between the structure. They are also proposing some ' - parking islands in between the garages in the rear of the property. Staff feels that additional trees in that area would be nice and also provide some landscaping around `.~` the foundations of the proposed buildings as well. So, this is the site layout for the Brownstone project. These are the multi-family developments. It's kind of hard to see ~'~'~ S; Mf!' here, but, again, it's just -- trees along the perimeter of the roadway and, then, sod through the remainder of the project. Again, they do show parking islands adjacent to ~'°'~ the parking -- to the garages. Staff feels if they go with that concept they should add additional trees -- two inch caliper trees and also provide some shrubs and ground cover along the foundations of those proposed buildings. So, these are the two sites. 5:;;' That's the northwest, southwest, and, then, here is the southeast and -- sorry. Yes. ~~ `' South -- southwest. Southeast. Again, this -- same kind of proposal, just trees along ,r r 'i &~k ~' Y ~i r~ +1 ~{~,~r. ~~?~ ~, ~ '. ~,.• ~ • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission :; , ,,-; ' October 18, 2007 Page 7 of 29 the perimeter and, then, again, you have the parking islands there, which staff has also, ~°:` ~ again, stated as earlier, put in two inch caliper trees and, then, also some landscaping around the perimeter of the buildings adjacent to the foundations. I'd like to go back up ~,; - here, if I can for a minute. Get my bearings here. It's kind of hard to see on that, but , ~~a just wanted to point out, as I mentioned earlier, that some of the amenities that have been approved for this site, staff is pretty supportive of all the amenities. I mean it's a ~~ ~ pretty rich amenity-filled project. This -- this portion of the project -- this is going to be a park -- a dog park, adjacent -- it will have a water feature in it. This is also proposed to ' be a pocket park for the residents. Here you will see a trail that connects to this multi- ' `` use pathway along the canal there and it goes all the way throughout the development, 'F ~ up the western property side -- property boundary, cuts, and goes east and, then, up north to Overland. And also this parcel two in the southwest comer here has been donated for Kiwanis Park and that should be developed, too. Staff has asked the ` ~' applicant to kind of give us a time frame as to when these amenities will be put in and '~° ' built, so that once this project comes in, the future residents will have some way to ' recreate within the residential development. The applicant is proposing several different structures on the site. The Brownstone units will be attached townhomes consisting of ~" ~ four and five units. Right now these are the elevations they have submitted for the ~` ' E : work-live units that we are talking about. Again, these -- this is where the person who ~, :~ ~'~~~ buys this, the future tenants or future owners of these properties will work out of their homes and do business and, then, these are the -- where the -- they are proposing to s live. Pretty good size. They range -- they are approximately about 2,000 square foot of _ living area above the first floor. They are proposing to use stucco and, again, accented with brick and stone. Staff is pretty much -- pretty supportive of these elevations. ~~ ,:: Moving on. Here are the condominiums. This would be two different product types. You can see there is some -- again, these will be stucco with brick or rock accents. You - can see the two car parking in front of the units. Again, they show the trees there, one ~~~' ~~ i of the conditions that staff had placed on them. The site elevations. Again, staff is pretty supportive of this. It looks to be durable and quality material. It should be -- the applicant indicates they should be painted earth tone colors, too. So, real neutral colors, try to blend into the other surrounding uses in the neighborhood. Surrounding ;. i the development I should say. Excuse me. One other thing I'd like to bring up is it i wasn't submitted with this application, but staff is also requiring the applicant submit for a DA modification for two purposes. The following is to, one, as we mentioned -- I'll go ,~~~'I up to this. This will be a live-work type of situation. Staff is supportive of that. We want ~~y`°' that type of development there. It's part of the -- pretty consistent with the A' ~ -` ~ Comprehensive Plan. It's just that we want a limit to what kind of uses -- home f f''` ~` occupational uses can occur in that -- in that lower portion, so we want them to come up with a specific list of what are allowed uses and what are prohibited uses. And the other -- the other provision we want in that DA modification is to hold that applicant to these ~` it applications that they submitted with this CUP and preliminary plat and rezone. That's all staff has. Staff is recommending approval of that and I will stand for any questions ~.,~,,~,x~~ `"''~ ` the Commission may have. ` "' ' e• ~ Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of staff? Y 9 r ~7 ~ 1 ~ ~' ~~"~' ~~~ ~ ;1 '_ ~i.-m ~. , n ~ .~ = sot ~~ <<. fuV 41 } ~ y ~~ x r ~~~ ; ; ~~~~,~, ~ A ~ t C 54~'~ ~ a ! 1 ~ ~ '. itt vCr F i~w*aja~~' .. F C ~`Lh X~~~ b ~~ ~.~ 1 Y ir` ~~~ ~ k 3 L' 4 ~' 7 1_ F ~ i ~ y}K, t y ~ IM(1 '7~ <~ }t,l ~~.1~ .. . 1 :~ L^ y J ~ }{' ~, .,:. i. ~ ~: ~ ,.f0. ~ ~ .9~ ~ e ~ F ~ ~ - t~? ~ r i' ~~~ r ;~, .,F_ ,. ~.a, ~; ~:~: << ~; r r .:! ti " ~i ~~, ,;' ~,=. ;~. i ~...,. ,,~ >. '~~ _;, :-:: f` n.- ~'-,: ~. ~+ Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 8 of 29 Moe: I have none. Siddoway: Just to clarify -- so, the outstanding issues that I picked up on were the fire access, the parking overhang, the additional trees and foundation plantings, and the DA modification, that language is already in your staff report as a proposed condition; right? Parsons: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, that is correct. Siddoway: Thank you. Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please? McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. I had to think about that. New address. It takes awhile. I'm representing the applicant on this particular project. For the benefit of some of the new Commissioners, I'd just like to kind of briefly give you just a quick overview of the Gramercy project. The project is right there along the eastem boundary of Mountain View High School. Mountain View High School is located here -- or on the western boundary, I'm sorry. On our -- this west. And, then, on the eastem boundary of the subject property is EI Dorado. This is approximately -- was 70 some acres. We came through the process with a mixed use type project. Obviously, wanting to incorporate some commercial uses and, then, some office uses within the interior and, then, as we went south the intensity of those uses decreased. We showed some Brownstone with some alley-load type product. We had some courtyard, detached single-family dwellings, and, then, we had these little areas here that you see in gray that were blocked out for future multi-family type product. But at the time we processed this application we didn't know what that product would look like. It was the desire of staff and the City Council and we were in agreement that we would come back with a Conditional Use Permit for any of the multi-family type product in those gray blocks, including this large center piece, in order to allow the Commission and the Council to look at that product. We wanted this to be a different type of project and create residential uses that we haven't seen available in other projects in the Meridian area. One of the things that -- that was discussed was the Kiwanis Park. Kiwanis Park is a conglomeration of multiple pieces of land. There was 2.4 acres, I think, here that came from Thousand Springs and, then, there was some that came off of the Resolution Park Subdivision and a little bit came off of Los Alamitos and the last piece to the puzzle was this comer of this Gramercy project. My clients donated that two acres to the city. They worked closely with the parks department to oversee the improvements of Kiwanis Park and they did participate financially in those improvements in excess of 200,000 dollars. So, they also put in a pathway. The City Council wanted to see a continuous pathway coming along the -- or that's the Ridenbaugh Canal and, then, it would come down through the park, down the side, and, then, we'd bring it out here. We have got acenter -- center medians. There was some nice landscaping along there. It's kind of a parkway effect. We do have one point of ingress and egress here with this center -- what we call the spine parkway-type collector roadway. We connect to a stub street here in Resolution Park and, then, connect to a stub street over here on the east boundary in EI Dorado. We have been meeting ti ~" r lb , 1 , `.'. i?~ t. =' ~rl ~r A, r L;° 2y i ~~ ~y 1 ( C._ }1 ~~ t t x r~ L . ~`__ I r~'~ } y _ ~ i ~' ;fi~ < ~~ ,. `: ~ {: <.:r= h i ~; }: h_ ~- "r • • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 9 of 29 ~~ ~;. ~~~ >~ ~;, ~' ~;; :~ ~; ~: ~: y~, €> >,,~ ~:~~`. . i,~ ~., . ~:< a; closely with the planning department and the fire department, multiple occasions with both entities to try to work out some of -- some of the little kinks. Since this is a unique project and we are proposing types of residential units that really haven't been tried before, we had some issues, the live-work issue and how do you classify that from -- from the International Fire Code and so forth. Those were things that we have been working with the fire department on. One thing that we did agree on with the fire department is when this commercial lot here, which I think we -- we designated as probably most likely some type of an office use, we will have an emergency vehicle access out of their vehicular travelway here to connect to this public street. So, that would provide a secondary emergency vehicle access to this residential area. We have got the Ridenbaugh Canal here that is, obviously, a natural barrier. The vehicular crossing, bridge crossing, is to the west and, then, Mountain View High School here and, then, EI Dorado just has the one stub street. So, in our meeting with Joe Silva he seemed to be comfortable with an emergency vehicle access here to give -- meet his criteria of two points of ingress and egress to the project. The application before you does include a rezone for about 3.66 acres and that is located right here in the midsection and that was the area that we always discussed as Brownstone-type product. And the reason for the rezone is the R-15 zone that was given to the property when we annexed mandates 2,400 square feet per dwelling unit, as far as the lot area and we were at like 2,379. Very very close. And the way the units were designed, the square footage of the units and the configuration and the fact that half of this project is already constructed, so the street -- these streets here are in. We were kind of stuck. So, the best solution was if we went with the TN-R, that would allow us to deviate from the 2,400 square feet minimum lot size and that's why we have asked for that just right in this particular area. We will have 38 Brownstones and I think Bill put the picture up on the -- up on the screen. As you can see, they are three stories on -- the living area is the second and third floor. As far as the uses here, we did -- we did provide some example uses for the staff as part of our application. They asked us to get more detailed and make -- and kind of make that list a little bit larger. Our intent is say an art studio. An insurance agent that is just cone-man show. We -- in the CC&Rs it is our intent to -- to restrict what type of uses would be allowed. A commercial type use, you know, somebody that had lots and lots of -- you know, a beauty shop, for example, that would not be an allowable use in there, just because of the intensity of it. It's alow- keyed, office-type oriented, study-type oriented use. We are seeing them in other states. They have been real successful and we are kind of the first one to give it a try over here in Meridian. As you can see, the -- as far as the esthetics of the structures, they are very beautiful. They have attached two-car garages. They have rear alley entry. We do have a 20 by 20 parking pad in front of the two-car garage. So, as far as the parking issues that were discussed in the staff report, that is not an issue. The other type of product -- if Bill could switch -- there we go. These are the condominiums and we struggled -- as I indicated before, most of the improvements, at least on this portion, these improvements are all installed. Street, sewer, water, utilities, et cetera. In working with the space that was allocated, that was based on input we received from one particular architect, who doesn't work for one of our clients anymore. So, we struggled with trying to come up with something that, obviously, we envisioned as part -- as being a benefit to the project and the picture we painted for the Commission and the ~. ~ v:. ..'.j ~ +~ ~`~ S ~: , S ~~ iy ~ ~~ y ~ ~ ~ "~ ~, t yp l~, ' ,, i, 4 ~' ~~ ~. .. ~~ . ~c~~y ~ -t- <'fi'~ F ~ o y ° ` ~ ~, t r ~ c '~ ~" ~f: ' ~} ~ F ~ .~ 3" K ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ f L~ ~q k; ry y1 ~r~: i~; T ?ww: Y+ -i ~ s, ~ r ~ ~- }~ ;. A r iS n . s,~s -li Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 10 of 29 Council and this I believe is it. This French country look, mixed in with this English kind of cottage look, so you have got variation in styles, earth tone type colors, two-car garages, these are two and three bedroom. Now, when we -- when we first met with the staff, we struggled with the allocation of the parking pad in front of the structures. We e based on the input we received initially, we were under the assumption that we did not need the 20 by 20 pad. But staff, through further research, in looking at that UDC, ~~~~ stated, well, if you -- if it's just one building and they say were rentals, we wouldn't need a 20 by 20 pad. But the way the UDC is written, if you do a condominium plat and you sell these units, then, it falls under the attached single-family requiring the 20 by 20 pad. Now, we did allocate parking. We have some guest parking in each little quadrant and we felt that -- that what we provided was a good idea. I mean we were trying to minimize our impervious surfaces. We have like five foot planters and I think there is like a 12 foot planter between some of those parking areas here, versus just having one ' continuous hard surface area. So, those -- those parking areas I think as indicated in ` ~'~ I think there is 16 -- 16 three -- 16 three deep or is it 16 -- no. Sixteen the staff report , three wide by 18 feet deep. So, they are very close. We can -- we do have some room ",'~'~ to -- to link them in, so that they would be 20. The problem that we saw was if we do widen them from the 16 three to the 20, it would eliminate what we -- what we liked -- °~ the decorative planters that we incorporated into the project, which break up that hard ` surface area. So, I guess from a planning perspective, you know, where a unit is rented or a unit is owned, why is -- why is the 20-20 applied only if it's owned? I mean, typically, you drive the same number of cars, you have the same bedrooms -- everything else remains that same. So, in our -- if you looked at response to the staff conditions of approval, we did put in there that we would like the Commission to, obviously, take a look at that and weigh is -- is that critical, that 20 by 20 pad in front of each unit? And I did go out and I measured my cars, because I was just curious, you know. The area that we have allocated is that, you know, enough. Well, a Yukon is less than 7 feet wide and 16 feet long and my car is less than six feet wide, less than 15 es of vehicles -- ou know rent diffe n So based on ou know two , feet log y tYp Y `~~ ~``„` obviously, those are just two specific types, it would be able to accommodate the two cars as designed. We have read the staff report, we are in agreement with most items. I will address the conditions that we did identify. As far as the miscellaneous application to amend the development agreement, we just offered up a recommendation. The staff wants us to do a modification. We do not object. We will go ahead and get that '~~~ prepared and submitted, so that it does accompany this application to the City Council. I believe staff asked me to address the 1.2.4, the 80 square feet of private usable open `"' space for each unit, such as a patio, balcony, or deck. We will comply .with that. These ``>a? units have been designed to -- to meet that standard. Item 1.2.10 is the 20 by 20 pad. Basically, the condition states if these -- if these multi-family attached type units are to ~~ be platted as condominiums in the future, a 20 by 20 pad in front of the garage would be mandated. So, we -- we do object to that condition. I guess we -- we are trying to think outside the box here. A lot of times the ordinances don't allow us, they put us back in `~' the box, and so I don't -- I don't know what the solution is. I have read through that parking section multiple times. There is discussion of alternative compliance through - the director, where the director evaluates your parking, are you providing adequate ~''~ parking, is that an option? I'm not sure as far as how the staffs been applying that. I ~-' ;t ~.~ .t .,x.15 ~_~' ^~~ t * , F ;s a ,F r_ l%,• f i' ~• ~,_ . ~, ,. ~, ~~ -c - y 4. r ~~ A; ~i t' .j ~t i, ~'n 5 r~ 4 A. _.. 'Y; • `•'"~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 11 of 29 haven't had to deal with that as far as parking is concerned. In 3.11, as far as the R-2 ~' occupancy, we have been working diligently with the fire department. The complexity ,,n came with the live-work unit, the Brownstone unit. What do you classify that as? Is it '` classified for a commercial as far as -- under the International Fire Code? Residential? We just want to make sure that -- that in addition to that statement that -- that there is some added wordage, that, obviously, work with the fire department to determine ~' exactly what that rating is going to be and how we will handle that. r ~_. ;,. Siddoway: Which number was that? .,; •. McKay: That is 3.11. Sorry. r,, ;:" :~ Siddoway: 3.11? Okay. A ', ' McKay: The last thing that was brought up -- it was mentioned -- the last thing that was mentioned was the secondary access. It was in 3.23 under the fire department and I believe 4.2 under the police department. We have been working -- the same applicants ~ ~'~'"~ ~ have been working with the Meridian School District for about the past six months and ~; ;~ their -- their attorney to dedicate a public right-o- way out of the west side of Mountain View High School and construct a new public street outlet to Linder from Mountain View High School. My firm did the construction plans. We obtained from Ada County ~' `: Highway District, the city staff, and that street is now under construction. So, I believe ~' "'`' the 3.23 and the 4.2 should be eliminated. ~i:.~i O'Brien: Excuse me. Did you say Linder? ;~~; _. H ; ; ,' ~~ ~r~ ; ~_~ McKay: Locust Grove. `' ° ` O'Brien: Locust Grove. Thank you. McKay: Sorry. Not only are they donating the right-of--way, but my clients are also paying for 50 percent of those public street improvements and I want to submit this as ,~.-;~.I ~~_.~~~;~~ part of the record. Here is a set of the construction plans. As you can see, they are ~" `i~ approved and signed and, then, this shows you that alignment and, then, this is the -- ~~• what that right-of--way will look like coming out of Mountain View High School. So, we -- we have connected to Mountain View's high school site and, then, we are coming into the site and extending a driveway to interconnect with their existing parking area and so this will help to alleviate some of the traffic congestion due to the one point of ingress and egress out of Mountain View High School. '~~ti Moe: And that would be on the west side of the school, not the east side, where we come to this property. McKay: Yes, sir. Moe: Okay. ~~+~ ~ ~ 3} ~~ .~; ~ ~.~ ~` ~~~ ~~, S s 51~, a .. _ ~~ ti ~ ~ *~ ~,a 1~~~ ,~ " ~ E ' ~~ ~ ~ ~~' ~ ; F~ ~: v ~ ~~~ :~, ,~. t~<~~kc t`l l ;y', _ ~~i ~'r. i, ti~ ~?^` ~ ~,~ . R:. /.-,. C ~ y.v { s~'. >;j~ _ .~ z Y p K ~ i f~ ,, =M ~~ >, . r , ~+ ' i : ; .~ . ,~~, ~ ,- g" 4. ` ~ r F F ~F .. J ~ ~. 1~ y 1 t i~ _ ~ , ~ ` ... ;~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 1 S, 2007 Page 12 of 29 ,. .~ ,t: • McKay: When -- when this project was first contemplated, the Gramercy project in its entirety, it was discussed as far as where should an appropriate outlet be, based on the existing improvements at Mountain View High School and based on what the applicants were proposing. This was determined to be the best option. Obviously, you wouldn't want to bring high school drivers into this residential area here. I think that's already been tried to the southwest of Mountain View High School and there is -- have been quite a few complaints and I think barriers were up. So, we have worked diligently to solve that problem and at substantial expense. So, I ask that you, please, remove 3.23 and 4.2. Now, 3.24, the fire department requested additional parking be provided for the multi-family. I'm not quite sure where that came from. Obviously, if we meet the requirements of the UDC and staff is satisfied with the parking that we have allocated, I don't think that that is applicable. I mean I just think that's kind of overstepping the bounds there. Concerning a question under the police department 4.1, I think they were concerned that we have more than four units sharing a common entrance, such as a stairwell. We had some concems about public safety. We do not have any four units sharing common entrances, so that is not applicable. Do you have any questions? Rohm: Mrs. McKay, can we go back to the parking pads, the 20 by 20 for a moment? And staff had recommended that you make that change. Have you taken a look at the layout to see if there is a way at all possible that the pads could be accommodated? McKay: Yes, I have. Rohm: And -- McKay: In some of these -- in some of the areas we can accommodate the 20 by 20 pad. For example, this -- let me get my bearings. The northwest quadrant here. This is one of those areas that I told you there is the 16.3 width and, then, the 18 depth. As you can see, the rear yards have 20 feet setback there, which is, obviously, in excess of what is required. So, there we could stretch those out, but it does just add additional hard surface area. As far as the width, I have some concems -- I guess it would all depend on how staff applies the setbacks. We tried to -- from the public street we have got like a 19 and a 21 foot setback, so we didn't want those -- those units right close up against that public street. We have some -- a little bit to spare through there. It would most likely mean the elimination of the landscape areas between the parking. So, if you can -- that's the problem with these small site plans. I got to get up close so you can kind of see them. If you look at that you can see that -- that there are landscaped areas in between each parking area. So, we didn't have one continuous hard surface area in front of those units. It breaks it up. So, if you can kind of envision you have got a 20 foot drive aisle, which is -- it was the width that we need and, then, we have got 16 three in width and, then, 18 feet in length. Then, we have two parking spaces at the end of those two buildings to add additional parking. I guess if somebody had a Suburban that was longer than the 18, then, they could -- and it was a guest, they could park down there. The area that we struggled the most with was the southwest comer, which is down here by the park. In that area we have five parking spaces and another small ~~. ~°:< ~k .._~~ AY b 2•r' ~: x ~~~~k. ~, ~" ~ ",¢ '~,v~ ~ ~ iL 1 al t G -1 -~ ~ }'YT'~,5~ 4 .G '.~ ~' ~ ~1 Yl~, l! ~ - ~~- a' ,~ ~r , >r 1 .y:~ rp j, ~~~ t~° ~rmMr;S ~~ r ~.. _ f y„c Y..--1. 6 ~c`1 P ~ pp " ~'I R C f ~ ~T { i~ '* 'tr: VSy1 fit; `~ L M ~ ~~p+~F I Y.j yp,~ {5 }~ Yb' ~% ~ ~ ~4, ~+ -y i}I K i ti . ~'Ir~JL ~1 Y~ ~i ~ A N- {~ n7Rt ~~~.Y~a j ~~ ~ a-~ ~~~~~~:~ h ~ R $ Fr ~~ ~' A ~, 5 ~ If~TY d lC > ~ ~&/R±r~'FL 4 ~ x ~ t ~~1 ~ ~3 i ~`+~ V q r '~+ ~: r ~ t ~ ~ ~~ S ~A K t L' .fie ~+, ~,~' . ,< T G. h ~r.~ .' f ; ~ i S Y ,r • • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 ` Page 13 of 29 ~`:'. drive aisle to accommodate guest parking and, then, we designed it so there was no parking in front of the garages. There is only five feet in front of the garage and, then, a 20 foot drive aisle and it was a similar design we used at Crossfield Subdivision in the alley load product. It's kind of the rule of thumb if you keep that dimension five feet, then, it's very obvious and visible that there is no room there to park. I have seen units that are built like that in Hawaii. I stayed in one for like a week and they provided -- they had a little parking lot at the end of the buildings for guests and they had -- these particular units had aone-car garage and, then, they just had five feet in front of the -- ~~ the garage. So, I guess we are trying to be creative. We are trying to think outside the ~, box, but we are trying to work within the confines of the UDC. Staff likes the project, _ but, obviously, they are governed by the UDC and so I'm not sure how to grapple with that. I don't know if they have had any brainstorming or not. But I do find that it's so peculiar that if -- if we don't do a condominium plat that's not an issue. It's anon-issue, _{ so -- but if -- Joe, you want to address that? He's an architect, so maybe he can explain a little better than me. ::,. ~'~' Atalla: Joe Atalla. Tuscany Development. 6223 North Discovery Way in Boise. What, really, I think at the root of this question for the parking pads is whether these units are <' ' classified multi-family or single family attached. And as I look at the definitions in the - UDC, amulti-family dwelling is a structure or portion therefore that contains three or more dwelling units or apartments where all such units are located on the same k- ''` property. A single family attached dwelling is a structure containing two dwelling units ';:; < attached by a common wall or walls where each dwelling unit is located on a separate ~ r property. Now, when I read that, a condominium is -- they are not -- each unit is not on ,, :::-, - a separate property. Thereafter, you know, that really should apply more to townhomes ~'-~;',` i or duplexes, things like that, where the multi-family, the way I read it here, is apartments ~~'` ` I or condominiums where -- you know, a condominium you're just buying the air space, ~~ you're not buying the land that it sits on. So, I guess in my interpretation of the code, ''~ `' those would be considered amulti-family dwelling and, thereafter, by the parking ~: ; ~~, ,,,, requirements of the code would not require a 20 by 20 pad, so -- ;~ ''`~~'~'I Rohm: If, in fact, they were condominiumized, you would be just selling off the structure .~.~:; and not the land underneath it. -< Atalla: Correct. t~ Rohm: Okay. ~;~.~, Hood: Mr. Chair, if I may. The difference is -- and Iwill -- Joe is right on with the multi- r, family and the definition. The difference, though, is with your units you're not just two attached, you're three or more, therefore, you fall into the townhome definition and a townhouse, by definition, is one structure, three or more properties, and three or more dwelling units. By definition, then, when you look up property -- you have to go to property and it's a lot or parcel. If you go to parcel, a parcel is a tract of land held in '~~ single ownership, so -- and a lot is a portion of a subdivision intended as a unit for transfer of ownership and development. So, technically, once you condo those units, ,., ~' ~ " t. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission h;: ; October 18, 2007 Page 14 of 29 they are -- a unit and a lot are synonymous. So, you have -- by our definition that's how ~` ~ we define the property. So, it's a unit and a lot are synonymous, so, therefore, that becomes asingle-family dwelling. That's why we put in there that if you're going to ~> ~ condo these, that's fine, but we are going to be looking for these certain things that "'~~~ relate to single-family or townhouses in this case, so -- and a lot of it, too -- a lot of our k~ analysis wasn't necessarily based on -- and I will go back to Becky's question earlier. It k; =~ does seem like we treat multi-family different than single-family. I mean the unit's still the same, regardless of ownership, if it's a renter or someone owns it, it's still the same. Our parking requirements should be the same. The difference is that the multi-family `~' parking standards were meant more for complexes where you have two or three - time hundred units and the chances of everyone being home at the same time all the ~~~ `~ and fighting for those -- those parking stalls is not -- you're usually able to find '~~ something, because someone's working graveyard and you can park there and, then, you go to work and someone takes your spot -- you don't really have those assigned w,, ,, x`:' parking. So, that's kind of the idea with why there are only two parking spots required for multi-family is there is more parking to choose from than just eight or, you know, a smaller group of multi-family. I think that's one of the questions that were asked. Also, I .., . did want to also comment on the fire department's comment on why they made that same comment and their concerns are -- the depth of that, they are pretty concerned >- ~ about, because there is only 20 feet wide of a drive aisle that are coming into those -- to the garages and they are afraid of overhanging vehicles. Now, 16, 17, they are close, ~: ~ but most people don't pull right up to their garage door, they leave a space that they can walk in front of, so it's a foot or two, usually, and now you're driving the Yukon, so it pushes back. So, they are a foot or two into their 20 foot fire lane and that's what their G -'~'~ concem is. There are no real good spots to park. So, I think you're right, I mean guest parking is another concem that we have, just because there isn't a lot of on-site parking ~ here and so you got two for eight units on the northwest corner, what, four and a i , handicap for seven in the -- and it just seems like regardless if itsingle-family, multi- ~.;::; family, or whatever, there just doesn't seem to be enough parking, regardless of the ~~,' code. Just we don't think that it probably functions to have -- you know, will function . adequately if people are fighting for on site, on street parking, and it's approved as is. t ,, So, the code isn't terribly clear in that, you know, aspect of why multi-family gets treated ~'°~~`;. differently than single-family with acondo -- I mean a condo is just airspace. I thought I I'd just try to clear that up. And, again, it's not too terribly clear, but that's kind of the ~F~ i~ to istics of wh we said, oka , ou're multi-family, but condo, then, you really are more 9 Y Y Y .. ;...~: P`~"" towards the single family and just the form, too, of the building is more related to a ` <i i townhouse slash single-family than it is towards a standard four-plex. So, I don't know if `' ~' that helped anything or not, but I just thought I would try to clarify some of that stuff. ' :~ . Baird: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Mr. Baird. Baird: Could I ask a question of Mr. Hood, as a follow up to his comments? If our code ;," ~~ "'= is forcing us into this requirement of the 20 by 20 foot pad, wouldn't the appropriate ~'`'~ relief vehicle be a variance request? And I'm not trying to put things to a stop, I'm just ~;,~; ~{ ~. ~r ~ t ~ t y ~ l4 ~ ~s~~ S~~ 7~~~~ } ~ ~~ ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~° y j. t, ~~~: ~~. a ~~~ r t~' + s ', ~' t. '~'~7 c +~`;y: K t .r - ~~~..~ ... 'a ~: s~ ~- i ~j ~~ ~k ~. 4~ i' Z J ... ~5 ~. ~i A 21` 1j. ~.y" ~ i} K Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 15 of 29 trying to help answer the question of the applicant, where do we go for relief? It seems to me if they are -- if we are applying code requirements, it requires a certain dimension, I think a variance request would be how they would approach that in front of the City Council. Hood: Mr. Chair, Mr. Baird, typically, we try to reserve variances for some hardship on a property. In this case I mean they could -- I'm not saying that's what they need to do, ` but there are other ways around. You lose a unit off of each comer, you redesign some things, you can make it work without going through the variance process. The variance, to just kind of -- you know, if there is no -- if you have exhausted all other scenarios and -- or there is some natural feature that bisects your property, I'd say, yeah, a variance. Here Idon't -- I don't know that we can make the findings for a variance. We could just ` ~ as easily say -- make less units. The parking problem goes away and you can have a development with less units, but be similar size, so -- I mean we would accept an application, probably, if they filed one, it would just -- I don't know that staff could really support it. ;~~'~ Rohm: Did you have anything else you were going to add, Becky? ~~ ,,;~. ^,, `'.I ~;~:.` -~t~~ McKay: No. I'm struggling myself about the parking thing. Rohm: Yeah. Okay. McKay: Other than -- as far as condominiums, you know, the state law -- they -- it dictates how those are handled and it is an airspace. It's not a physical lot, it is a unit. So, they are treated -- they are treated differently. Rohm: As Caleb was giving his assessment after hearing yours, I was trying to think in terms of like multi-story units that would be condominiumized and I can't envision us requiring an additional 20 by 20 for each unit as it's stacked up and so it's -- I'm kind of tom on this issue as well. I can certainly see staffs position that an additional parking pad out in front of each unit would be certainly desirous, but I can also see your position that --that it's not the same as asingle-family attached and so I'm kind of stnuggling with that a bit myself. McKay: Thank you, Commissioner Rohm. We are kind of the same opinion. I don't think the people that buy these are traditional detached single-family people, they want to live someplace where they can walk to the park, they can walk and shop, that's why it's called, you know, a mixed use, live-work type complex. Rohm: Thank you, Becky. At this time I'd like to see if there is anyone else that would like to testify to this application. Okay. I suspected not. And seeing none, I guess if -- do any of the Commissioners have any additional questions of either the applicant or staff before we close the Public Hearing? > rt ~~ ~ i ~' °~i ~ ~~ , ~f "~` ; t ~' " ' ~@ ~ ~ +~ i z~', e,~ .! - -~ j , ''-3 -~c:"; y e i.~ s ~L '` 3.1. t f t~',: k FcL {, ~'2r FFF~SA riiv 1 4 ~. ~.' ~ } ~ . r. ~' t l 1 - ~ .~ • y. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 16 of 29 O'Brien: I have a question, Mr. Chairman. And I'm not sure who is the right person to ask this to. Along that roadway access from the high school and in the commercial ,:~! areas that I pointed out, are there going to be anticipation for fast food restaurants and all the things like this that the high school students are more apt to use or are they restricted, because I anticipate if that's the case, there is going to be quite a traffic ' '` problem. McKay: Commissioner O'Brien, in the residential area they would not be providing even in the live-work any type of uses that would go along hand-in-hand with Mountain View High School. As far as the commercial area a is that what you're -- ~ O'Brien: Yes. ,~~ McKay: Yes. Up in the commercial area. I think the bank -- a bank is going in there. There could be some restaurants. Intermountain Orthopedic, YMCA, are going to go into that facility. They do have a connection through Galla Street -- do you see Galla there? ~: '~;~~~ O'Brien: Yes. McKay: Galla goes through and, then, interconnects over to the spine collector roadway at the signalized intersection at Overland. So, the students can come -- they don't have to go out to Overland and, then, come in through our primary entrance you see there as Wells Avenue, they would come in via Galla. They would also be able to come in via Galla, go down Wells and out Blue Horizon to go over to EI Dorado. So, we do have interconnectivity of those commercial uses, if that is one of your concerns. O'Brien: Yeah. That's good. Thank you for explaining that. Appreciate it. ,..:: - McKay: You're welcome. Moe: While you're still there, though, I guess the question I have got -- I'm a little bit f his -- the ntin o t confused in re ards to both the fire and the police and their wa g 9 '-I~ I. The hi h school is ri ht there so there is nothin secondary access to the high schoo g g 9 `' ,`. we can go into the high school for. They are providing another one to the north, so I'm not real sure exactly -- I assume, staff, is that what they were talking about? Just , s where it s k has talked to u Bec wanted to make sure there was a second access and y `' going to be, north here -- I assume that they have met that and, if, in fact, we are doing ;:. that. ;,.>: Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Moe, that was just stated as the preferred ~`'' # location. They were open to entertaining different locations, but their preferred site was ~.~~ the school site, so I mean -- `. ~ Moe: They were anticipating -- ~F ~~ ~.,. ~;_~; ~` ~ ': r~ ~ ,' :{ `~ ' ; ~< ~:-~ v >4 b -: a+ Y~`M.. . . ; i Nr~1 ~y.' !u {.:T~~ y~~~yy{ l ~h'.7 <V~:-. # f `'~1 `: 4~-.}~#~ -~r.-~:.~%~4'~;: 3V''~"p~~i ~; i'x?' '^2 „~ ~r ~~~.~ ~ , ~ `. ~ ~ '- at -FY.^' ~a ~ ~ r ~~' } yy ~ J"~t~j d"Yrf "f~ I"" ` r r~ ,~. it i . ~ C 3 ' ~ u r (~''. f ~ t i,,''~ } ~` 1~ S L ~P~ ~ y ~. ~ ~( 4, 1_ i 4 .; ~ ` ~;g a~ sri.:~: ~~ =~; k ,. s ~r t , fir: ~ ~~ u>. 4, i i 6 ~ -'' ~ ~~ .~~;: ~j.::: E; ', ~~ ', _ ;''~~ ._i ~~ ` _~~ ti, j, ~'r q' ~> f ~, ;; s. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 17 of 29 Parsons: When we met at the agency's comment meeting, they had indicated that they could -- they could be happy with that -- with something up through there on the eastern portion of it for the access point. Moe: I guess just for curiosity, were they hoping the district was going to give up land to put something where the high school is or something? Another roadway? Parsons: I will defer that to Caleb. He knows the history. Siddoway: Caleb, as you speak, is there a stub location from the high school? Hood: No. McKay: No. Hood: But the high school wouldn't have to do much, because the parking lot is directly adjacent to -- if you look at the -- it's not that the building backs up, it would just be stubbing right into their driveway. I mean that's parking all the way up to the subject site. Now, there is a ten foot wide pathway that kind of separates the two, so you would be crossing amulti-use pathway, but there is room to get -- right kind of as you can see where the ball fields and grass ends, right where the parking lot area ends, that's the tip of the comer we are talking about. There are eight multi-family dwelling units proposed right there on this side of that parking lot. So, you know, they would lose a -- you know, a couple parking stalls, but it really wouldn't be any major improvements that would have to occur for that access to happen. Rohm: But, then, again, the school district didn't come to the city and offer it up either. McKay: No. Hood: That's correct. Rohm: Yeah. Moe: Okay. Rohm: Thanks. Moe: Thank you. Siddoway: Mr. Chairman and Caleb or Bill, on the police department comment 4.1 that talks about multi-family dwellings show more than four units that share a common entrance, we just heard testimony that there are no such instances. Can you confirm that from staffs perspective that there are no multi-family dwellings with more than four units on a common entrance? 3 yy {~}(~ ~ Z ice: !t~ C4 ~: E• ~7~ t ~~ ~ ~:- ~ r.. 4 r<: ~~ xpx ~ ,. e ~; ~S*' '~~' Yy ~ ~ dLY ~~ ~~~ ~ r ~~ x ~~ F ~, ~- ,~ 7 / ~ ~l 1~ r ~~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~~: ~~ ~;~< , ~a ~:- s ~}2S i'f~ ~~. L ~ ~ ~ ~ } _ ~ '~'.Sf t r E ,S p' ''.~; ~r ~; ~;~YY •. ~~2 4'ff~ ! ~''' ~; `' r~,'_ S ~ j ~'~ ~~~! t ~f I;. ;: ~ . ~i~ Ji+ { k 'rr, %~ - i,:. y e'•: JIB "I i:,~~! ,:, '+~~~ ^yyj ~. ~i S ~S. ;... ,~. "`~~<' ~:.., }.:, r~ 6. ! ~~ ~.. r. t- , 6'• `~ t F E."a~~ ~~:~~~' V~ ~: .,, .. -~:1 _;;;<~i N ~ ~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 18 of 29 Parsons: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Siddoway, if you look at the elevations the applicant's provided here, you can see that their entrances to the units here and also from the side here, so you can tell that they aren't sharing any entrances there. Siddoway: I wonder there are -- are they talking about the fact that there -- the entrance into the driveway has four on the north and four on the south or -- I'm just trying to understand what the concem was. Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Siddoway, that's the only thing I can think of their comment is related, because, yeah, there is -- there are dual -- there are two folks that share entrances on the Brownstones, but that's the most that share an entrance as far as a pedestrian entrance into a unit or two. There are I think up to ten, maybe, on one of the blocks. I think there is a five and a five in one of the blocks. So, there would be ten sharing a driveway in that, but that's a driveway, not a -- not an entrance. Usually they say that comment for entrances -- walking entrances. Siddoway: The comment as written says that the applicant should meet with the police chief prior to the next hearing to address these concems. I imagine if we -- if it's just as -- as stated, with the note that, you know, we don't see where four -- more than four units share a common interest or stairwell, but ask the applicant to meet with the police chief and address that concem prior to the next hearing, do you think that would be acceptable? Hood: Yeah. And that -- I would have hoped they could have had that meeting already. I don't know if the applicant knew that that was a condition in there or not, but, yeah, I think if -- it should be able to be worked by Council and if, by chance, no one's able to touch base in the next three or four weeks, there is -- nine times out of ten someone from the police department is here. So, I think that will work fine. I'll just let you know that the main comments that we did get from police and fire -- I mean there are several conditions in there, but their main concems were lack of parking and Idon't -- they really don't have in their standard conditions any way to say we are concemed that you're not providing enough on-site parking. And Becky mentioned, you know, maybe they are overstepping their bounds, but that's what they were telling us and when you look at it we are, too, concemed about parking for -- for the future residents here and visitors and, you know, these streets do allow on-street parking, so, you know, I don't know that it's a huge concem, but it's limited, especially around curves where most of these are -- you're not going to be able to get a whole bunch of on-street parking, so that's primarily what I recall from our comments meeting was they are concemed about the number of units that are taking access and, then, not having anywhere for people to park when they are either living or visiting there, so -- Siddoway: And which number was the comment that was overstepping its bounds again, please? Or that the applicant suggested might be? 3.24? Thank you. All right. Mr. Chairman, I move we close the Public Hearing. Moe: Second. ~~ i w, ~~ ~rC ~ ~(:1 1 } F 1 j alp 1,~ti; x v ~~ t 1 r y. ~ c ~• 4 r' r ~` „} ,~~ ~a .... ~.._. ~y' ~ 1 J'~ ~i... -.. d ~ .t ~,~ r Yj' ` '~~ h 5-' 1 ~' ~~ ~ ',~ t T 1 >h ry+ q~A a7µ fr "~ h i ~- JI ~ ~~ ti T > f>l t t`yF u ~ xT Y h ~~ ~l~ z-. ~~ _ `~' ~, ~f. ' t iM' ~} !~ ,f. ii p ~ ': ks y'7f ~~~ ~ ~~ , i~~ ~ ` ~'' `~~ i J ~r r ' `~ '~ ~a „ ti~ ~ ~ C , ~~~` E' ~ '.~ 4.. ,, :,{ . f p ~:~rl ~i ~;, >;,_;;_ ~:. ~, ~~;; ,:,;, ;; . t, Ai•r '.~t ,:;~ ~; Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 19 of 29 Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-016, PP 07-018 and CUP 07-018. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carved. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: Discussion? Commissioner Moe, do you have a couple comments on this application? Moe: Nice product. I think the only thing that I am a little bit bothered by -- and, then, I'm not sure I have the answer either and that would be the 20 by 20 pads at the front there. My biggest concem -- your standard parking stall per se would be a 9 by 20, you know, and basically as far as codewise I think that's what that is. So, we are -- we have got the problem both ways and both directions and that.. There is a very good comment that was made that the fire department's got a concem that vehicles will be out in the 20 foot right of way. That concerns me as well, going into those. So, I'm kind of interested to see what the other commissioners think about that, but other than that it's a very nice project. O'Brien: Mr. Chairman, I think it is also a very good project. I think the intent of everything -- especially the park -- the park's idea. Again, I'm tom back to the parking or the stalls pad size. I'm really one that -- you need to have some good space for a vehicle. To give you an example, if I go over to my daughter's house -- and I have a pickup truck with an extended cab and I'm three feet away from the garage door and my tailgate or my hitch is sticking out over the sidewalk and they are in an approved subdivision and I think the same goes with this particular project. I think you're going to have more problems than not due to the fact that 75 percent or more of the vehicles sold in Idaho are trucks and they are long, most of them. Most of the percentage anyway. And I just have a problem with trying to squeeze too much in too little space and I'm inclined to say, you know, drop one of the condos off the end or whatever -- townhouses off the end and make it right. So, I'm -- that's the only concern I have with that project. That's all. Rohm: Commissioner Siddoway. Siddoway: Let's see. On the 80 square feet of private usable open space, we heard testimony that it was -- that that is accommodated, so I think that's good. On the 20 by 20 pads it's tough. I could see both sides on that one, too. But my inclination is to support the staff interpretation of that -- of that code and leave the requirement as stated. On 3.11, the classification, Idon't have a problem with adding the words to work with the fire department on determining the classification of the structure. Regarding the 3.23 and 4.2 with regards to secondary access, I would be in favor of just striking the last phrase with preferred connection to Mountain View High School and just leave in place the requirement for secondary access to and from the site. z Y~~~ ~; i .S. ~ ik _ M~ flYT?~RSM-.' li ~, ~. 1 ~~ ~~ l f ~. ~~,~ W ~, ~' ~ ~ `~%yy, ~~ _~ fir,: ~~ ~ to r . S y~~~ E 1vk;1L. ~, f E1~. ~ i cl ~ ~ - SS !~ C ~y .t ~ .a +~~~ ~`,: ~yF h ~~ 1 ~ `~' r : ^; ,.' ~ .~ Yf,~' ~ 1; ~ ~ -. u, F ~'~. ski ~ ~ _ ~ r, Uw { ~. A ~' ~ ~~~ ~, ~u ~ ~~~ . r ~ , 5 a 3~ - ~~ ~~~i ~$ fi~ ~~' ~ ' '. '~ r. ~9 Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 20 of 29 Moe: Yeah. I would agree. I would be okay with that. Siddoway: On 4.1 with the more than four units, I think we just let that one stand, but note in our motion that they need to meet with the police chief before the City Council hearing and resolve that issue and -- "~,'' Moe: That's as it's stated in the report. Siddoway: Yeah. So, just leave it in there. 3.24, I could be fine with striking that. I mean it's -- it's a request, it's not a condition, but, yet, it's confusing, because it's stated with the conditions of approval, so unless someone feels inclined to require additional parking beyond what's there, Ithink -- I think we could strike that one. ~: ~ ~~ -''~'~ 1 Moe: I would be in favor of strikin that, because, quite frank) when we o lookin to 9 9 y ~;~~;; a couple extra parking find how they get their 20 by 20 pads in there, there may be spots eliminated at that point. Possibly. ,, ; Siddoway: Yeah. The 20 by 20 pads are going to have that effect, so -- '. `i Moe: Yes. ~a. ~~~~~f~ Siddoway: As I'm looking up, I'm realizing I don't remember a specific discussion about the additional trees and foundation plantings. Did we -- did we get any specific - testimony to that? . Hood: I asked the applicant, Mr. Chair, Commissioner Siddoway. I just asked the ' ~ applicant and they are okay with that condition. ,~` Siddoway: And that condition is already written in, it's nothing we need to add. ;,~:j Moe: That's correct. They had no problem with it. ;, ,; Siddoway: And we also heard clarification that the -- the question of how a two foot I overhang is accommodated as well; is that correct? On the stalls that were only 17 feet deep. ~~ Moe: Yes. Siddoway: Yeah. Moe: Sounds like you're ready. Siddoway: Any more discussion? Rohm: Well, I -- you know, as far as the 20 by 20 pad, I'm not sure that I'm in agreement with the balance of the Commission. I --Ithink where they could put them ~' ~, r 4L:_ i •: mot'?'' + ~ z ~#'~ ~. r ~°1( ~S t" i T~ t 4~$ r+ T r +~~') 't : ... tS pc ~ r { ~ ~' ~" ~j' 4 'Si """"h~ r,~ ~ E Y ~' `N ~.~~~ ~ ~;~ rY yy cr^' t f ~ ~'' R 't ~,~ ~~ ? ~ f K:. '1>,h ~~' 3 r k= Sw's .;;.i-~~. r k,~.w -V~.,:~ ~~ H# t~'r ~,:~ .. .. s Y~< fi-;~ ~~ Y ~ ;r ~;. E i Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 21 of 29 without losing units, it would be appreciated. I don't know how you can put that in a motion, but in the north -- in the -- well, it was the northwest comer, I believe they t, .'; commented that the pads could be placed in that grouping in the southwest comer, it `; just wouldn't work at all and I think that maybe if they could condominiumize the 3 ~ northwest comer, then, the pads are there and the southwest comer, they are going to remain apartment complex and I don't how you put that into your motion, but that seems like that's kind of a mix between stafFs recommendation and the developer's proposal, ~;::~; so just a thought. is Moe: However, in the application they aren't going one way or the other on the condominiums, they are stating that they are going to be condominiums, so, therefore, `` we are ruling tonight based upon them being a condominium, so, therefore, we need to review staff for that purpose. Rohm: I don't think so. I don't think that the application -- 'f Moe: Right, basically, within the summary it's noted as such. Rohm: That they intend to condominiumize them, but they are not constructed as condominiums initially, they are not -- but, I don't know, you -- ``` Moe: I'm just going by, you know, it's a CUP for multi-family units and in parenthesis they have got future condominiums. .:; ~~; ,. Rohm: To each condominium and I think that -- I can live with that. Mr. Siddoway, -~ would you like to make a motion? ,.~ Siddoway: Sure. One second. Mr. Chairman -- Rohm: Before you start, can I just make one last comment on it -- on this? Is in your ,~ motion you might say that if you're to condominiumize these -- a specific block of units, ''r`~`,'' they must meet the single family standards that include the 20 by 20 pad. Can you do that? And, then, that would be stipulated that anything that they move to that designation would meet that and anything that doesn't remain an apartment and that's just a -- maybe more of a question than an answer. O'Brien: Would that be taking away the potential buyers of a unit, though, d you stipulate that these are only apartments and a person couldn't buy it as a condominium? ~~. `~' Rohm: Well -- and Ithink -- Siddoway: Kind of give them the choice. Rohm: Ithink that --Ithink that that's what the staff want is if, in fact, you're going to '' condominiumize these units, then, you have to have a 20 by 20 pad. But if you're not, then, it doesn't require it. So, my only -- and I'm not saying that that's the right answer, ~'j ~,' r t t~;~ r ~,, ~: ~ ~~ ,' ~~ ~ ~ +~~ ~ ~ i r~^v L-: ~: ~$a S yy si .v t 4 ~ t 1,~ ._ 7 ~ .x_ . °uP `I~° ~, 5 . ~~~ :M:. 4. ~~ { .yy 11`1~. ~F' Ft i yb ~{ ~i7rJ'; 1 , Pte? i'' jf. t+": 4 M p ~{ o- ..y. 'a.,. FF ~~ir~~~ ~ 33 Y ~ i5'-^ t t ~~ Yj ~~~, ~' k f ~ ?3 ,j o Y" I { J /yk Sy~ ~ b ! . } 1~• . ... .y F ~` :T' '` E s 1~' z, t' }~ ~~+ ; `'. ~ ~ s ~, . '6~~Y~,k~ .y~+'. ~ l 2 L ~. k ~ u r ~`~ z^ r ~~, ~ ~'-,~ ~`'~+ .1'. .F:n, w 1: a_;.. C h~'~~~ ~,;~; €~. #yj ~ ~l b, iq, .k:~ y. . ~'. a i ~h. - - ,^~ • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 22 of 29 I'm just saying that that is an answer that seems to put it back on the applicant's shoulders to -- if, in fact, they intend to, then, they have to adhere to UDC based upon single-family -- Mr. Baird, I see you down there -- I know you have some thoughts on this. Baird: My thought is that Mr. Siddoway is ready to make his motion and in -- that's sort `~' of a joking way of saying I think you have to take the application as it's presented and the way it's presented is they intend to make them condominiums and unlike some politicians who use the intent in a flexible way, I think we have to take them at their `~ word, that this -- these are intended to be condominiums and your ruling should treat it as such. '~~"~ Rohm: Fair enough. Thank you. Appreciate your comments. Mr. Siddoway, you're on. ~`~ Siddoway: Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move " to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers RZ 07-016, CUP 07-018, and PP 07-018, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 18th, '~ ~ 2007, with the following modifications: First, for clarification, it is under the assumption ~~' `~ that these are to be condominiumized units. I would note that item 1.2.4 the 80 square ~ ~'~ feet of private usable open space is to be accommodated in the project as stated by the applicant. For 1.2.10, the 20 by 20 pads will be required for the condominiumized units. v,; ~-: That 3.11 we add a note that the applicant work with the fire department in determining `' the classification of the units. For conditions 3.23 and condition 4.2, that -- I don't have the language in front of me anymore. It's changed. That the phrase that states that the ~~:`_~, preferred location of that connection as to Mountain View High School be struck and the remainder of that sentence say that it requires a secondary access. Item 4.1 will remain ~ x as stated in the staff -- in the staff report, with direction to the applicant to meet with the 4 police department prior to the hearing with City Council to resolve any outstanding issues on that item. And, then, with 3.24 regarding additional parking spaces being ~ -- requested, to strike that condition. I would note within my motion, just for the record, that the 17 foot parking stalls are to meet the two foot overhang standards. That the '' ,," additional trees and foundation plantings shall be required per the staff report, as will be F?' '"~ the proposed development agreement modifications. End of motion. q~ ~x5~ Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of RZ 07-016, PP 07-018, and CUP 07-018. All those in favor -- recommending approval. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion ~~ carried. ;.. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: Thank you, folks. ~. ~ T.,~ "~}-~ s ' 4 ~t ~'i _. ~ n ~~.:.. ~ f f' " f~ r.:. 1i• :... ~~M." ~' ~.,.~ {~''~ r 4 ~n R zz~ r { ~ ~~_ r . p~yj~ . It ~ Y'. ~ ~'~ ~ y1~y ~~~ ~ ~~ i~~~ ~'.~: -'. ~~\ t41 u~ t" i • . Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Y' :,, October 18, 2007 >, Page 23 of 29 Item 13: Presentation: Landscaping Requirements of the UDC presented by Caleb Hood (Time Permitting): Hood: Mr. Chair, would you like me to take the last item off the agenda and -- r. Rohm: Would you, please. ~ ' Hood: -- take care of that one tonight? So, a couple months ago there was some `~ questions from Commission about some of the landscaping standards and it seemed ;'~ like some of you at least could benefit from just a quick refresher or if this may be new to some of you, just of what the UDC required landscaping -- what the UDC landscaping requirements are. So, I put together just a quick little packet. Some of it has stuff '}`~ ~~ directly copied out of the UDC. I have also got some verbiage that I will refer to that's ~~ ~ from the UDC, although it's not specifically cited, so -- the main things that I'm bringing t ='^~'~ before you tonight are the street landscape buffer widths and their construction, land ~. use buffer widths, when they are required, and their construction. And, then, alternative compliance and when that's eligible and kind of what staffs looking for for alternative _.'~ ~ compliance. So, I'll try to keep this brief. The --our landscaping requirements are really broken up into three different sections, residential, commercial, and industrial and I'm ~ ;f,~ going to start with the residential first. In all residential districts there is a requirement fora 25 foot wide landscape buffer along arterials, a 20 foot wide landscape buffer along collectors, a 35 foot wide landscape buffer along entryway corridors, and a 50 foot 's'~' wide landscape buffer along the interstate. Also of note in there is although they are ' ~ interstates, Eagle, Chinden, and Meridian, south of Franklin, are designated entryway '~~~ corridors and do have a 35 foot wide landscape buffer requirement. In residential `°' I districts the UDC does require that these landscape buffers be placed in common lots and not in easements. So, that is a big difference from commercial or industrial projects ~ ;_~ that do need to be put in common lots owned and maintained by the HOA. I have a :,,; ; ~ commercial handout, it's the third page, I guess there -- , Siddoway: Caleb? •l Hood: Yeah. <~ Siddoway: Just for quick clarification, that requirement for the common lots is just for ~;;=~~~ residential projects, not for commercial. ' .; ,,, Hood: Correct. Yeah. That was just for residential and I will talk about commercial ' t -- jump right in and here actually right now. And, please, if you have any questions don ~ -- there is nothing formal about this, I'm just kind of going to run through these and if it c~ ~: ' ' doesn't make sense or if you have questions, please, stop me. So, that commercial sheet, it's got 11.2B.3 at the top, those are our standards. I have highlighted some of ,` them. The street landscape buffers and, again, they are real similar to the residential ~~ ~' ones that I just listed. The main difference is along local streets in commercial districts `! we do require a ten foot wide landscape buffer. Local streets in residential districts, °~: ~~ there is no street landscape buffer requirement. -, 1 ~ s EY ~: r y-'c~'- C1 n~ ~~. '"~ ~ ~ ~. f" ~~ , 7~ i" .j {~, ~ {` ~l~ry 1 1 l:, ~~, P - ~; H$kr g~ ~~ '~ ~ n 'Y YES t ~ '`^ J -. o ~• , I T{,~." 3 ~, { 3' f y~ i f ~ CC..,~' `- .,r r I H f f~,r~ i~' .5 ~` I ~~... ~ y,y. E ~ t.~ h. 4.' ~~l ~ ~5 ~j .C- ~ h ;{ r`,4 jp' f.. J ~z ic~ i_<': { ,~~: r t ~ L .. :i r'~~ t 't ~ - Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission '' ! October 18, 2007 Page 24 of 29 O'Brien: Caleb? Hood: Yeah. O'Brien: Excuse me. What happens when we annex property on a roadway that doesn't have those requirements currently established? Are they required to change it, then? Hood: Correct. Yeah. There are a couple of mechanisms, depending upon what we are annexing. I mean if we are annexing farm ground and they are doing a subdivision, we would require them to set aside the appropriate right-of-way and, then, construct the landscape buffer -- the appropriate landscape buffer width on their property. .!~ O'Brien: So, to give an example of -- and I hope not to get too personal with my ':' situation, but along South Locust Grove Road above Amity -- or south of Amity there is ~:~ a lot of homes in that area that already are up against the roadway and the annex -- or the city of impact is getting close to that already, if it hasn't already impacted it. What do ~_, ~ they do about those homes? ' Hood: You will see -- and this is the last part of my presentation. We do have an `~;~~ altemative compliance section that talks about just things like that. If you can't comply with these dimensions, there is a mechanism that says, okay, we recognize that you ~ ~;~~ can't move your house ten feet back nor should you move your house ten feet back, but ~`''~~ I you can provide landscaping and provide it there, provide a little bit more dense landscaping in the areas you can provide them. So, it's not the variance process, it's ~' '` ~ more done -- it's one at the staff level and staff can evaluate the merits of those projects ~I and we recognize that there are situations where this can't be administered to the letter ~~ ' of the law a hundred times out of a hundred. So, we do work with them, but that's the r.., -;: mechanism, that's the tool we use is the altemative compliance to look at those '= ~j situations. ,,: ~;~ :,,~,~; O'Brien: Thank you. t~;:"~';"`' Hood: So, then, the commercial land use buffers to residential uses are required there, `; ; ; so -- and they vary from zone to zone. You have got the four commercial districts, L-O, ~ which is our office designation primarily. There is a 20 foot buffer required to residential uses. The C-G and the C-C you have a 25 foot wide buffer requirement and, then, the C-N has a 20 foot wide buffer on those sides of their property. So, it's not on the ~ residential side, they have to put it on their lot and construct. And, then, other things ' with the commercial landscaping requirements, they can be located in a lot or within an "`" easement. So, it's at their -- if it's easier for them for maintenance purposes to just have ;,' it be in a common lot, that way everyone pays their fair share to maintain it, they can do that. If they just want to have an easement across that buildable lot, they can do it that ~~~~:t way, too. But the important thing is that width of the landscape buffer is maintained in the commercial districts. I have also talked just real quickly about the -- we do require a ~•~ji x .~ Y ~ 3j.'1 ~ ~ ~. ~C t l .y{~ { r i ~ .S S ~1~r~k 3 ;4 r4 ~`= r •. 5 'r~ niaw t i~'.f ~4i ~ a r f. ~' ` i ~rxe..' tV ~4f~.~F "i'Y "4. .f ..k . ~., 1 't ~. i i~ ~! -t. ~ G ( ~ ~ u t'~ t ~f ~~' • ~~ xd ~yi C'f k .~{~f. S ~~~\ ~ rh' S ~~~/ 4 a x r ~~ ~kya y7' ,~'`byw'7, ~r ~~ x?ji ~~ ~"* ~ A~a~ , iax~ . ~~. ~j~''ry ~-~, ~ ,T . F„ v ~ ~~~. . ~ M. z 1." y' ', Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 ~, Page 25 of 29 five foot wide landscape strip adjacent to all vehicular use areas. So, you can't just pave your entire site, you at least have to have a five foot strip going along all sides of vehicle use areas, parking, drive aisles, loading areas, all would require this five foot wide strip next to your partner -- or your neighbor. The only time where that wouldn't be ';,~ required is if you're sharing a driveway, so you're allowing them access to your pavement, then, that, obviously, doesn't need to be landscaped, so you can have cuts in those if there is cross-access. Within that five foot strip are trees and vegetative ground cover. We also do require planter islands at the ends of all parking rows, as well as interior to those parking rows if they exceed 12. So, any group of 13 or more you would have planters on the ends, as well as one in the middle somewhere. So, that's the commercial. Industrial, again, the street landscape buffers are exactly the same as far as local collector, arterial, entryway corridor and interstate, to the other ones. The big ~~'`~~ difference here is your landscape buffer to nonindustrial uses -- so that doesn't mean if it's just residential, if it's industrial next to commercial, this buffer would still be required. And although right now we don't have anything zoned heavy industrial, which is the I-8 zonin designation, a 40 foot wide landscape buffer is required from their property to 9 ~ their -- where they could start developing. So, looking at a pretty wide buffer there. So, '' ! again, we don't have anything zoned that right now, but that's the established buffer widths. O'Brien: Caleb? Hood: Yeah. O'Brien: So, you're saying that's 20 feet on each piece of property, 20 feet on one, to a 40 foot total? !4'~ Hood: It's all on the subject property. So, if you're zoned industrial and I'm zoned anything else, it's all on your property and it's -- unless you work with me and can provide it and I agree that you can use ten or 15 or 20 feet of my property. The onus is ' me on m roe and on ou to construct that and if I don t ive ou authori to co p p rty _ . Y 9 Y tY Y `I construct it, it all has to be on your site. O'Brien: Thank you. r, ~~' ;.rl Hood: Probably the biggest difference between the industrial -- the land use one, the one that I mentioned, the next biggest one is the industrial exclusion for your parking lot ~_ ~ ~,~ landscaping adjacent to loading areas. We do not require the end cap parking landscape islands if it's adjacent to parking in industrially zoned areas. So, we still require the internal parking to be no more than 12 in a row without the parking islands, but on the ends, if you have got a loading bay, we don't want semis to be hitting the trees and breaking curbs and things. So, we let you off the hook on that. Other than ;,~ that, the standards are pretty much the same as far as parking lot and street `''' landscaping between commercial and industrial. So, let me jump back to the street buffers and get into what's required in those street buffers. And this doesn't matter if it's => a collector, arterial, entryway corridor, or interstate, all these standards are going to be ~~~k~ ~ . ;° . ~t.: 1 t ~~ } ~ '~ 1 ~ ~'fi~~rr~t L. F t `' I~ ~~ '~ }~ jr ~`~~~ ~ ,.~. 3'I a' xll.yyW~i. 3~ i.{~,.. ski„ i ~ "'K'I .ti - ~~' ~• ~ Y ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ '~ ~ l f t f . r . ~: L ~~ ~ ~ Ry i ~ i ~F r ;_ ~ ~~ ~'~ r~ {~ :. ~ , s' ~~~». ~, .~ ~µ~ ~ , (( z ff~ ~r,C A ~I ~SMf.y! ~~ iu k , ~~~ : ` ~` Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission ' October 18, 2007 Page 26 of 29 5 ' the same for all of the -- where ever a street buffer is required. I guess the one _, exception to that would be if you're doing parkways in a residential district, but I don't ~` really want to go into that too much, but, basically, require one tree per 35 feet of street ' frontage and, then, at the base of those trees should be shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover. Now, you can group the trees. It doesn't mean you have to `'' lant one tree every 35 feet on center, you take -- if you have got, what, 105 feet of ~;; ~• frontage, you can take those three required trees and group them together and cluster ' • them, so it's attractive landscaping or however you want to kind of group them so they ~ ~' I ' don't kill each other off in the future, but there is some flexibility there and they can be = placed, you know, closer to the street, closer to the property. There is some flexibility • ` exactly where it goes within that width of a landscape buffer. But that's the requirement. ' "' , s -- they So, we do allow some flexibility for some people to be artistic in these things. It ; ~:_ F are not set in stone exactly how they have to look, it's just the number of trees we are ~ looking for in there, so -- the use of large shrubs, hedges, and conifers are discouraged in those. They tend to -- tend to create hazardous situations in some cases and they ~~; aren't meant to be full like your land use buffers, full screens, they should add some breaks, so you can still see through some of the landscaping at certain intervals ~~ especially if fences and walls are permitted only at the interior edge of the street buffer. :: So, again, it doesn't make any sense to have a 25 foot wide buffer along an arterial and, ?, ~ then, the developer puts their fence right at the street side and so it screens off all that beautiful landscaping they just put in and all you're looking at is a six foot fence as you ~ drive along. So, we require any fencing to be at the back side or at the beginning of the • buildable lots and not on the street side. Land use buffers. I'm going to move ahead to ' '? ust read this straight out of the UDC there. Intended to land use buffers. And I will J ::: insure that incompatible adjoining land uses are adequately protected and are provided ' -- ~ an appropriate amount of land separation to conduct permitted uses without causing ' adverse impacts. Where -- now you can go back to those -- the industrial and '~ commercial handouts that I gave you and you can look again at the 20, 24 or 40 foot ` width requirement. If the adjacent property is vacant, it is on the director to determine _~.: '~ what land use is most likely to go there and, therefore, determine how wide the buffer ~•~~~:{' needs to be. '''~ Siddoway: And that would be based on the Comp Plan? " ~ `~ ~'~ Hood: Based on the future land use map of the Comprehensive Plan. Correct. Have } ~ you even seen this before, Steve? Are you familiar with -- z ~LL 'r Siddoway: I have. I like all of it so far. This is really good. ~ ~~'~:~ t `~ ~; Hood: The buffers -- and I'm talking about land use buffers -- shall result in a barrier `' '"~ that allows trees to touch at the time of tree maturity. Again, this is different than your street landscape buffers and we are looking for screening of incompatible land uses - when these are being built. So, we are looking for something that -- not today or not ~' ~`% right when it's constructed, but when the trees mature it does create a screen wall. All buffers shall contain evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ;;. ground cover. So, we are looking for a mix of materials in there. Fences, walls, and ..7.: ~y ,~ s:F:'~ ,b`f _ ~:',3: ; : ~4iF. '' :• ' f, { ~ ~$. '~ Y ~ nom: {~4y~ 'F,r•'• .•;M ~) d.>y'~'~~^J';ti t . a ~ ~'~~ • :i~a?•~ .~ ~' •: . .;4 . k . •, ;` ~~',~~=r:k` ..~%" •4' t r s k'~:,:~; . T 4 F~ .i'' 4 A.. _ r ~ i F~: I ~k rl :.y ~' ~.k,. `,.I ~~ • ~ ' ~l r't~.' ,"s.Y' ' .`,"~' k;, ..~. t' : ' .14'0 ,~" :I ~ : o A . •;g„ ~ ~• r, t ~.~,.. ~ .r ~. 1 ~ ; ;~~ ~ p y; ~~: .~ i,; ~ f 't~ ,. ~ ~ ~ ~'s ~+~'~ -~a ":~~ y;,~c aft,., y .t:. ~ ~ 'f. ~. i ~~ i ~ ~Y;~. ~ ~ : •~ r'Y ' ..~ • ~ , ~ 1.. ~ ~ '.V; t>i ~ ~ ~'- ~I. . . ::i red I I: .1 . 3.' •.7 ^ h>d~ , yy ~ ~~' .J I ` ' l < • Y ~ . ,' ' Y ~ ~. • y(r . ~ ~ 1 y; .Y i,•. . i 1 E I it ~~ J 'A"T [ "`~ s•:': E,~ d, "~ :.4". ~ :y! ~K'`^ ;: r ~ ` } ~ ~ z' ::~ ~ ~A4• .I ~ 0. '.C. a .: 111 ~ ? ~ ~ ~} ~ I ':I`o ' ~ 1~'f' :) `,~~ .rf 'k ~ .1:, yi•. aiRay [. .I' .:ri. ..>^'yA. ~ ' y..,:' Y 4 I sir iy. " • }•. g9 .~'M ~` ~J. ~.rt : • h) ' ~~`•~.+5 k: '.d~ ;5' F, ~ ..r I.. r ; ~ 1 '?" Z t tk i '','~ ~'d' •: n ~ '~,~". ' ~ :I• :}^.~ , . ~: i i. I F a ', Gi,: PAY •~` , I t '~i :; i r ~ _ ' "~,:' ~ , : t . ; ` a , GWa d. • ~ I _ I1 i :`Y;. a')'~ . .{fir: >.;f:' :::71r • '@E ..j: :~.~' x e '•1:sSZ;lr . '.~' " -;,r.. s``" 'Sw ;, I i ,, , 3 1. 1. !.I .I.. ~.q• I I .1 I. _ Lrl ~•: .r x 1. . , - a .• h y. • ~ 4 l I.~' ''S +ti'•. t I .1 to " ~ ' .. f n.,}. , ~t * t?~ 'ry »l .}4,~,-. ~ ~ r :;q :.. ,t, •~i -r,.,^ ,';f .F . ~: ~ ; y. .f • Y ~1•=.~,E;~~:',' .Q9"f', ~ •y , r. 1 ~ Y 1^ ~ .'.l.(~ ri'. k. FF :.t . ~ e~ ;? . •~~. ~' it ^.L'^ _ ,:~"' , e a ~ jN!` '}iA~, iiV . .i. .•4: ~ Ry Y ..~~~^i t .•~~ ~'~'~ ~.. ~ ' '~:`~~'YS `[ Pia'?ki.~vw$ .,~?:. ii.gx .~.. ',~ :. t,~ , .,, 1~. .l ',i ~'! ., .'.}.~•a .r, r _ :.`..+a~_:£x- ,' .. ,.. :, ..... ' ~ r ~ rr ~ I -•1' ".;w 111 .:~.''``.: ~ ;,. ., .... . ..4 , : ,~ I: ` :~. ~( ,. 6 ~ eS~ , Sy ~ I I r S i " ~, p v A 3 t E~ : r~~ `,1 . sC , ti. n ' '' 4, .,,z r:~ ~ ~ I yf .Fy ;SC ,..i . . -[ : ~ , ~ >f...{.~.,r a Y• r%ti :.~. •,F Ii~l ~ - rp , y..~. :f '' ~lr` `•Y.: ~• `~ z ~~ ~~ d{ " ~ i ' ~~' `:~,'i`a: •'`. i i , %°•.: ~^+ f t ~ ~ ~ '~~ ~ , . . i + t l }r L . J ,~ x ~;~t r ~ _ II r I .... f u . ' ~ . .., , ~ ~ ) i ` `r Sl 3 I. i r{ -. ?_ t ~: ~.'~ • • € Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 }~" " Page 27 of 29 f berms can be incorporated and are encouraged within these land use buffers. So, 4 :,~ anything to kind of get those incompatible land uses some separation and berming is =~ buffering use. O'Brien: So, Caleb, what determines -- it's come up from time to time about trees, size and growth to maturity and is there anything there that stipulates not only the type, but . how long it takes to get to maturity, et cetera? Is that something you stipulate in a motion or something or in the staff report or what? How is that determined? Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner O'Brien, we don't as staff require them to tell us how long a tree would mature. There are going to be several factors that will determine when your average tree would grow to its maturity. I mean based on species certain ~'' trees will grow faster or slower than others. Weather, the amount of rain or precipitation that's given and tender loving care that it's given -- what we do require them to do, though, is on those landscape plans we require them to show the canopy width of that tree at full maturity and we don't say -- you know, we don't ask them is that ten years or 20 years until it gets to be that big, it's something we could ask for. I'm not a landscape architect, so I don't know those things, but I'm sure they have their resources to get us that information if need be. We could, if the Commission's concerned, too, about it being ten or 15 or 20 years until you have an effective barrier, we could at these hearings say plant trees that are going to mature faster and, thus, provide that barrier in a quicker time than some other slow-growing trees. O'Brien: I think that sometimes they stipulate, you know, as a sound buffer for instance, that they don't -- they want to try to buff noises from a particular like parking complex versus residential, like we had the last time -- Hood: Uh-huh. O'Brien: -- it would take a long time for those trees to reach that particular maturity to be able to perform their function and that is to keep down the noise. It just seems like it's -- 20 years is a long time for someone to put up something. Hood: Yeah. Siddoway: On the flip side, if I could just interject -- Hood: Sure. Siddoway: -- the problem with trying to require the fast growing trees is they are often the most weak and they really break off a lot. So, I don't know that we want to -- we have certain trees that are prohibited from required landscape buffers because of, you know, problematic features and those are spelled out in -- they are referred to in the ordinance and in the tree planting guide the city has adopted. But I don't think we want to specify faster growing trees necessarily. If it's particularly sensitive, I think we need ,., ~~' . 'r~ ~sr-,- ., ~ ~~: ~- F . F t~: of ~ y~ y ~ ~' ~ ~ ~i Yr ~7 ,~ , z ~SY, ~~ ~ ~ T i .~~ a'`~ w' ~ .~ Y T z } ~~{ ~ 4 ~ y a S A, :~ - ; r ~~~;}.. , . . fait Y i _ l {~., f. ~.. i h ~~~` k ,~ . y~ ~,c _'~,.... _,i-( ~ ` ~' 1 _ Q:ii • " ~~~ t l'N, Ki( i :r ~1 ~.~ .. Y'.... k: Viz'; ~:; ~r t :; -~. ~,-~~ 4 ~, /~ r; aW i f ~.,' ~~! 'a: ,..;:~ ~. :~ ,. j'. '. `_~ ~.: ~~. ,, • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 28 of 29 to look at additional means of screening that noise, whether there are sound walls or something like that. O'Brien: That's why I asked the question. It just seemed like it was difficult to do. Siddoway: Yeah. Hood: And my preferred -- just what I like to look for when there is something where you're looking for a somewhat effective barrier almost immediately is requiring a bigger caliper inch to start with and mixing in some evergreen trees. So, you know, if you have -- you know, that would give you some at least to six, seven, eight feet right away you're not seeing through those and if you can mix those in with some deciduous trees at three inch caliper for most of the year that's going to provide you a pretty good screen, although it's not -- they aren't going to be touching, it will still give you a pretty good buffer and if you can place those correctly, you know, between windows or where there are openings, you can accomplish still a pretty good screen material, so -- O'Brien: Thank you. Hood: Then, finally, altemative compliance. And I did copy -- it was just easier for me to copy the last three pages are the altemative compliance sections. I'll note that the altemative compliance isn't only for landscaping, there are several things that are listed on the first page that you can ask for altemative compliance for. Any standard -- and that's what I have highlighted. Any standard in the landscape ordinance, anything in 11- 36 is eligible for altemative compliance. Now, there are some -- some conditions that need to exist for us to approve it and findings that must be made, but, basically, any landscape requirement can be applied for and altemative compliance granted, so -- and that's done administratively. Oftentimes we try to have that done and, then, if there is a CUP or something else that's tagging along with it, we can have -- you know, staff can be overruled by the Commission if you think that caliper inches need to be more than three or whatever. So, it's not -- we are not the final decision-making body, but we are the final decision-making body if we are not -- it's not appealed to you or there is not another application that's tagging along, so -- anyways, that's just a quick overview. Hopefully, you know, this is helpful to you on altemative compliance and you can kind of see what buffer widths are required where and some of the materials. There is a ton more information, but I thought this is a pretty good starting point, anyways, and, again, I don't remember where -- where the concern originally originated from. Maybe it was even Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, I don't know. But I do remember you guys wanted some -- some more information on landscaping, so I hope that helped. O'Brien: Thank you. Rohm: Caleb, thank you. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjourn. S rr~5=c'` -h '~ ~s"'n!k'i a ~~ > i .a. y~crs~ ~ e ~r ~+ ice. ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~.~ t .. ~ a+~ ". YY r s~ ~ yl~t S~ i i ~ W t ~ ~ 5w~ &&~It4 ~.~ .. ~ ~YY~~',St ~~4 ~,r x , t'; F err: s ~ C" ~ ~~'' ;,r ~- ~:, a ,s L s ~ 1 ~, , ~ M~s~ 1' X11 F "~~s w ~,: a L~.~S,K;f fi~ } j` ~~ ~ rf:: ~` ~; Mo-jy,~, i.. ~ ~ et,a ~ ~ ih ~ aY i a' ~`~ i ,. ~ ~~ c r~ ' '~ t ~ ~''y y~': ~ ~} 1 ~ y. r, a. ,~ !f p:, .. ' ~ .. Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission October 18, 2007 Page 29 of 29 Siddoway: Second. /.: IT, ~~ ~, ~~..;. ~::. , :' 4~, ;.. Rohm: It's moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: We are adjourned. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:40 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APP VED MICHAEL ROHM -CHAIRMAN ATTESTEQ: . ~~ ~,: ~'; ~;~ °'~~ ~a,I ~,l,r: ~~ ;:~ ~' ~~ ~~ ~ O~ DATE APPROVED \\\\`I~Itl lltlllll//,Y/i~ ~~TF nn,~AA__ ~~l G. BERG, JR, CITY C ERI~~~° ~, ~ ®~ - T r 1~~ ~~ ,,~ ~ ,~~ ~~` ., ~ ~~ . Y T r f _ '~ ~'~~' vA1)! fK ~1,~ I ~, i I i Y~ 7-.' N x~>~~~ ;.a ,. ~a ~ ~aC = ~" p I ~ tr x,: - r, P,/. 3 , t ~ > { •. Y: <~ ~ Y } ~ ~ t. f ~ k ahh+ r~ 7 f~r 4" i ~ ?; ~ Y irl~ ~x ~: .-. ti '9f~ k~~ 6 ,~~r/<' y Z. f•. ~ ~~.T _ ~Qs3.k t - ~ 'i" ~ ~a '~T*~. jj.p ~ y 1% ~ r ' '.. J k Sk _, ~~ r.. / alp y~ ~~`., ky "~ wF ^~Sf . N~` T i :k~. ~~ ~ ~ Ib 'i~'~ f~ ~ ~ ~ '~ : f ~ ,•:, Irk 6~ ~.il ~ ^'h`~3e 31 ~~ .y. 1' ~ I ~ ~ ~~ 1, ~ ~ t f ~~` ~1~' ~` it,~l i ® • October 15, 2007 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3'A REQUEST Approve Minutes of October 4, 2007 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: AGENCY COMMENTS ~``'~' CITY CLERK: ~' ,,~',{ i -; ; :~ i~ 111 ,~~~.~ k t_; , x,l ~ SY:. --: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ~~r '~I ~ OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~;, ~~` ,. ~~~. . ~~( 'T r '~ St,; ~ f,t k y4 $~(yI1It ~(~" iF n .~. ~. E Y ~t ~~~ a ~ , ~ p,~' a~¢v~,. ~~ wy ~Yh h ~ f~l f " G ~ 4 ~ ~t .~ f .( F '~ . +. ~Y ~~ ~~ 1 I ~~~~'~ K ; ~ }* i i t .f y! ~ t, ~~ ~ r x „ ~' ~~~ y S ~` ~' .ta i v ~' ~' ~ a~ ~-; ~r.l ~t ~f r ~t~~~-*ft?r r -.. < 'G"'~ - ~ I~ r ~ M1G. }', ~.e e~15~~~,~r t 'j q'c' St ~ ~y ~ ry~~ftt°, ~ r~„1 ~~ ~ a - , ~~ ~;~ ~t 4r~rt y,~ .i ~,~ ~, C;.: ~ • October 15, 2007 AZ 07-012 `; MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 APPLICANT CenterCal Properties, LLC ITEM NO. 4 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from 10/4107- Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Meridian Town Center - NWC 8~ NEC of N. Eagle Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See Previous Item Packet /Attached Minutes CITY ENGINEER: ,. ~ ~;,;: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Request for Continuance ~:' • ` ; ,: €", ,,.~ :; ~~ :' ,,;y :~a~:~~. .,, ::;; ~,, t :°~~~ ~~ ' . ~, CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See Attached Comments by ITD / ~-ttached Sign Posting Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials present®d ai~ public meetings shall become properly of th® City of Meddlan. ~~ ~:~ ~ ; ,,, r-% ~ `- ', ~' ~: ~ x r~_. r x-:- t * r ~~ L ~iy ~ x: ~ r ;< ~ ",r t v ~t t ~ ~i a #. ;g ~. „j r ~y' F `*X R ~ ` + ~ M`f`g ~~ ~ L ~' r ~ ~~ ;-0, ~ !~" ~ ~~ .~- k x ' .~'~;' .?~' R ~ ' ~FYi ~ ~ • ~~ fti ~~ -rya= ~Yy~ ` k 4 ~ ~ tJ L ~r*x C C~ T ,p. 1 ~ ~. ids ~t !* ~ „:, %t ~Y~; nt ~:, f ~ ~:- ~` ' `$ `° ~~ t 6~ ~,~" 4 ~-~ ` F Wk i E i:: ~', ., ~' ,:~: ~~ ,, October 15, 2007 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 RZ 07-0 l 4 APPLICANT Kastera Development, LLC ITEM NO. 5 REQUEST Public Hearing -Rezone of 30.08 acres from R-8 to C-N (13.59 acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh -SEC of S. Meridian Road & E. Victory Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: 0 COMMENTS See Request for Continuance No Comment See Attached Comments See Attached Comments INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See Attached Af~drnrit of Sign Posting Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~S ~~ ~ M~ ,,. .~- ~z ~ r;t ` ~T ' F'~;. y,r y k t~ fi~ ~ } 3 N l ~A 1 :: ,`y .R,.'''.a ,. ~,, ~ ~ ~r .., 3L ~~ 4~~7 f ; r ~'~~ ~~ ~ ~` ~ ~. ~~ t W ~ ~y.+ r Sr D"L fs~s j i~° ~` ~Y ~,~a 1. +,e`s 4 T 1 7t,Yf Tt r F Y tic ~'.' j 9_ "'k~ I i ' ~` ~~ s =; 2_r ~~; :+~~: 1 F -: fi~ ~~ F! ISc ~r i5 {~ ~Z _ f ~; .A . 4 '' ~ , Yz ~- ii? i ~~ }• > > , i~' ~, r.,~ October 15, 2007 ,.. ~`~ ~~ ., ~*~` ~' ~• ~` ',. ~~ ~'~, :, ~, ``;<-' ~,, . ~~ . , . :~ - ~~ k ~, , ;';;~';' ~. ~; F., ; '.; E», .. ~ ~. i PP 07-015 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 APPLICANT Kastera Development, LLC ITEM NO. 6 REQUEST Public Hearing-PP for 518 lots consisting of 443 single-family residential bldg lots; l r~IdenHal bldg lot consisting of 32 apart- ment units; 8 residential bldg lots consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mbced use tots consisting of commercial retaU on the 1st floor vrl 7 2 resi- dential lofts on the 2nd floor, 9 commercial bldg lots,1 school bldg lot,1 civic /social halt lot, 46 twmmon lots & 5 other lots on 1 TI.43 acres In C-N TN-C, TN-R & R-8 zones for Cavanaugh -SEC of S. Meridian Road anti E. Victory Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY ®UILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: IYITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See RZ Packet COMMENTS Oontacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: ;, ~z .~ ~~ ~_~`'~ j <: ~ti', ~: ~n 4y R~ ~` K2 v; ,x2]. ~ M1 k i ~ I i~~4 ~ s tw i• ~.. rt::. Nrx4 +5.°.• ~. ~>>', ~y ~L Y.}~~ ~ F; ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~5. ~} K ~ a~ ~ti y~Y ~ Y , 7 h~• .,~ . ` ~~ ~~~ "'~ rid: 4'.., ;+ i, r ~ ,, 1', 4 '~ ~ ~k bVC 1, f £ a ~~ F~~:' ~ f ~~~ ~~ h ~ l s +j_ S ~~;:~ ~ ~ ~ r5' - ,{y R ~Y a .1 ~ {` ,~ ~'_ ~{1 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ , x~ b' 1 ~ a; ~~r h- ?a ~E f _. ~ .~ ~G~ She ~;. ~,' °~ e~ ~: _; ;; _,. '~ ..~. F~ :~ ~. :;- y. ~;`;{ ~; ~, . ~, ::; ~, .. ;. ~~ F `~ Y'~ ~, '~ ~;;-~' %~>_ , r,,; p~. w, t, ~:- f, ~; ~, ;, ~, ~. ~ 1 ~~~? ~',f'r ~. ' i~ October i 5, 2007 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING u October 1$, 2007 CUP 07-017 APPLICANT Kclstera Development, LLC ITEM NO. 7 REQUEST Public Hearing -Conditional Use Permit approval to convert the existing Caven home into acivic /social hall in an R-8 zone for Cavanaugh -SEC of S. Meridian Rd 8~ E. Victory Rd AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY EIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: Sew RZ Packet COMMENTS OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. G~'F ~ _ ~ ? ~t~ 1:' ~r b~ .T f F ~ tri-~ ~ K.:'I ~: V; ~f t~ R 4 A~ + Y ~' ~ ~ Y-n u ~ ~ dy~ z .`~ ~, ~ i i~~i 4T M `^4 _ Y' ~{~~ ~ ~~ P Y ~~ x F ~~ ~-w ~~'~ ~ V h t .'/ ~ ~~' :~~ ~[ ~t _ ,~y„y~ L i%i ~. WWW ~,~ rig ~ ,~: ~~ i' ~~ ' r cf c' ~{ it f` ~~~~n 3S { l .it ~} v; ~.~ a . <~ Y a r,' ; v,, e~x .. 1~. ry ~b ~ s~ tai 9 v, ° ^ ~, ~~ ~ ~ S ~ ch ~ . v_ ~ .~. , «,:~~X IT t ~ D , i i i r r* ;~ `''~ ;;;; s~ F ;:; ~- . ~~' . ~;; '~ ,.~ '; is ~; ~: ~, ,_ °. ~~_: C~ October 15, 2007 AZ 07-013 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 APPLICANT Equity Development ITEM NO. 8 REQUEST` Public Hearing -Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision - 1235 E. McMillan AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY QUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: COMMENTS See Attached Staff Report No Comment See Attached Comments OTHER: No Comment by ITD / Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. ~ ~ '_~, f ~ ~~ ~>a f-r~ '~ 4 ~ 4 ~ 1 = 3 f.~; E ~ ~~i -~ 4 y fi~ t ~~ 'ti' pC'~ [ ~~ ~:I ~ vt I[ ~Yt ST Rh~'t {{ x > a Ie ~'j ti y K ~ ~ ~ 1 1 .ff: ~, r = ~h ~ ~ 4 ~, ~ ~ ~ S i ~..,.. ~~;+. `V$h n'~'z i t'.~~ ~.yi ~~ 4l` ~i '~ z . ~?„ i t ~ ,+ ~t. xl ~ r~$~q ~~~^ t Y ~t r~ ~ ~ r.~~y. a~-r~.A r c,N ~ "' ,rlr, a, ~ . a_ . ~ ~ ~ ~~~, -; t ;t ~~ t~,. ~ ,~ Y% ~.k '" ~ ~j4+s~ f .~ ~ ; ~i ~''. ..- -k ^,y^~ tx ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ hz~; .~ R y - ' .; ~ r f ~+-0c.. ~ tit `,° ~ ~ ~r„ ~ r a ~ ~~ c r _ ~ ~ ~ j: f ~'°:,', . w J .. ~, .; „ z 2 ', ~' ;~~~' `:, Ig`,; ;; ~; ; €: ~::2;~ ~=;' ~-' ~~ ~.~~ ~; =~a, -'is! `. r,',_ ~.. ft s 0: ~: ; October 15, 2007 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 PP 07-017 APPLICANT Equity Development ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Public Hearing -Preliminary Plat approval for l bsingle-family residential lots & 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision - 1235 E. McMillan Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDItyG DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See AZ Packet COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented art public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~ k3 ~' r r ~i xY ~` t' 4 ~. _~ .:~ 3 at ~ 3 i ~.. 1~Yt ..! ~~ wi ~'{ i ; .i"b i ht .t C, 6 ~ '+r s } , t k ~_i i' ~~ %_r: } w p~ K I .i ~~ x rr i ~ 1' ..,. ''~~ ~.M.. ~F Wi, h ".' v" a, '~L ~~ /7St.~ ~ ., ~ r, } x `~ ; ~'~ ar f. 5v ~ J~ ~:_ i~ J y 1 y: -m j ~ } r'. .. = s`' ~ :~ 1 ~'`~` October 15, 2007 RZ 07-01 b MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 y APPLICANT Tuscany Development, Inc. ITEM NO. 1 ~ REQUEST Public Hearing -Rezone of 3.66 acres from R-15 to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision -south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road `~ ha... ;; ~~ _j ~:~.,. AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: COMMENTS -~ ~,, . k ~~ .~•~ See Attached Staff Report No Comment See Attached Comments See Attached Comments INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: No Comment by ITD / Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. C Qctober 15, 2007 PP 07-016 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 -',~; r; '~I :'t ~~ ;;,~, _. ,:;., , ,, l ~, rHf ,~;;~: ~~,. ,; "~, APPLICANT Tuscany Development, Inc. ITEM NO. ~ 2 REQUEST Public Hearing -Preliminary Plat approval of 38 single-family attached residential lots on 2.81 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision - south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See RZ Packet COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. 4 ~C ~ ~ ~. Q~~. { :~ Wit, ~~~,., .. ~ . •::x .'. ~ " ~, i~1 1!;' t ~' L ~+; c .-~ ; ,~ dj'- ',ry Yry .,~ 4 i m c'r-,~',,.+ ~~ xau Y E `l~ x. ' ~ ` ~ ~7 ti _' ir:~ ,~ ~- 4.1-' ,y_ ~~I ~r 1~ 1 }~ afS` {~, 4 P~ •S~ v ; ',f ~; ~ ~. .., 7 ~~ 4li i ~ ~' ~ t ki 4~ .Kt ~r S { ~ ~ ~ F ~` ;~ ~~: { f~ v ~s,. ~.< t , to t. rc T. I'+ i C CUP 07-018 >;~• ;;;,;, ,; I „I MERIDIAN PLANNING 8. ZONING MEETING October 18, 2007 APPLICANT Tuscany Development, Inc. ITEM NO. REQUEST Public Hearing -Conditional Use Permit for 32 multi-family dwelling units on 4 lots in an existing R-15 zone on 2.93 acres for Gramercy Townhome Subdivision - south of E. Overland Road and west of S. Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS Date: Staff Initials: Materlcls presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Merldlan. r~. ~. .. -.. t _. ";5 _ ~. ~ Via' "i: `~, ~~Y"S ^~.` ;~ r `" ' { 1~~t ~~~ h f' ~` ~`" a'~ ~, ~ e era T ti z "- ~~a ~~ ~~ tip. ~s~{7~.M ~+ jY ~~ ~'. ~~rA, ~1 }~` ~:~Y~ R l~ r _ ~,` ~~ ~, s r. -n; 1 M',: Ike. ~t ~' ; ~'f'. ~{ !: t ~9r ~ ~ z h' J tart r {i ~~ k?.,~ u e Yti ~,~ h rr k ~` , .. ,~ tl;=' ~ ~°c~~ r;, i.,?:~ ~~~as~,,~ni~ Phone: ~j; ;;,' z ~ ~ r '^ ~~~ Y ~ r. a:. ~ d"5~€ r .+.~ ' ~ ,~ ' 1 , 8''~ 4t ~ ~`~: t ~~~- c.H.