2014 03-06Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission March 6, 2014
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of March 6, 2014, was called
to order at 6:00 p.m. by Steven Yearsley.
Present: Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Patrick Oliver, and
Commissioner Macy Miller.
Members Absent: Commissioner Scott Freeman and Commissioner Joe Marshall.
Others Present: Machelle Hill, Ted Baird, Justin Lucas, Bill Parsons, Sonya Waters and
Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
Scott Freeman X Macy Miller
X Patrick Oliver X Steven Yearsley
Joe Marshall -Chairman
Yearsley: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time we'd like to call to order
the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for
March 6th, 2014. Let's begin with roll call.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda.
Yearsley: Thank you. The second item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda.
We do have one item of change. Public hearing AZ 14-004 and PP 14-002,
Amberwave Subdivision, will be opened for the sole purpose of being continued to
March 20th. So, with that could I get an adoption -- a motion to adopt the agenda.
Miller: So moved.
Oliver: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 3: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of February 20, 2014 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 2 of 39
Yearsley: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and it consists of the
approval of the minutes of February 20th, 2014, Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting. With that can I get a motion to approve the Consent Agenda?
Miller: So moved.
Oliver: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Yearsley: Before we start here tonight I kind of want to go over a couple of items of how
this process is going to work. We are going to open each of these items one by one
and we will start with the staff report. The staff will -- has prepared findings regarding
how the items adhere to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code with
staff recommendations. After they have made their presentation the applicant will have
the opportunity to come forward to present their case for approval of the application and
respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have up to 15 minutes to do so.
After that point we will open it to public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet in the back
for anybody wishing to testify. Any person wishing to testify can come forward and they
will be allowed three minutes to speak. If they are speaking for a larger group and there
is a show of hands, they will be given up to ten minutes. After all that testimony has
been heard, the applicant will have an opportunity to come forward and to respond to
those comments. If desires for -- and they will have another up to -- they will have up to
ten minutes to respond. And at that point we will close the public hearing and the
Commission will have an opportunity to discuss and deliberate and hopefully make
recommendations to City Council.
Item 4: Action Items
D. Public Hearing: AZ 14-004 Amberwave Subdivision by The
Land Group, Inc., located Southwest Corner of W. McMillan
Road and N. Meridian Road Request: Annexation of
approximately 5.56 acres from, RUT in Ada County to the R-15
(Medium High Density Residential) Zoning District
E. Public Hearing: PP 14-002 Amberwave Subdivision by The
Land Group, Inc., located Southwest Corner of W. McMillan
Road and N. Meridian Road Request: Preliminary Plat
approval of Twenty-Seven (27) Single Family Residential Lots
and Three (3) Common Lots on approximately 470 acres in the
proposed R-15 Zoning District.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 3 of 39
Yearsley: So, with that I would like to open the public hearing for AZ 14-002 and PP 14
-- excuse me. AZ 14-004 and PP 14-002, Amberwave Subdivision, for the sole purpose
of continuing it to March 20th. Can I get a motion to continue the public hearing?
Miller: Are we hearing from them like we did last time?
Yearsley: No. Just because it's a -- it's a legal process that we cannot hear because of
the noticing wasn't done correctly, so --
Miller: Got you. With that I -- I move we move AZ 14-004 and PP 14-002 to the March
20th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Oliver: Second.
Rountree: I have a motion and a second to continue public hearing of AZ 14-004 and
PP 14-002, Amberwave Subdivision, to March 20th. All in favor say aye. Opposed?
Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
A. Public Hearing: AZ 14-002 Revolutionary Ridge by C13, LLC
Located at 1100 W. Riodosa Drive Request: Annexation and Zoning
of 20.39 Acres of Land with an R-4 Zoning District.
B. Public Hearing: PP 13-040 Revolution Ridge Subdivision by C13,
LLC Located at 1100 W. Riodosa Drive Request: Preliminary Plat
Approval Consisting of 64 Single-Family Residential Building Lots
and 5 Common Lots on 19.74 Acres of Land in a Proposed R-4
Zoning District.
Yearsley: Next item is the public hearing of AZ 14-002 and PP 13-040, Revolution
Ridge Subdivision and let's begin with the staff report.
Wafters: Thank you, Chairman Yearsley, Members of the Commission. The next
applications before you are a request for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat.
This site consists of 19.74 acres of land. It's currently zoned RUT in Ada County and is
located at 1100 West Riodosa Drive on the south side of West Victory, a quarter mile
east of South Linder Road. Adjacent land uses and zoning. To the north is West
Victory Road and rural residential properties zoned R-1 and Ada County. To the east
are residential properties in Kentucky Ridge Estates, zoned R-1 and R-4 in Ada County.
Actually, they were recently annexed into the city R-4. Sorry about that. And to the
south and west rural residential and agricultural properties, zoned RUT in Ada County.
A little history. This land is currently platted as Lot 3, Block 3, Kentucky Ridge Estates
Subdivision. The request is for annexation and zoning of 20.39 acres of land with an
R-4 zoning district. The proposed R-4 district is consistent with the low density
residential future land use map designation for this site, which allows for densities up to
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 4 of 39
three dwelling units per acre. A preliminary plat is proposed as you see here on the left.
This is a revised plat that the applicant recently submitted. It is not the one in the staff
report that you may be looking at. The plat consists of 64 single family residential
building lots and five common area lots on 19.74 acres of land. The average lot size
within the proposed development is 9,400 square feet and the gross density is 3.2
dwelling units per acre. The colored plan you see on the right has not been updated per
the revised plan, but there are only a couple minor changes. Pedestrian pathways to
the west here and to the south mainly. The common area has been shifted just slightly
there also. But other than that it's the same. Access is proposed for the subdivision via
two stub streets from South Kentucky Way in Kentucky Ridge Subdivision with an
emergency access to West Victory Road. Stub streets are proposed to the west and
south for future extension and interconnectivity. Staff recommends micropath
connections provided to the west and south as shown to promote neighborhood
interconnectivity and to break up the block length along the southern boundary of the
site as shown. Five foot wide detached sidewalks are proposed to be constructed along
West Victory Road and South Kentucky Way as required. There is an existing home on
the site. You can see it right down here where my arrow is. This home is proposed to
remain on Lot 14, Block 2. It is required to comply with the building setbacks and
dimensional standards of the R-4 zoning district. The landscape plan depicts street
buffers along Victory Road and South Kentucky Way and open space landscaping in
accord with the UDC standards. A minimum of ten percent or 1.97 acres of qualified
open space is required to be provided within the development. The applicant is
proposing a total of 1.98 acres of qualified open space, consisting of a 1.39 acre of
park, a parkway, and half the street buffer along Victory Road and the full street buffer
along South Kentucky Way and a micropath emergency access connection to Victory
Road in compliance with this requirement. As you can see by the arrow here, this is the
emergency access that they are proposing to Victory. This will double as a pedestrian
pathway also. The applicant is proposing a fitness park in the large common area that
will feature 1.3 acres of open play area, an eight mile long pathway around the
perimeter of the park and nearly a dozen workout stations as quality of live amenities in
accord with UDC standards. The Sundial Lateral crosses the southwest corner of the
site as you can see here. All ditches on the site are required to be piped, unless waived
by City Council. The applicant is requesting a waiver from Council due large capacity of
the facility. The applicant anticipates that a 36 to 48 inch diameter pipe would be
required to the the lateral. A six foot tall vinyl fence is proposed along the perimeter
boundary of the subdivision. Five foot tall wrought iron fencing is proposed adjacent to
the internal common area in accord with the UDC standards. If the Sundial Lateral will
not be improved as part of development to be a water amenity, the latter is required to
be fenced in accord with UDC standards for ditches. The applicant has submitted
conceptual building elevations as shown for future homes within this development.
Because homes on lots that back up to West Victory and Kentucky Way will be highly
visible, staff is recommending the rear or sides of the structures on these lots
incorporate articulations through changes in materials, color, modulation and
architectural elements, horizontal and vertical, to break up monotonous wall plains and
roof lines. You see here on the right is a detail of the fitness stations that they are
proposing within the park area. Written testimony has been received from Kevin Petty,
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 5 of 39
three different letters, and Laren Bailey, the applicant's representative, in response to
the staff report. They are in agreement. Staff is recommending approval with
conditions. Staff recommends the report be updated to reflect the changes made to
their revised plat based on staffs recommendation and the allowance of bollards with a
chain, instead of a gate at the emergency access as requested and agreed upon by the
fire department. Staff will stand for any questions the Commission may have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions?
Miller: Not at this time.
Yearsley: All right. Would the applicant like to come forward? Please state your name
and address for the record.
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Jim Conger, 1627 South Orchard
Street in Boise. First we'd like to thank City of Meridian staff. We have had numerous
meetings with the -- your planning and development services group and your Public
Works on sewer and water services, so we have gone through quite a process with that
and appreciate that. I'm going to take a moment to walk you through our land plan. As
Sonya noted, we are, basically, replatting Lot 3 of Block 3 of the Kentucky Ridge
Subdivision, which was the original nonfarm development that had the 20 acre set aside
that we are now in front of you today with. This site plan was designed with, basically,
one goal. Our goal was to match the existing Kentucky Ridge neighborhood. We are
requesting a matching zone of R-4 and lot sizes and widths are similar to Kentucky
Ridge and -- and they both -- and, obviously, comply with the R-4 zoning. This project
will have a great builder team. It's actually going to be anchored by Tahoe Homes and
will be similar to Carmelle and Spurwing Greens at build out. Landscape design has
thoughtfully been planned and creates this active use park that you have heard about.
One and a half acres. Again, it's the walking of the perimeter of the park it's
approximately a dozen athletic exercise stations. It's strategically locating the mail box
structure within that as well to get people into that active play area. It was designed to
appeal to all ages and -- and really to get out and promote an active lifestyle and have
these amenities that actually get used. Next -- oh, go into -- into our request -- our
waiver requesting that -- not tiling of the Sundial Lateral. Basically what we don't want is
what -- what we heard and what the ordinance -- we just don't want another ditch, you
know, the the ditch and have a bunch of weeds and fence it off and everything of that
nature. The existing lateral is currently a great amenity to the wildlife and we want to
continue that also for our residents and enhance it for the wildlife. It's a nice setting. It's
-- we are going to enhance it with crushed asphalt. We will have natural grasses and
pressurized irrigation in it. So, we are just not going to leave it alone and think it will be
usable in the future. And this riparian area will actually be maintained by the
homeowners association and will have an annual maintenance put to it in our budgeting
and programming. Our goal is to enhance the wildlife riparian area, similar to what we
did -- we did similar to Woodbridge on Locust Grove and several other great
neighborhoods in the City of Meridian. Next I'm going to touch on traffic. At our
neighborhood meeting this was probably the number one -- number one item on it. We
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 6 of 39
heard those concerns regarding the potential of traffic issues. We went down, met with
ACHD, and they proactively -- proactively addressed the concerns with a traffic study,
identifying the average daily traffic and even speed results in Section 8 of the ACHD
traffic staff report. Basically in summary, Victory Road at this location of this
development is at 44 percent of capacity and I think the important one, which is
Kentucky Way, is currently operating at 27 percent of capacity. Both are well under
their engineered capacities, of course. We don't down grade and -- you know, the
neighbors concern for traffic, but it's from -- from -- I mean that's what they were
designed and function to do both of the stubs into this 20 acre parcel were meant to
forward our vehicles out. In closing we do agree with staffs conditions of approval and
--and just stand for any questions that you may have.
Yearsley: Is there any questions?
Miller: Mr. Chair, I have a question.
Yearsley: Yes.
Miller: So, Sonya mentioned that this ditch area would still need a fence. Are you still
planning on fencing that for safety reasons?
Conger: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miller, yes, per the UDC and the code we
will definitely have to fence it still with six foot. The way the code reads it would have to
be chain link, but we will -- we have done it before and we will use the black chain link
for esthetics.
Miller: Okay. Great.
Yearsley: Any other questions? I actually have a question. You talked about crushed
aggregate along there. Are you looking at another pathway through that area as well or
what are -- help explain what you're planning on doing along that ditch if you would.
Conger: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, what I indicated was a
crushed asphalt pathway, some more of a three foot type neighborhood pathway for our
-- our individual residents. It is not part of the city master plan pathway, nor I think with
the easement width and everything of this nature would we be able to fit one of those in.
Yearsley: Okay. And that's why I -- then I understand now. I just wanted to make sure
there was a pathway.
Conger: Yes.
Yearsley: Thank you.
Conger: Yes.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 7 of 39
Yearsley: I don't think there is any other questions, so -- we do have a few people
signed up. Let's start off -- first one is Norma Petty. Would you like to come forward?
Please state your name and address for the record.
Petty: Norma Petty. 1155 West Victory Road.
Yearsley: Go ahead.
Petty: Thank you. Thank you for allowing me to address you. My husband and I own
the property that is the five acres right to the side -- to the -- of this subdivision and
want to state in advance that I'm not opposed to the subdivision. However, there is a
couple things that I want to make clear that I'm protecting the value of my property and
they have been addressed, I don't know. My husband and I are pretty new at this and
asking a lot of questions and everybody has been very wonderful in helping us to
understand that. Probably one of the first things that I'm concerned about is the fact of
all the lots -- at one time ACHD had indicated to us South Kentucky Way could only
handle the traffic for about a hundred homes. It sounds like that's something that's
already being addressed at this point in time. Once this subdivision is built out you're
looking at maybe, what, 120 to 130 homes, somewhere in there, that would be
accessing that. I see the stub that's coming up to my property and what I want to make
sure is that my property -- that I don't have to allow a road onto it if I don't have an
incentive to do that. So, I want to make sure that my property is protected. I would
encourage that this development is stand alone as far as road access and it not
necessarily rely on my property, again, because I plan on living there for a little while
and enjoying it and I want to continue to enjoy it. A couple of other minor things here is
we do irrigate our property and for those of you guys who come from a farming
background you probably understand what I'm getting at here. It is currently in an
agricultural crop, it's alfalfa, and our water comes from the Sundial Lateral and so I want
to make sure that I have drawings and specifications on how that water will continue to
be delivered to my property and I also want to make sure that any runoff water is also
planned for, because right now it does drain across this subdivision along the three
roads. So, I think those are two areas that we need to make sure that we are congruent
with. And, then, I know there is a plan for a privacy fence to go between my property
and the subdivision. I would just hope that the fence is built in advance, so that we can
mitigate as much noise and debris as possible from the construction of this
development.
Yearsley: Is that it?
Petty: That's pretty much it.
Yearsley: Thank you. We will take these notes down and at the end we will let the
developer respond to your comments.
Petty: I have copies of my notes if you would like those.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 8 of 39
Yearsley: Sure. If you want to hand them to the clerk. Next Ihave -- is it Tom Snyder?
Okay. Next one is Rick Fisch.
Fisch: My name is Rick Fisch. I reside at 3378 South Kentucky Way. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman and Members of the Commission for this opportunity. Would you put that 4-A
back up there? That's kind of a better depiction than I have on the overhead. There we
go. Now, does this pointer work?
Wafters: You need to first touch one of the colors at the top. Select one of the colors
along the top of the screen. The push buttons along the very top.
Fisch: Oh. Oh. Oh. Okay.
Wafters: And, then, you can draw on the screen.
Fisch: All right. We got to go back. All right. How do I erase that?
Wafters: There should be an eraser button on there also.
Fisch: My concern has to do with irrigation and I'm not trying to angle for ten minutes,
but I'd like a show of hands for everybody from Kentucky Ridge. We think pretty much
alike, so I just want you to know --
Yearsley: Now, can I ask a question. Are you speaking for all of these people and they
are not going to testify?
Fisch: How many am I speaking for?
Yearsley: So, then, you don't get ten minutes, because you -- they don't get to testify --
Fisch: Okay. That's fine. Are both of these mikes -- yeah. All right. I mentioned I want
to address the irrigation access issue. Kentucky Ridge has irrigation rights for all of the
property within the subdivision, although we don't take delivery for all of that water just
yet. Currently -- currently deliveries are limited to the park area, which -- all right. Hold
on here. Park area -- oops. What am I doing?
Yearsley: Push the button up on top.
Fisch: Pick a button at the top? Okay. All right. We need the other -- the other picture
back up. 4-A. There we go. Anyway, we have a park in the subdivision -- I'm afraid to
touch this thing again --and we have deliveries to that, plus the water goes across there
and is delivered to my property and the property of Alex McNish, plus a 2.66 acre site
that is part of Mr. Conger's development, but not included in Kentucky Ridge. Since we
don't have any pressurized irrigation system we are contemplating adding one, because
everybody is going to be -- on metered water here in the not too distant future. So, the
option to retrofit is -- is a possibility. Since the water is going to be metered it's
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 9 of 39
obviously a good opportunity to do that. Now, the boundaries -- it's interesting -- and
will try to draw on here now. If you take and extend the end of Stoddard Road down
here to where Kentucky Way stubs out into the southern field there, that is what's known
as the mid section line. Everything to the west of that is delivered by New York
Irrigation District and its access point is the 650 tap off of the Sundial Lateral and
everything to the east of that, interestingly enough, comes from Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District. So, we actually have two points of access for irrigation. So, what we
want to do is make sure that the delivery of the water, which is on the surface now -- it
actually starts up by Frank and Ricki Savala's house right about here and it comes down
this property line and terminates kind of in the backyard of John and Pam Eaton's home
and from that point it goes underground and it comes down here and, then, comes into
the -- our park and, then, it goes underneath the road and into my property and comes
around to Alex McNish's property. This portion right here is -- is a gated pipe -- Mike,
ten inches? Something like that? The size of the pipe? Yeah. Yeah. It's a surface
pipe on the surface anyway.
Yearsley: You need to hurry up. Your time is up.
Fisch: Okay. All right. The only point is we want to make sure that that is maintained,
it's got to go underground, and we want to make sure and have some assurances that
since it's going to cross a lot of backyards that somebody doesn't drill into it with a post
hole digger or something like that and create quite a problem, because there is a lot of
water involved in that. And we would also like to have some cooperation, since we are
looking at a pressurized irrigation system, of perhaps co-planning with the developer on
what we might do together, since it's fed off the same tap.
Yearsley: Thank you.
Fisch: Thank you.
Yearsley: Is it Mary Brown? Marge Brown? Okay. Brenda Jones. Would you like to
come forward? Absolutely. Please state your name and address for the record.
Hamilton: My name is Tamara Hamilton. My address is 3496 South Arcaro Avenue.
And as I stated I am the president of the association for Kentucky Ridge Estates and
what we have done is broken up our concerns and points for this subdivision that's
coming in into six speakers and Rick was one of them and I will be one as well. And,
then, we have another four. So, how can we allot our time accordingly?
Yearsley: Just -- we -- how it works is if you're speaking for a group you're allowed ten
minutes, but those people who you're speaking for are not allowed to come up and
testify. So, trying to make -- move them. So, with that, you know, we can --
Hamilton: So, we can --
Yearsley: Yes.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 10 of 39
Hamilton: So, everyone that would be in agreement to allow the six of us to speak on
their behalf would you, please, raise your hand from Kentucky Ridge Estates.
Yearsley: Okay.
Hamilton: Thank you.
Hill: Mr. Chair, ten minutes?
Yearsley: Ten minutes.
Hamilton: Is that ten minutes total?
Yearsley: Each.
Hamilton: Each. Okay. I will go ahead and begin with mine, since I'm up here already.
One concern that we have is the name of the subdivision, as well as the streets. It is
called Revolution Ridge, but the streets Riot, Rebellion, Revolt and we feel that these
are very negative and I for one wouldn't really want to write down my address if it was
Rebellion. I just feel like it has a very negative connotation to it and I think I would be
willing to help find appropriate names if they are short on hands to do that. I have heard
that you can go to other counties and maybe look for pleasing names and use them in
the current county that you are. And that's all I have to say. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. Brenda Jones, would she like to testify? Okay. Is it Christie
Rye? Oh, are you Brenda?
Jones: I am.
Yearsley: Sorry, I didn't think you were coming up.
Jones: That's okay.
Yearsley: Now, are you on that list as well as the --
Jones: I am.
Yearsley: Okay.
Jones: Am I on there?
Yearsley: No. No. Are you on the list of --
Jones: Oh. Yes, I am. One of the --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 11 of 39
Yearsley: Okay. All right.
Jones: Okay.
Yearsley: Just trying to clarify.
Jones: Okay. I'm Brenda Jones, I live at 659 West Blue Downs in Kentucky Ridge
Subdivision. So, a couple of the points that I was asked to speak to this evening is the
common fence that will be taking place. So, I know that they talked about a six foot
privacy fence, which is great. I think one of the things that we would like them to
consider -- and I think it's something that should be talked about at -- this evening or
brought to the table is that we are not only dealing with one developer on this side, but
we have another developer on the back side of our property who I know has just filed
and that will be Biltmore. So, we are little pocket of homes that have been there for 18
years with views and all these things and now we have got all around us coming in. So,
what we are asking is that those privacy fences match and I know that Revolution, they
are doing their best to, you know, look like Kentucky Ridge or have that feel and that's
much appreciated, but I really feel that it's important that those two developments have
to come to some kind of agreement as to the type of fencing that's going to be in,
because we do have a few property owners that they are -- the way their property sits
they will be impacted by this developer on this side and this developer on this side and,
then, we have our own covenants, which is white vinyl and, then, wooden perimeters
down the center. So, they potentially could have four different fencings on one piece of
property. So, I think that's something that needs to be looked at and I think also when
they were talking about -- and I'm not going to dwell on this alot -- but when you're
talking about traffic flows and those numbers that were originally given out and, then,
the numbers that the current developer gave out, we really need to look at that other
subdivision. I know they are not on the docket yet. They are coming. And they, too,
want to use us and that's -- it really needs to be looked at as a big picture, rather than
part A and part B. So, with that said, I know that they have put up some looks of what
their homes are going to look like, which is great. One of the other requests that we
would like to do -- and we have made this request before of a developer that was going
to develop this same piece of property before the downturn of the building industry and
Mr. Bass was very accepting of our request to have single level homes along the
perimeter of our property, because a lot of us do sit in view lot homes right now and we
understand that there is growth and we understand that we will lose our views, but we
would really appreciate to be able to keep our privacy and not have a two story home
looking into my single story backyard when I'm sitting on my deck. I haven't had that for
17 years. I built up there for that reason and I understand things sell and things
happen, but I feel like if we don't get in front of these issues now it's going to be built
and then -- and it's a done deal. So, we would really like those to be all single level
homes that sit around us and -- and from there forward they can, you know, move
forward whatever plans they want. But I think we are a unique entity in that we have 66
homes and, like I said, we -- and a lot of my neighbors sitting out here tonight -- I have
known these folks for 16 years, we all built -- bought, built and what's kept us there is
the community feel and the safe-- the safety feel that you get -- I mean my kids can go
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 12 of 39
to that park and play. They are within steps of a neighbor's home that know that they
could go to if anything was going on and I just think that it's important to us at this point
for us to be able to stay in a hub and keep that integrity that we have worked for for so
long as a community to keep together and I understand building is going to go on, but I
do think that even though these developments look lovely, when homes sell, families
move in, HOAs take over, it's out of everybody else's hands that's sitting here tonight.
So, we want to get the things in place that keep us private. I know that there is -- I have
seen it all over and I know you guys have, too. Farmers that sell -- well, in fact, this is
happening right now. But the farmer that sells they keep his individual residence right in
that subdivision and some of those developers do an absolutely phenomenal job of
landscaping them in and securing their privacy and letting them, you know, continue
with what they originally had and I think that's what we are really asking for tonight from
both of these developers that are going to be developing around us is we get it, we
welcome you, but, please, do everything that you can to secure what we have already
built and worked so hard to maintain and keep. I appreciate your time. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. Next on list is Christy Rye.
Rye: Hi. I'm Christy Rye. I live at 3497 South Arcaro. I am an original homeowner at
Kentucky Ridge. So, my points are we would like to have a construction road put in,
because right now the way it looks like it will be going right down Kentucky Way. Where
they will be turning there is a bus stop and right before the park. So, we would like to
have a construction road so we will not have any damage and we won't have any safety
concerns. The other thing we would like is post signs that would have construction
rules so we know it's going to be quiet, it's going to be safe. Times of operation --
know that Strada Bellisma had a wonderful sign and rules to follow. It's quiet out where
we are and we want to make sure we keep our subdivision the way it is and clean and
undamaged as much as possible during this development time. I guess that's it. I'm
quick. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. Val Hill.
Hill: Hi. I'm Val Hill. I live at 686 West Blue Downs in Kentucky Ridge Estates. One of
the concerns that we have is the ACHD report on the roads. I find that there are many
inconsistencies in it and in many cases -- at least five instances they are making
exceptions to their rules for this subdivision and we feel that it's not appropriate to do so.
Number one, the Kentucky Way as it enters off of Victory Road is very narrow. There
are no curbs and gutters. It's not up to the standards that ACHD has set for a collector
road. I believe that it's less than 34 feet in width and that's not wide enough for what
goes on there. We have children that go to that intersection every morning and every
evening and they will collect -- or they get on the bus or they are dropped off from the
bus and with that narrow street coming in there, there has got to be something done to
widen that and it needs to be brought up to proper standards so that the vehicles can be
there to pick up their children in cold weather and we would like to have curb and gutter
and sidewalk put in according to the ACHD standards and not waived because
somebody doesn't have the funds. I know that ACRD will collect thousands and
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 13 of 39
thousands of dollars in impact fees for this subdivision, as well as each home, and
whether the developer builds those curbs and gutters and sidewalks or ACHD, it doesn't
matter to me, but something's got to be done to bring that up to a standard. We do not
have connecting sidewalks to Stoddard. That's a very narrow road. It's below ACHD
standards admittedly by their report and they are waiving that and saying that that's
okay and I feel like that that's inappropriate. We need to at least have one side of that
roadway with curbs and gutters and sidewalk. Gives us a way to get -- to be part of the
City of Meridian. We have been annexed into the City of Meridian, now let's have a way
to get there that isn't endangering our lives having to travel down a very narrow road for
those who walk and are on bicycles or whatever. The accident report says there hasn't
been very many accidents on that roadway. How many do they want before they say
let's upgrade it. How many people do we have to kill before ACRD and the developers
come to the table and put the proper amenities in. I wasn't there when they built
Kentucky Way. I do not feel like it was built up to a proper standard, it's too narrow, and
we would like to see that addressed. Just as a comment here, this is what ACHD said
and this appears at least five times in their report. The applicant's proposal does not
meet district development requirements policy because the applicant is not proposing to
construct curb and gutter or widen the pavement. And, then, staff says the staff is
recommending a waiver of policy. My question is when does safety become important?
Obviously, the staff doesn't feel like safety is important and these kinds of things are
quite disturbing to myself to many of the others in our subdivision and would we like to
see them addressed. Beyond that I really don't have anything else to say. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. Next is Brad Broth. Okay. Brian Newkirk. Okay. Gordon
Hamilton.
Hamilton: Chairman and --
Yearsley: Please state your name and address for the record, please.
Hamilton: Gordon Hamilton and I live at 3496 South Arcaro Avenue. There was some
discussion on ACHD and I think you're probably aware that the hearing before ACRD
has been delayed by a month to the 26th, I believe, of March now and so some of these
issues will be addressed at that time and we support the construction of the subdivision,
we are just -- you know, we are looking for a way for it be compatible and safe. There is
a lot of concern about the entry road, as you have heard, coming off of Victory. It is, as
mentioned, something less than 30 feet wide and with no curbing and a sharp S curve
that you get the tiniest bit of show and you have people driving ten feet off the road,
because the people coming up from Victory, they cut the corner, they can't see where
the road is -- there is no curbs, they can't see where the road is, so people go on the
inside. What -- what we have proposed -- and if I can try and use the technology here.
Is it possible to see that? Okay. This is a -- sort of an approximation of -- of what is
proposed right now with all -- all access coming in all the way up and going in -- back
around. This is -- this is what's currently proposed with all traffic that has to come in off
of Victory, come all the way up, come around the park, go in and if there are -- these
lots go all the way back down. Every car that goes in and out will probably be going this
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 14 of 39
way right here. In addition to that car, it was mentioned -- and I saw the -- I think the
filing just came out yesterday -- there is an additional subdivision being proposed off the
end of Kentucky Way with 159 lots. Now, if something isn't done here now, it's -- it's
really unlikely that this 159 lots is going to be tasked with doing anything. So, it's
important that somebody take a holistic look at this thing and look where it's going and
what -- what we are proposing is something more along this line where there would be
an entrance -- a specific entrance to this subdivision that would come off Kentucky Way,
keeping any of that traffic from going through and this is what we will be proposing.
This would also eliminate the need to build the emergency exit onto Victory I imagine.
Of course, ACHD would have to address that. Let's see. Further, we really -- you
know, we understand the need for having multiple entrances. I think the current
standards for fire department is 30 residences on one entrance and, you know, what --
without this emergency -- that's why the emergency exit is there, because this isn't 30
residences, this is 120 or something like that, and it's soon to be 300 and so it really
needs to be addressed and Iwould -- I would encourage you to wait until ACRD makes
a final decision. Let's see. Further, one of the other things that we wanted to mention in
there that if we have the traffic coming up here there are some seven different
driveways that back onto Kentucky Way, which, of course, wouldn't be allowed on a
current collector. It's only allowed in this case because it was built to residential
collector standards at that time in the county and, then, let's see, there is another ten or
11 that back onto Blue Downs, which this current design relies on for all traffic flow. So,
further, we would even suggest that it be considered that if this entrance was built that
these be made emergency access only and we have seen things like that in -- in the
neighboring Bear Creek Subdivision. So, we would hope that would be considered.
Yearsley: Thank you. Was that it?
Hamilton: I just want to make sure that's it. And I appreciate your patience. We did our
best to break up the separate issues and present them in a quick and precise way, so
thank you.
Yearsley: Appreciate that. Next one on the list is Carolyn Sayler. Okay. Polly Cutah.
Okay. Carolyn Goetz? Sorry if I butcher your name. Okay. That's all I have on my list.
Is there anybody else that would like to come up and testify? Please. State your name
and address for the record.
McNish: My name is Alex McNish. I live at 835 West Victory Road and I just have one
comment interest. I see. that the sewer and water connections coming up from
Stoddard to Victory Road and I'm just wishing that there could be a connection point for
my place for future connection. I have a septic tank and well, but if something should
happen I'd like it to be nearby. And that's all I have.
Yearsley: Thank you.
McNish: I thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 15 of 39
Yearsley: Anybody else? Please.
Livesay: My name is Roberta Livesay and I live at 756 West Riodosa and that's real
close to the -- the entrance and what I wanted to talk about was just the -- the whole
entrance and how it has the S curve and it -- I was actually in an accident during --
when it was icy and so I was coming into the subdivision and one of the other -- a young
kid -- kid was coming out and he couldn't make the turn, because of the ice and so he
just kept coming across the road. We were going, you know, quite slow, but, you know,
I got smashed up and -- and that needs to be considered is just the -- you know, it's not
a straight road, you have to go slow and the more traffic you get on there the more
dangerous it is and this last year -- I think it was last year our children used to have to
go down to the end of the subdivision right there at Kentucky Way and Victory and take
the bus and some of them even had to cross the street and there is no -- my child had
to cross the street to get on a bus to go to Chaparral and the road just goes down, there
is no sidewalk, it's just straight down and it was so dangerous. But last year or the year
before three kids almost got hit waiting for the bus and one of our own people was
coming down the road, again it was icy, and poor guy he couldn't stop and it was so
close and we almost lost three kids waiting for the bus and so that road is very
dangerous and the other thing is that Victory has changed over the years. It is getting
more and more and more traffic because there has been so much development around
and it's only going to continue to get more traffic. We have got -- you know, it's been a
great development, we have Walmart and lots of fun stuff down the road from us, but
you just -- you know, just see the traffic building up and with all these new houses
coming in we really need -- you know, we really need some more access. So, that's all
have on that. Thanks.
Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? Going once. Would the applicant like to come
forward?
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Jim Conger, 727 South Orchard
Street.
Yearsley: Thank you.
Conger: Thank you for letting me rebut. I will go -- go through -- hopefully not in too
much of a shotgun -- shotgun format. First I will address the existing irrigation and
delivery points. We are very well aware and will have more discussions with the
neighbors, but our -- our engineers and myself, you know, we understand where the
irrigation goes and -- before we even get this far in the process. So, that will go through
the process. City of Meridian Public Works is very good at making sure everybody's
taken care of. So, that I'm not concerned about, we will definitely address it and we
definitely have the obligation to get the water to that point. In discussions with Kentucky
Ridge I'm more than willing to sit down -- if they need to up-site delivery pipes we are
always open to cost sharing and if they want to share a pressurized irrigation station we
are always interested in cost sharing, it's better for both parties typically speaking. I will
go through -- continue on going through. Really I think the irrigation water was Mr.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 16 of 39
Fisch. That is addressed. Street names is our least favorite thing to do, but we did go
with a Revolutionary Ridge type theme here. If anybody wants to take on the county
during the street naming process you have way more time than I do, but it is not an
easy task. We did theme it, we are comfortable with that and I don't know that that's
really a discussion for tonight. Common area fencing. We will definitely be going with --
just as we indicated and think is that that's the privacy fence and, then, the wrought iron
at our parkway. So, I think we are on the same page with that. I don't believe we can
coordinate with an adjacent developer that's further behind in the process than us and
we really don't see our fences being in conflict, our common areas are so far apart. And
I think that will work itself out. We are more than interested to talk more with the HOA of
Kentucky Ridge, however. Two stories, one story, it is the same every time. We will be
restricted just as much as our neighbor is being restricted and there are two stories
across from us, there are single stories across from us. The single stories have every
right to remodel to a two story. So, there is no restriction across the fence. We cannot
see a restriction on ourself as well. Kentucky Ridge, ACHD, not up to standards, sub to
standards. We really didn't get waivers. The policy requires curb and gutter that are
standard. They typically don't require it in rural settings and that's why we were --
received the waiver. That's an ACHD deal. We do have our commission, but you have
seen the staff report. ACRD is in full support of the project. We did not get any waivers
on sidewalks. That doesn't exist. So, what we did -- if I may show you -- we --
basically, coming in off -- what we decided to do -- Kentucky Way is such a magnificent
setting with its landscaping and its rural feel, it would be a -- nothing short of a sin to go
in there and tear up that landscaping and ruin that entry. So, we took our valuable land
and created additional -- there is already a 60 foot right of way, we created an additional
20 or 24 feet to be able to do the detached sidewalk. Yes, that cost us landscaping.
Yes, that cost us real estate. But it was the right place to put it. So, our sidewalk is in
that area and that did nothing but take property away from us. But it's that important for
us to stay out of the existing right of way and keep that feel and look the way it is. It's
magnificent. They have done a wonderful job maintaining it. Narrow street. You know,
it is -- it is -- I don't know that it's narrow. It's 30 feet. It meets their standards. Meets
ACHD standards. We are in a big push with all our developments. Narrower streets
actually slows traffic down. If you continue to widen these streets you will continue to
have speeding issues and there is study after study after study that would support that.
We are not ever in support of widening our roads. It does not make sense in areas that
-- of this nature. We are not talking about Victory, we are talking Kentucky Way.
Accidents and deaths. I don't -- I don't really like deaths -- the threats of death. But
there has just been two accidents since 1997. It's in the ACRD staff report. The last
lady that spoke that must have been the one that was in the snow. It was speeding in a
snow environment and they couldn't stop and the other one was -- was a little previous
to that. So, two accidents since 1997. We don't want any accidents. I'm not pooh-
poohing it, but it's just not been an issue. You know, I guess I will close just saying,
yeah, there is stub roads. We are definitely connecting onto two stub roads. They were
stubbed for future development and, unfortunately, the future is here today with this
project. And I will stand for any further -- any further questions.
Yearsley: I had -- oh, go ahead, Macy. Commissioner Miller.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 17 of 39
Miller: I wanted you to address Ms. -- Alex's comments about future connections to
water, sewer for her property.
Conger: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miller, we will be bringing sewer by there.
Typically speaking if there are -- you know, typically stubs mean eight inch, manholes,
things of that nature. I mean that's probably a 4,200 dollar deal when you have a 2,200
manhole and about 2,000 dollars worth of eight inch pipe, but we are open for that. But
typically speaking you see those landowners help absorb that cost. So, yes.
Yearsley: Okay. Any others?
Miller: Actually, yes, I do.
Yearsley: Go ahead.
Miller: I also wanted you to talk, if you can, towards Mr. Hamilton's sketch of the
proposed secondary entry to kind of bypass kind of going through this existing
subdivision. Did you guys look at that? Is there a reason you didn't do that initially or --
can you speak to that a little bit?
Conger: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commission Miller. Yes, this -- this property has a
requirement to stub to the west. We have a requirement to stub to the south. We have
two existing stubs on the east that would put four stubs out of a 20 acre parcel. Any
more than that you are starting to be a pinwheel. The bigger obstacle than even being
a pinwheel is that vertical difference is probably 12 to -- ten to 12 vertical feet of
difference. We actually couldn't get a road down -- ACHD standards, once you come off
at an intersection you have got to go 150 feet at less than two percent, then, you can
start your slopes up. We just have a big vertical grade. If you have looked at the
existing Kentucky Way entrance it actually is carved in a little valley with the hill going
straight up beside it. So, it's not feasible and it's not necessary.
Miller: I have got a couple more.
Yearsley: Okay.
Miller: One thing that was mentioned was the timing of the fence on that west side to
get that in beforehand and I'm just curious, you mentioned a privacy fence. Do you
have a type of fence for that? Is that a wood fence, a vinyl fence, or --
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miller, good question. Yeah, we programmed in
our application tan vinyl, so we are trying to go with vinyl, as opposed to wood, for
maintenance purposes.
Miller: And I think my last one has to do with the posted construction rules and a
construction entry. Are you guys planning on doing that?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 18 of 39
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miller, we -- we don't -- we don't think people
read at 35 miles an hour on the way through. We believe in the contracts between the
builder and their sub trades and who you hire and how you manage them and I am one
hundred percent responsible for every sub trade that goes on during the development
side, so we have a sign that will have all these rules on during the land development
portion of it, but it's still -- it's written in our contracts and it's who we hire and how we
manage them. That's from noise to trash to loud music. So, we find that very important,
but we don't know where you would sign this and I'm not sure that's of great value.
Miller: Would that list be made available to the -- the subdivision next to you? I think
that was more their concern was just being able to know what's supposed to be going
on and not supposed to be going on.
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Miller, I honestly don't understand that question.
Sorry. Would you say that again?
Miller: I think their concern was being able to know what's going on, what's not going
on, so that they can say, hey, there is trash being burned here, the sign says there is
not supposed to be trash. Is that contract going to be made available to them just so
they know?
Conger: Commissioner Miller, no, none of our contracts between our development and
the sub trades are really available for public information. My telephone number is on
my sign and I will give my business card to everybody in the surrounding area and I
would love a phone call on my cell phone anytime they want to call me.
Miller: Okay. That's all I have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Commissioner Oliver.
Oliver: She answered quite a few of them, but I have got a couple more that I might ask
just to make sure I understand. One of the questions was asked about a construction
road. Are you planning on using South Kentucky as a main arterial for getting into that
construction area? Is that --
Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Oliver, another good question. Yeah. No. Our
preference would be to bring that construction entrance off Victory. I think that's what
we will plan. I had talked to Mr. Fisch about that a couple days ago and that was a
good alternative, as long as I'm not trapped or my project is not cut in half and I have to
get around to the other side, so I'm not saying I will never drive in Kentucky Way, but
the least traffic I put on Kentucky Way is the least I have to run a sweeper on it. So, it
saves me money as well.
Oliver: The other question is you said earlier that traffic on Victory -- is it 44 percent
currently or will be after the project is finished?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 19 of 39
Conger: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Oliver, thank you. I did not make that
clear and I was going to reiterate that before I was done, so thank you for the question.
After all build out one hundred percent homes lived in you will have Victory at 44
percent capacity, you will have Kentucky Way at 27 percent. That's not what it is today.
That is what it will be when we are built out. Twenty-seven percent on Kentucky.
Oliver: Twenty-seven percent currently.
Conger: Twenty-seven percent at build out --
Oliver: At build out.
Conger: -- of our project at Kentucky Way at build out.
Oliver: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. They pretty much -- I had a list of questions as well and between
all three of us it seems like we got most of the issues taken care of, so I don't have any
other issues at this point. Thank you.
Conger: Thanks for your time.
Yearsley: With that I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing for AZ 14-002
and PP 13-040.
Miller: So moved.
Yearsley: No. I'm sorry. But just that's kind of the way the process is. I'm sorry, but
this is where we are at.
Oliver: Second.
Yearsley: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on AZ 14-
002 and PP 13-040. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Yearsley: Comments? What do you guys think?
Miller: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Miller.
Miller: I will try to whip through this here. I just -- I want to mention also the letters that
were sent in that we didn't hear spoken to. The stub street on the west side. It sounds
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 20 of 39
like that got all cleared up, though, and they are fine with that. So, just for the record we
saw that. Personally I like the development. I like the park. I see a lot of people in the
audience here, which means something is not going right in the process, so that to me
is an indication that there needs to be a little bit more work done. A lot of the issues I
hear are to do with ACHD and we really have no control over that. I wish there was a
little bit more working with the neighbors on these couple, you know, lots to get single
level houses next to that. That seems like something that's relatively easy to do and I'd
like to see a little bit more work going to that. I -- if I was in the existing subdivision I
would have the concerns of all of this traffic funneling through my subdivision when it
does seem fairly easy to connect. I'm not out there familiar with the geography at all,
but just to bypass that -- everybody in the subdivision is going in through this other
subdivision and it seems like maybe there is a different way. I understand what Mr.
Conger is saying, that, then, you have, you know, four stub streets as it is and that's
quite a bit for this size of a development. It just seems like it makes sense to me.
don't feel like this is there and the people in the audience are -- are kind of indicating
that to me as well. Yeah, Ithink -- I understand the concern also about the street
names. That's one I haven't heard before. But it sounds like maybe he's able to work
with you on that a little bit, so that's good. Ithink that's all my comments I have on this.
I'm not sure where I sit on this right now.
Yearsley: Thank you. Commissioner Oliver.
Oliver: I don't have anything to offer, other than the fact I just hope that Mr. Conger
continues to have an open ear to the community out there at Kentucky Ridge and that
he's willing to understand their situation and work with them to have a situation where it
fits everybody, so good luck to you.
Yearsley: Thank you. I actually have a couple of things to say and I'm going to preface
this by -- when we first were looking to move to Meridian from Nampa we actually
looked at Kentucky Ridge, because we liked the subdivision. So, I mean it's a great
place and you have enjoyed not a lot of growth around you for a long time and all of a
sudden you're just getting inundated, which is somewhat unfortunate, but yet somewhat
inevitable as well. A couple of comments. I will kind of go through them each as they
came in. The road extension to the west, the lady had concerns about -- that's your
property. We -- we want connectivity between subdivisions and so what we do is try to
place a stub street where it seems appropriate and in doing so if you want a future
redevelop you have an access to another access to your subdivision. If you don't want
to redevelop it just kind of ends in a dead end at this point. So -- so, with that -- the
irrigation and drainage, Mr. Conger basically said that he was amenable to working with
the subdivision, with you guys, on making sure that you guys are addressed and taken
care of and any future expansions that you're wanting to look at he is willing to -- to help
with and Ithink -- or not -- or at least to share a cost associated with that, which think is
-- was very nice of him to do so. The street naming and fencing, you know, that's not a
purview that we actually have any control over. Street naming is through Ada County.
And the fencing is based on what he would like to put in. The single family homes along
the -- the edge, you know, we have struggled with that back and forth on different areas
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 21 of 39
and, you know, I struggle if -- if the homes on the other side are too story, you know,
why do we have to limit the ones on the other side to be single story? They have a right
to build what they would like to build as well. So, you know, it's kind of a -- a tough deal,
but I still think it needs to be -- they have a right to develop -- or build the size of home
that is legal to put on that property. I'm glad to hear that he's looking to try to do a
construction entrance off of Victory Road during the building of the subdivision. I think
that will be beneficial. You guys had concerns about the existing -- I'm not sure what
the name of the street was -- coming into the subdivision. I believe the reason why it's
the S shape the way it is now is because there is such a rise there they had to move the
road over to get enough grade so that it would actually not be so steep. Regarding the
widths and the no curb, gutter and sidewalk, I know ACRD has a community programs
project -- piece of their work that they go back in and will put in curb, gutter and
sidewalk to existing facilities. That's all done by application. I know the city actually can
help with that -- writing that application as well. If the homeowners were wanting to do
that I would recommend going to them and to -- asking for that to be widened and so,
you know, that's something that can be done if you wish it to be wider and have the
curb, gutter and sidewalk. I do appreciate the fact that he's -- you know, well, he's
required to do the sidewalk on his side of his property and the extra landscaping I think
is -- was beneficial. The existing -- the proposed alternative layout I think is not a bad
idea, but given the elevation problem it makes it really unfeasible it sounds like. And,
then, your problem with the connectivity -- or connection to your sewer, I would
recommend -- I'm not quite sure where you live in association with this project or with
the other project that's going to be constructed now, but maybe talking to the city Public
Works Department about maybe trying to get an extension to your property or -- would
be a wise way to do it. So, other than that, overall this phase is actually meant to come
into the subdivision initially. I got the impression, you know, it was part of the phase, so
it's just finally getting developed after 20 years. So, I think it's a good subdivision. I
think it works and I don't see any issues with it.
Miller: I tend to agree. I think all of my lingering things have to do with ACRD issues,
which we can't speak to, so --
Yearsley: So, with that I would entertain a motion.
Miller: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Miller.
Miller: I after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to recommend
approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 14-002 and PP 13-040 as presented in
the staff report for the hearing date of March 6, 2014, with the comments mentioned in
the staff report.
Oliver: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 22 of 39
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve file number AZ 14-002 and PP 13-
040. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Baird: Mr. Chair, the hearing has been closed. The record is closed. Any further
questions can be addressed to planning staff in the hallway. I suggest we take a two or
three minute recess to let the room clear.
Yearsley: I was just going to make that same comment. Let's take a couple minute
recess to allow people to clear.
(Recess: 7:11 p.m. to 7:15 p.m.)
C. Public Hearing: PP 13-043 Summerwood Subdivision by Kent
Pintus Located at 4202 and 4052 W. Daphne Street Request: Preliminary Plat
Approval Consisting of Thirty (30) Single Family Residential Building Lots and
Four (4) Common/Other Lots on Ten (10) Acres of Land in an R-4 Zoning District.
Yearsley: Let's go ahead and get started again. Let's go ahead with the public hearing
for PP 13-043, Summerwood Subdivision and let's begin with the staff report.
Wafters: Thank you, Chairman Yearsley, Members of the Commission. The next
application before you is a request for a preliminary plat. This site consists of ten acres
of land. It's currently zoned R-4 in the city and it's located at 4202 and 4052 West
Daphne Street. Adjacent land uses and zoning. To the north and east is agricultural
land that's in the development process for future residential uses. Bridgetower Estates
Subdivision, zoned R-4. And to the south and west are rural residential properties
zoned RUT in Ada County. This property is currently platted as Lot 6 and 7, Block 2, in
the Black Cat Estates Subdivision No. 2. A preliminary plat was approved back in 2006
for Prado Villas, but that has since expired. The applicant is requesting approval of a
preliminary plat consisting of 30 building lots -- excuse me just a second. Having kind of
PowerPoint issues here. It's not wanting to go forward. There we go. All right. The
preliminary plat consists of 30 building lots and three common lots on ten acres of land
in the R-4 zoning district. This plat is proposed to develop in two phases as shown.
The minimum lot size proposed is 8,030 square feet, with an average lot size of 8,500
square feet. The minimum living area of the proposed units is required to be 1,400
square feet. The gross density of three dwelling units per acre is consistent with the low
density residential future land use map designation, which calls for three dwelling units
per acre or less. There are two existing homes and a barn on this site. The home
located in phase one and the barn located in phase two are proposed to be removed.
The home in phase two is proposed to be moved to a future lot in the subdivision. I
think I have those backwards, actually. But -- pardon me on that. The primary access
for this subdivision is at the south boundary via West Daphne Street. A secondary
access is planned at the northeast boundary of the site to connect to a future street in
Bridgetower Estates Subdivision, which is currently under construction. A stub street is
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 23 of 39
proposed at the northwest boundary for future connection and interconnectivity upon
redevelopment of the parcel to the west. The plat depicts 1.1 acres or 10.1 percent of
qualified open space, consisting of a large open common area, consisting of .74 of an
acre and parkways along internal local streets. A barbecue, benches, and gazebo are
proposed as quality of life amenities, consistent with UDC requirements. A six foot tall
privacy fence is depicted on the landscape plan along the perimeter boundary of the
subdivision. All fencing should comply with UDC standards. The Scribner Lateral and
East Drain crosses the northwest corner of the site. These waterways are proposed to
be relocated along the south and west boundaries within a 35 foot wide easement. The
waterways should be piped in accord with UDC requirements. And an encroachment
agreement is required to be obtained for the lots that encroach within the irrigation
easement. Written testimony has been received from the applicant's representative
Sabrina Durtschi in agreement with the staff report and staff is recommending approval
with conditions. Staff will stand for any questions Commission may have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? Would the applicant like to come
forward? Please state your name and address for the record.
Durtschi: Chairman, Members of the Commission, hello and good evening. For the
record my name is Sabrina Durtschi, I'm here on behalf of the applicant and Briggs
Engineering. My business address is 1800 West Overland Road in Boise, Idaho.
83705. And tonight, as Sonya has mentioned, I am here for the preliminary plat
application for Summerwood Estates. This was previously approved back in 2006 and
we did not have sewer and water at that time, so the owner has been very patiently,
patiently waiting for a sewer and water connection, which we found last fall was coming
from Bridgetower Estates and he was very excited, so we are finally able to now
proceed with his proposal again. So, we are not asking for any rezone. It's R-4. It got
rezoned back in 2006. There was a development agreement at that time that was
recorded and signed and we are going to adhere to that development agreement
standard, so the old development agreement will apply to this new application. We
didn't -- I did have a neighborhood meeting. No one attended. I did talk to one of the
neighbors and I'm just going to kind of draw on this. I'm so excited. It's my first time.
His name is Eugene. He lives here. Originally our road has came in this way,
connecting to Daphne and he was worried about the car lights approaching his house,
so we changed the ingress-egress so it kind of aligns with Daphne trying to alleviate his
concerns and that was my only concern that I have heard at that time. Sonya
mentioned that we do have ten percent open space. After we submitted our
landscaping plan I found out that they are going to let us include this common area, so
we are exceeding our ten percent requirement then. Sonya talked about the
pressurized irrigation. We are -- I believe we are going to be connecting on -- from
Bridgetower at this location from their PI system and sewer and water will be connected
at that stub street location. Sonya also mentioned that -- I believe it's this home that's
located in phase one is going to be relocated to one of the lots. It's going to meet the
standards on the setbacks of the R-4 zone. And with that I think I'm finished and I will
thank you for your timely consideration and respectively request a recommendation of
approval to City Council. I will stand for any questions that you may have.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 24 of 39
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? No. Thank you.
Durtschi: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: I have a few people signed up. I'm wondering if some of this may have come
over from the other hearing. Dean Duckett. Eugene Thompson. Please come forward.
Wait until you get to the microphone and name and address for the record, please.
Thompson: Eugene Thompson. 4203 Daphne Street. It's just right straight across the
street from 4202. I'm glad they moved their street over to line up with the other one, but
just have some -- a little bit of drainage from irrigation water that is also going to come
across into that area, so they come right from the corner of my property -- Dean Briggs
told me they thought they could handle that with some kind of a pond in there. I can't
tell that there is a pond there. But that's my only concern is that irrigation water, it's
going to drain across that street -- underneath and into there, so --
Yearsley: Okay.
Thompson: Because they are not happy.
Yearsley: Thank you. Paul Poorman. Please come forward.
Poorman: I'm Paul Poorman. 5230 North Black Cat in Meridian. Let's see. Mr.
Chairman, Members of the Commission, had a few comments and is there -- I just want
to make sure I can draw on this. Okay. Got it figured out. I just wanted to make sure
that we insure continued access to the irrigation water through the Scribner Lateral that
was mentioned. It crosses the applicant's property and I think there is this line right
here. There is actually -- can you see that? There is actually two ditches there. There
is one ditch that's our lateral that supplies water to our place over on Black Cat Road.
There is also a drain ditch that comes off of the property to the east, as well as to the
northeast, and both of those ditches need to be continued to be maintained. I do want
to mention that they do route the -- the new ditch to the south and, then, connect in
here. This ditch has got a very low slope and if they increase the length of the ditch, like
I think I heard explained, that's going to reduce the slope even more and the water may
not flow very well. So, that's one of my concerns. And, then, the other thing is that our
supply ditch for our lateral comes in here and there has been a problem with the
Volterra Subdivision, I think is what they used to be called, and maybe -- it sounds like
there is a different name for it over here. The pipe needs to have a T in it and this -- the
current subdivision that we are talking about, we will have to put a T into that pipe if they
want to the it. And, then, there is an issue that I have noticed that this concrete ditch
seems to build up a lot of mud every year and if they the this in, my question is how is
the mud going to be kept from building up and if it does build up how is it going to be
cleaned out so that it doesn't just get plugged up all together. And, then, the last thing
did mention, this drain ditch here has got a similar issue with mud over the course of the
summer, collects a lot of run off mud from the farm field and I have to have that scooped
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 25 of 39
out every year -- pulled out every year with a big tractor and if that's tiled how is that
going to be kept clean of mud. So, that's all I have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Carolyn Goetz. No? How about Mike or Tanya McMann or --
no? That's all I had signed up. Is there anybody else that would like to testify? No?
Would the applicant like to come forward and address -- I guess drainage is the topic of
discussion.
Durtschi: Chairman, Commissioners, for the record again, Sabrina Durtschi, 1800 West
Overland Road, Boise, Idaho. 83705. So, to address a few of the issues, the drainage
issue, I know Eugene had talked to our engineer Dean Briggs and he talked about
having him meet him on site, so he could point out exactly where the drainage issues
would be, so he can make sure the engineering would be appropriate. Per state code
and per Meridian's code we have to keep all of our drainage water on site. That's
required by law. And we will make sure that it's engineered -- that it will drain correctly.
And, again, I will make sure I get Eugene's information again and I will have the
engineer coordinate with him when we are going the plans to make sure his concerns
are addressed. As far as Paul's concern about irrigation water, again, we are supposed
to keep drainage on site and, then, for irrigation water we can't impede anyone's water
rights. They will receive water. It's, again, Idaho State law and the irrigation
requirements. So, that's not an issue. It will be engineered so that it will -- won't
impede flowment. As far as the low slope, I'm not exactly sure how our engineering
department is going to address that. I think with tiling it makes the water cleaner as far
as like the mud issues, it should access to points better and the irrigation company --
district should -- are the ones to maintain the -- those -- as far as there is mud build up.
But, again, that's kind of an engineering question and I know that it's going to be tiled,
know -- and, again, I can't really answer the question what kind of slope, what kind of
grade it's going to be at. But, again, we will be meeting all the requirements set forth by
Public Works and there will be engineering drawing plans and approved before any
construction is done and so I hope that answers his questions. I will get Paul's
information as well and I will have our engineer contact him more about the particulars
as far as how the engineering plans will be drawn up so that he gets a little better
answers at that time. So, I think with that I will stand for any questions that you might
have.
Yearsley: Are there any questions? No? Thank you.
Durtschi: Thank you.
Yearsley: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on PP 13-043, Summerwood
Subdivision.
Miller: So moved.
Oliver: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 26 of 39
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on PP 13-043. All
in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Miller: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Miller.
Miller: I think this is a nice development. I appreciate the willingness of the developer
to work with the -- the concerns brought to our attention. Those are laws, so they will be
handled. I think it's a nice little subdivision.
Yearsley: Thank you. Commissioner Oliver.
Oliver: Mr. Chair, I just would like to make a comment that I hope that the developer will
still keep in communication with those people that are currently living in that subdivision,
that they will be willing to listen to anything that will come up. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. I, too, agree that it's a good little in-fill project, good connectivity,
and I think they have tried to address most of the issues and hope that they continue to
work to address the drainage issues and so I like it. So, with that I would entertain a
motion. Go ahead and try it. Go for it.
Oliver: Okay. After consideration of all staff, application, and public testimony, I move
to recommend approval to the City Council of file number PP 13-043 as presented in
the staff report for the hearing date of March 6th, 2014, with the following modifications
if any.
Yearsley: With no modifications.
Oliver: No modifications. Sorry.
Miller: I second that.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve the public hearing of PP 13-043.
All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
F. Public Hearing: AZ 14-003 Heritage Grove by Tucker Johnson
Located Northwest Corner of N. Locust Grove Road and E .Ustick
Road Request: Annexation of Approximately 1.49 Acres from RUT
in Ada County to the R-15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning
District
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 27 of 39
G. Public Hearing: PP 14-001 Heritage Grove by Tucker Johnson
Located Northwest Corner of N. Locust Grove Road and E .Ustick
Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of 121 Single
Family Residential Lots and 19 Common Lots on Approximately
21.71 Acres in an Existing and Proposed R-15 Zoning District.
H. Public Hearing: Heritage Grove by Tucker Johnson Located
northwest Corner of N. Locust Grove Road and E .Ustick Road
Request: Planned Unit Development to Modify the R-15 Dimensional
Standards of the MEW and Alley Loaded Lots to Allow for Exemplary
Design
Yearsley: All right. The last one on the list is the opening of public hearing AZ 14-003,
PP 14-001, and PUD 14-001. Let's begin with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Next item on the
agenda is the Heritage Grove Subdivision. The property is located on the northwest
corner of Ustick and Locust Grove Road. This property was annexed into the city in
2008. At the time that it came before you the applicant was proposing a 120 unit multi-
family development. With the annexation of the property there was a development
agreement that did tie the site to the multi-family development, as I just mentioned.
There is a small sliver of property that is proposed with the annexation and the plat of
this -- platting of this property this evening and that's a small sliver along the east
boundary, as I am indicating here with my arrow, and the main reason for the
annexation is that ACHD is currently reconstructing that intersection there and as a
result of that road construction they are losing their well and so this developer has taken
it upon himself to have them piggy back on part of his preliminary plat application this
evening and have them come in and annex into the city. The one other item I would
mention to you -- when this property did annex into the city at one time there was a little
spite strip along the south boundary of the northern part of the development and that did
not allow this roadway to connect and so with this annexation tonight we have the
developer and the homeowner probably going to work together to make sure that we do
get that road connection. So, I did want to point that out. There is a major connection
point happening, which didn't happen in 2008, because of that spite strip. The majority
of this property is surrounded by residential development, both in the county and the
city, and as I mentioned to you this property is currently R-14 and the sliver of -- the
1.49 acres that's annexing into the property -- proposed for annexation this evening is
also requesting the R-15 zoning district to kind of mirror what's already there next to it
and have a cohesive development theme. The application is going to plat this with 121
single family lots and, then, 19 common lots. One of those lots will house the existing
structures as part of the annexation request. Currently this lot, which is Lot 25, Block 6,
on the preliminary plat, has an existing residence, a secondary dwelling and two out
buildings. As I mentioned to you, ACHD will be hooking that -- those structures up with
the road widening project moving forward. And, then, also in order to make sure that --
the applicant has also sold aportion -- or at least not the applicant, but the property
owner of the existing residence has sold off a portion of their property to the developer
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 28 of 39
and, therefore, this property is included as a lot and block in the subdivision as well. So,
a lot of things happening with this. We have the road project happening. We have a
subdivision and, then, we have an adjacent property owner that's trying just to get into
the city and connect to city services, so it is complex, even though we are talking about
-- talking about property that is roughly 21 acres in size. Main entrance into the
subdivision will be off of Locust Grove. ACRD is in support of that location as well. It
would again come in local streets provided internally. To the south and to the north of
this development where stub streets were provided and will be extended with the
development of this project as well and, then, also on the northern portion of the
development we have two -- to the east and to the west we have to Ada County parcels,
so the applicant has -- per staffs request has provided stub streets to those adjacent
parcels for future connectivity if and when those developments proposed for those lots.
One thing unique about this project and the reason why we are going to the planned
unit development process is particularly -- in this particular case the applicant wants to
take advantage of having a buildable lot that fits the entire footprint of the home and,
then, cluster that open space in a MEW design that you see here internal to the
development. So, all of the lots that you see along the perimeter of this development
will be your typical traditional lot front loaded garages. The only applicable portion of
the development where the PD comes into play would be the internal MEW lots that you
see here and, again, this plat will have in excess of 15 percent open space, which is
above what the code requires and as I get closer -- a little farther in my presentation I
will go into the proposed amenities as well. But for the internal portion of the lot the
applicant is proposing the following deviations to our R-15 dimensional standards and I
have highlighted that in this red -- this yellow graphic before you. So, basically, where
all the MEW lots will front -- lots front on the MEW the applicant is requesting a five foot
setback from that MEW. Along the interior lot lines of the lots there is 61 percent or a
five foot setback as allowed and required in the ordinance. But the unique feature here
is the applicant is requesting or proposing a two foot setback off the alley. One thing
did fail to mention to you is that the MEW lots will have access from a public alley
moving forward. These are not private streets, they are public alleys, and so in order to
get that footprint on that lot and get livable space on a lot that's approximately 3,000
square feet, they need to at least get that building to the -- to the property line and not
require that parking pad in front of that. So, moving forward the internal lots here -- or at
least these MEW lots will not have parking pads in front of them. I think it's our -- in
looking at this all of these are public streets. There will be adequate parking along the
MEW. They are built to a 50 foot right of way, which will allow for parking on both sides
of the street. So, we don't see parking being a concern with design either and we are
supportive of the proposed setbacks as well. The one other -- the other lots that will
front on the public streets along the MEW -- at least the internal development, will also
have a five foot setback from the street -- or at least five foot setback the back of
sidewalk. So, if you look at this design here, the applicant is proposing detached
sidewalks and eight foot parkways along the interior of the project, so if you were to look
at it from the streetscape you're actually going to have an eight foot landscape strip, five
foot sidewalks, and additional five feet and, then, the structure. So, realistically, you're
going to have a 23 foot setback from the street, even though they are requesting five
feet. So, you still get I guess about an 18 foot setback from the street versus a five that
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 29 of 39
is indicated here. So, there still will be some variation along that street edge as well.
As I mentioned to you, open space is abundant on this development. Again, they are
proposing two central MEW lots and, then, the applicant's worked with ACHD to provide
an attractive streetscape along Ustick Road and Locust Grove. The buffers that the
applicant is proposing are actually in excess of what the code requires. Our ordinance
requires a 25 foot wide landscape buffer. The applicant is proposing a 32 foot wide
landscape buffer on the Locust Grove side and 35 foot wide on Ustick -- Ustick Road
side. The applicant has also worked with ACHD to move that detached sidewalk in
farther from the street edge. That would allow him to do a ten foot planter strip between
the curb and the sidewalk, so that he can count that as his open space towards this and
have also allowed for the trees that you see here on the landscape plan as well. Here
are -- one thing on the amenities -- or at least when the application was submitted the
applicant was depicting two picnic areas located within the central MEWs as part of their
development or their amenities. The applicant has -- in my staff report I called out that
the applicant did commit to a clubhouse as one of the amenities for the development
and at this time -- at that time of the staff report they did not have details of that amenity.
So, I had placed a condition in that -- in my staff report that they provide details to you
this evening on both amenities planned for the subdivision and that's what the next slide
represents. So, this is what a typical elevation is for the proposed clubhouse.
Ultimately they will have to come back through the planning department with CZC and
design review approval for that structure to be placed on that lot, but we feel this is an
appropriate amenity for the size of this development and we are in support of that.
What this means is they will be losing one buildable lot in order the make the clubhouse
and to support the construction of the clubhouse. So, rather than having 121 lots, more
than likely with the final plat there will be 120. One item that 1 would like to step back on
is that the applicant is proposing to develop this subdivision in four phases. The first
two phases would commence with -- at the northwest corner of the intersection as you
see here and, then, ultimate phases would be the north half of the development moving
forward. In my staff report I did recommend that the applicant construct all of the
landscape buffers along both arterial streets with phase one and also include the trail
property, which is Lot 25, Block 6. The other condition that I have placed in the staff
report or recommended to you is that the trail property or Lot 25, Block 6, be part of
phase one. That way we can assure that, one, the landscaping is put in with the first
phase and, two, that they have an existing access to Ustick Road and we want to make
sure that we provide a local street access moving forward. So, staff is pretty adamant
on sticking with that recommendation and making sure that that lot and block is part of
phase one to insure that we get that access closed and that local street access is
provided with phase one. Because a PD -- PUD is involved on -- with this project staff
does look to have more details than a typical subdivision. We want to make sure these
structures can fit on the lots and fit within the setbacks that they are proposing. We
want details of the amenities, so you can see that it is equal or greater than what code
requires and we also want high quality design. I mean that's -- that's what we premised
our -- the design. If he wants something different other than what the ordinance allows
show us how it's going to work and I think the applicant has done that. So, as part of
this application the applicant is showing a mix of houses for the development, both the
traditional family lots and the MEW lots and they have also shown or given us a pallet or
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 30 of 39
a detail list of what their construction materials will be for those homes moving forward.
We reviewed this list. We have looked at these elevations. We believe they do comply
with our residential standards in our Meridian design manual and we do support these
elevations as presented to you this evening. Again, here is that lot fit map that I talked
about. One of our concerns with the size of the lots that the applicant was proposing is
we wanted to make sure we had an attractive streetscape and so we did want the
detached sidewalks, we wanted the parkways, but we also wanted the houses to be set
on different plains on the lots, so we don't have a straight plain of houses along the
street and so what this plan does is shows you that the applicant is proposing different
project types for these lots, bringing -- providing different setbacks, stepping the housing
in, bring forward porches and patio areas to provide that variation along the streetscape,
so you don't have houses on a single plain and we felt that was an important element to
this project as well moving forward. One thing I wanted to -- so, in closing I wanted to
let you know that I did receive written testimony from one of the adjacent neighbors that
came in by an a-mail. That should be in your packet this evening and that person was
Roberta Gabbin and she was concerned about the number of households here
inundating the school district school. Her concern was that you not act on this
application until the school district readjusts their districting boundaries and have other
kids going to a different elementary school. I don't know that -- that isn't part of your
purview this evening, but I did want to go on record and say we did receive that. And,
then, also I received written testimony from the developer on the project. As
mentioned to you, staff is recommending that that existing lot -- Lot 25, Block 6, be part
of the first phase and also the landscaping to be included in front of that home with first
phase. The applicant wishes to have you act on that this evening and his proposal that
it happen with the second phase as he's drawn there -- as I have presented the phasing
plan to you this evening. As I mentioned to you, we are not amenable to that. We feel it
is appropriate -- it is important to get that with phase one, given that we do have road
construction happening in the area. So, that will be done, so why not get the
subdivision improvements done as well in conjunction with that roadway project. The
last item is one of recommendations in the DA provision it would be the DA Provision A.
We did require the applicant to provide a mix of materials on back of those homes that
will be facing Locust Grove and Ustick Road and if you looked at the landscape plan,
the applicant is proposing a large berm and a fence on top of the berm to kind of screen
the housing and provide that sound attenuation from those adjacent arterials. So, he,
basically, wants to add some language that says if it's seen above the berm and the
fencing, then, they would add those decorative materials on the second story homes.
Staff is amenable to that request. We are willing to add that. So, with that that
concludes my presentation and I'd stand for any questions you may have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions?
Oliver: I have a question.
Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 31 of 39
Oliver: Regarding the intersection of Ustick and Locust Grove, they are widening that to
a five lane; is that correct? And so looking north from Ustick and Locust Grove going
north, that will be the entrance point to the subdivision; is that correct as well? So, will
that five lane extend to that entrance point or will it be a two lane at the entrance point of
where it goes in the subdivision?
Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Oliver, that's
always been the point of contention with this piece of property. Originally ACHD
thought they may want to shift that roadway down a little bit, but after looking at design
of the intersection as you discussed, that's why that -- that's why the road was pushed
up to get out of that stacking area, so it does not impede traffic entering and exiting out
of there. So, that -- ACHD will have to give a waiver to it from their district -- from their
policy for that to go there, but they are supportive of that -- that location just based on
what you said, they do not want cars turning eastbound or westbound on Ustick
stacking up in front of the entrance of the subdivision.
Oliver: Yeah. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. I also have one question with regard to the DA provision of the --
the back facing lots against Ustick and Locust Grove. That's not something that we
have to make -- we have to approve it. Is that -- that's through Council; correct?
Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, correct. The DA mod will be
acted on by City Council.
Yearsley: Okay. I just wanted to make sure we get everything appropriate. With that
would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and address for the
record.
Johnson: I am Tucker Johnson. Address is 372 South Eagle Road in Eagle. It's a
pleasure to be before you. It's been a long time since I have been before planning and
zoning. The market has slowly crept back and so I'm actually delighted to be able to
stand before you. I want to thank staff for their diligent help and input and
conversations back and forth. We do have that one difference of opinion. We have
agreed to disagree. There will eventually be an access point to the trail property, which
is that Lot 25, will be disconnected. It's just an extra hardship for me to get the internal
road to that location in time -- as part of the first phase. I have not done this before, so
bear -- is it showing what I'm drawing?
Yearsley: You have to --
Lucas: Mr. Johnson, just to clarify, what is the file name for your presentation here?
We are trying to bring it up. We can't see it.
Johnson: It's called PDS.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 32 of 39
Lucas: PowerPoint?
Johnson: Thank you, staff, for making that happen. Moving it forward. I could be
coached. Next slide.
Parsons: Just use the pen. Hit the arrow.
Johnson: Okay. This is the location under discussion as to whether or not that would
be appropriate to be part of phase two or phase one. Again, because of the need for us
to provide the initial access off of Locust Grove, to get to that completely opposite
corner is pretty much developing the whole first half of the project right with the first
phase. Now, we have agreed to do the entire berm frontage along Locust Grove and
Ustick up to this point and, then, once this -- this access point is created, then, this can
be completed there across the trail property. That's really our only main difference with
the staff relative to their report, as Bill outlined. Our target market is -- originally this
property was zoned the R-15 and platted for 120 dwelling units, most of which were
four-plexes and some of which were duplexes. We have taken a variation on that in
that we are still targeting an older demographic, empty nester, heavy on the empty
nester aspect where they want a smaller living environment, less maintenance, it will be
a full maintenance neighborhood where the HOA dues pays for the common area, as
well as their individual lot maintenance and so it's an opportunity to address what we
see as a need in the neighborhood and the overall community, actually. So, as part of
that we didn't want -- we decided also not to go with attached product. We wanted to be
a single family detached and incorporate this design that brings elements that are more
of a traditional neighborhood design. For example, the -- the MEW lots that back up to,
you know, an alley -- and this is a zoom in on one of those lots -- or a series of those.
The -- the lot here on the end -- the side street is here. The yellow shading here is
indicating how this person would be able to use across the property line through an
easement to actually have all of their side yard space to one side and, therefore, it's
clumped together and usable. I have some photos I can show you later to that effect.
The purple -- these two are purple, because they are the same size in terms of a
buildable footprint for the dwelling. But, again, this dwelling here would have an
easement across this property line to use -- to use this portion of the adjacent property.
This last lot, since it abuts a pathway and there is no neighbor to borrow five feet from --
this lot is actually five feet wider, as you notice there. And so that -- this design has
been proven regionally as well as locally. Actually, another neighborhood that we are
doing in southwest Boise is built on the same pattern, the same model, and we took that
model from areas in Denver, from areas in Portland, areas in Seattle, as well as -- which
has been a growing trend, because of the demographic switch. Ten thousand people
turning age 65 from that baby boomer generation every day. This is a blown out version
-- I can actually skip this one for now and much the same here. Slightly different
graphic, but to illustrate the same thing from the other end of the block. Here is a
common access point -- help me get back. There we go. Aside street in this location
on this particular slide -- we went too far. Is that me moving it or is that --
Parsons: It's me.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 33 of 39
Johnson: I will get this thing figured out yet. These lots, as you're facing the house --
well, something's really not happening here. There we go. Maybe I will just hold my
pen on the screen. As you face the house we call it -- this house will live to the right,
because they will use this space here. And, again, this house will also live to the right
and use this space here. The last lot again being 51 feet wide versus the other lots.
We have incorporated the clubhouse. We have incorporated a couple picnic areas
within each of the MEW parks that houses cluster around. I brought home a friend here
tonight just for the amusement of having an additional illustration, but this device is
being more of an interesting friend than the bear is. In each park we plan alittle -- a
picnic area. This is depicted here, the possibility they are stamped concrete or brick
pavers of that sort, connecting to the sidewalk system within the park area and it's
surrounded by trees at the appropriate locations. The trees would be -- the shade trees
particularly would be on the south and west side -- east -- west side predominately, so
you get that afternoon shade when you need to there. And this is what the park could
look like -- that picnic area could look like in a few years once the trees actually do
mature. I wanted to quickly address one possibility of this cross-access easement area.
Here is the property line and then -- so this house here is living over to -- and up to
within, you know, a few inches its of this dwelling. The builders I'm working with, we --
are very adept at this. You carefully plan the placement of windows on the adjacent
house and this house -- you can't see it in this particular picture, but right about here
there is a cove in the house for the patio. So, all of a sudden that patio space becomes
larger by about ten feet out to the -- out to the side. And this pad here is actually a way
that visitors, should they decide not to park on a side street and walk through the traffic
park to get to the front door, it saves your -- you know, your mom coming to babysit for
a few days. They could actually park here and come through the garage or through the
-- through the patio space, as is shown by some of the additional slides here. This
actually is from a local project in Eagle. This pad here is actually eight feet wide and
you can see how they have managed to squeeze in various size vehicles. We
anticipate the majority of the homeowners that will move into this community would not
be the monster truck variety, but a monster truck fits in this kind of an arrangement in
these two examples. Just wanted to show that for illustration purposes. The MEW is
kind of a park -- it's kind of a new concept. It's not been utilized a lot. I'm hoping that all
the success that happens around it can be -- can be my company, so we can actually
be real successful at this, but these are pictures from around the region. This picture
actually appears from -- should just learn to not tap that, right? This is from the Seattle
area. This is from Denver. It's actually the redevelopment of the Stapleton Airport. And
these two pictures here are from the project that I mentioned in southwest Boise that the
-- in this case there are a group of six -- eight homes, sorry, that face onto this common
area here and this is just aview -- this picture here is a view from this direction of these
homes here. Very livable environment. It becomes your own private park and it
encourages people to get out on their front porch and hopefully be interactive and be a
little less of the click generation, if you will. Click the garage door, you know, click the --
the cable TV and actually spur some neighborhood involvement and communication
and interaction. That's one of the elements of a traditional neighborhood design is to
incorporate these kind of elements so you encourage a more livable environment and
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 34 of 39
that's what we like to -- like to see. The fence in front of a house facing it would be --
would be a design such this where it is a wrought iron open style with wood posts. The
bulk of the subdivision will likely be a -- either a wood fence of this nature or some kind
of tote colored vinyl. That has not been decided yet. The sidewalk seen is actually a
very compelling part of a traditional neighborhood design. I don't know anybody who
wouldn't want to walk down a sidewalk like that and that's -- that's our vision. Actually,
all these pictures -- they are from different parts of the country, but I showed them
because of what you can seek what the future is going to look like there. But, you
know, attractive homes, facing onto the common sidewalk area, again, encouraging
communication. In this case it's actually facing a street and this design is effective in
our project on both the MEW facing homes as well as the street facing homes. But the
same concept holds true. I won't bore you with the details, but we did actually work, as
staff pointed out, with ACHD to widen this grass strip. They had originally had it
earmarked on Ustick Road for only a six foot width and on Locust Grove zero and so it
become very sterile if you will and not very pedestrian friendly, because who wants to
walk next to four or five lanes of traffic with only a gutter separating you. So, we can
create this ten foot space. ACHD has been working with us and has agreed to that, so
we can accommodate these street trees and, again, potentially create that canopy here
as people walk down through that -- that area. The side yards -- go back to that briefly.
This is an illustration of possibilities of what a side yard is if they do it the way I would
want it done. This picture here is showing how it comes from the front of the house, you
actually have a gate to get into this living space. I wish I knew why this would jump on
me occasionally. I won't go into greater detail, but you can see how it is possible to
create that ten foot area into a much more livable space. Actually, it can become, you
know, a second family room and being located between the homes and the strategic
planting of trees, deciduous trees specifically, you get a real shade effect. Avery
pleasant, inviting -- I would love to see some French doors that open the house into that
space, which is just a very livable environment. This is a unique shot just looking down
into that kind of space. In the clubhouse area we do plan to incorporate either a fire pit
and/or a trellis or some kind of covered area. The demographics we are targeting, you
know, wants nice amenities and -- we won't have a pool, but we do have a gathering
hall with a couple of restrooms and so forth in that area, but -- because our target
market is not necessarily interested in the cost of maintenance of a pool. I stand for
questions. We are delighted to actually get this far. It's taken a little over 12 months to
get this to this level of refinement and before you this evening. So, again, I would be
delighted to answer any questions that you may have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? No? I don't have anybody signed up
to testify to this. Is there anybody that would like to come up and provide testimony?
Please come forward. Again, state your name and address for the record.
Spiwak: Yes. My name is Randy Spiwak. I live at 1458 East Loyalty Street in Meridian
in the Heritage Commons Subdivision, which will abut to Heritage Grove on the north
boundary I believe. Just wanted -- I serve on the board of the ACHOA and I'm speaking
for myself and not for the board, because we haven't presented this, we have been
waiting to see what was going to happen. I can tell you that I believe this is exactly
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 35 of 39
what we were hoping to happen on this corner, not to be commercial property, but to be
homes much like ours. We live in the first home that was built in Heritage Common. It
is a carriage lane home described just like the homes on the MEW. Instead of having
the MEW we have a double football field park in front with a gazebo. But we love it and
it is a combination of traditional families in the larger lots around us and, then, families
of husband's like my age that live in the homes that share the side yard. Everybody has
to mow the grass to the right. Your neighbor mows the right, even though we split the
property. It works. It's much simpler to take care of, so we endorse this.
Yearsley: Thank you. Please come forward.
LeBlanc: Hello. My name is Josh LeBlanc from 3612 North Colbourne -- Colbourne
Way and I'm in the Heritage Commons Subdivision. And our house -- and I heard it
earlier in the discussion -- in the tenacious discussion earlier today, about the
discussion about single level -- about two story houses and, you know, I like the
development. I think it works. I have communicated with Tucker a few times. We
would just really request -- we live all the way in the northwest corner and our house
goes along the fence and we will have three homes backed up to our right looking into
our house and my wife is shy and there is a big window to our master bathroom I'm
afraid right there and so she made me come to make sure I could request that those
homes are single level and that's all I have to say.
Yearsley: Thank you.
LeBlanc: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: Was there anybody else that would like to testify? With that we'd like the
applicant to come forward and --
Johnson: I would be happy to answer any questions again. Specific to the comment
that was just made, I am actually working with Josh -- sorry, I don't remember his last
name. As well as a few other neighbors relative to the height of the house next to them.
And so we have worked that out on a private basis and we are actually coordinating the
work on the fence. The fence is there in both neighborhoods, a little bit dilapidated and
so the neighbors were going to work together to find the right solution there. I ought to
point out just briefly that while we hope that the -- the clubhouse could end up here at
this location -- just got to pick a color. I have got a red light and I have got a pen.
Parsons: I will bring up your presentation.
LeBlanc: Okay. We will see if I can do better the second time.
Parsons: Let me drive for awhile.
Johnson: I'm chauffer.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 36 of 39
Parsons: There you go. Go ahead and go to the slide you want to.
Johnson: All right. Well, we hope that the clubhouse would be in this location. The low
point for this entire area here is this point and the low point for this entire area here is
this point and so the storm drain demands or requirements from ACRD are pretty
intense. We are looking at new innovative ways to handle the storm water, but there is
a potential that we may lose a lot or two actually in this location because of storm
drains. This location. Sorry. You couldn't see that. And/or the clubhouse may need to
move, you know, across the street just to an adjacent lot. We will work that out with
staff and the code gives us the flexibility there, but I just wanted to kind of point that out
briefly. I do not think there is anything else. I could elaborate a lot more, but I will stand
for questions so I don't listen to myself speak.
Yearsley: Thank you. Any questions?
Miller: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Miller.
Miller: I think I read a public testimony thing about fence expense and just wanted to
bring that up, that you were sharing costs to these -- I .don't really remember which
property it was. I think it was that east property. Was it that one? Okay. Yeah. Are
you guys planning on paying for that fence or is it a cost share?
Johnson: We are going to -- we are going to take the bulk of it. The fence right now is
actually in the wrong spot in this location. If I remember right, in one location it's -- it's
on -- it's too small a backyard over here and in other locations it's closer to being on the
right line. The fence is a little bit old. I have committed to these neighbors verbally and
again tonight that we will work together. Idaho Code even speaks to the fact that
neighbors work together on sharing the cost of fence and so forth, but we are going to
take the lead in making sure that happens, so that is definitely our commitment.
Miller: Okay. I just wanted to get that addressed. Thank you.
Yearsley: Any other comments? Oh. Go ahead.
Miller: I do have one more. Sorry. You have a connection shown in one of your
drawings to that east property and not to -- in another drawing, the upper right --
Johnson: Here?
Miller: That same road all the way to the other side. Yeah. It's not shown on the other
one. There is a connection that exits there to that property for future expansion?
Johnson: Let me go back here, if I may. This is the official preliminary plat. So, this is
an undeveloped parcel. I can use this map I guess. The first station fits here. There is
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 37 of 39
an LDS church that sits here. There is a home that fits here on the property on the
boundary like that. So, we have been required to stub. So, this is the graphic you were
seeing. This is an older graphic.
Miller: Okay. That's all.
Yearsley: Thanks. Any other questions? I don't have any so thank you.
Johnson: Thank you.
Yearsley: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on AZ 14-003, PP 14-001 and
PUD 14-001?
Miller: So moved.
Oliver: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor say
aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Yearsley: Any comments? Commissioner Miller.
Miller: I'm very happy to see this development. I think it's a great development. I
definitely hear the concerns about the school district. That's nothing we can address
here. Hopefully that can get worked through sometime. Growth needs to happen there
so that stuff can happen. But this is a fantastic development as far as I'm concerned.
think that your target market you're going to start seeing people of the younger
generation going into these as well. Boise and Meridian is a little bit farther behind in
some areas, but there is definitely a trend that's coming across pretty soon. Hopefully
the clubhouse can get central. It sounds like it's going to try to stay as central as
possible. I think that's a great attribute. And, yeah, I hope to see it succeed. I am
wondering if it's a deal breaker that -- that that piece -- if the city wants it to be in the first
phase and I don't -- yeah, I don't know how I feel about that, but -- I like the
development a lot.
Yearsley: Thank you. Commissioner Oliver?
Oliver: As my daughter once put it, the Q tip generation, which I'm part of now. I am
thinking very strongly the same way as you were talking that that's what we want more
of in this area is that kind of living with less responsibility, we can just get up and go.
And at the same time it's a nice development where it's very nicely done and I was a
little surprised about that ten foot -- or that setting on that side of the -- that's a beautiful
area there that really makes that usable space outdoors, so I'm very impressed with it.
Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 38 of 39
Yearsley: Thank you. I, too, have to admit in our subdivision we have homes very
similar to that that have that ten foot and it works. It works well. And so I think it's a
good subdivision. With regards to the school, you know, that's -- it's always a tough
thing, you know, you want growth, but yet you want good schools. My wife actually
served on a couple of boundary committees with the school and they have told her that
they will not build a school unless it's at capacity, so you kind of need the growth before
the -- the boundary adjustments and the schools could be built. It seems counter-
productive, but that's kind of the way they work, so, unfortunately, that's the gist of it, so
-- but before that I think it's a nice looking project. So, with that I would entertain a
motion.
Miller: I just don't know how to require that one part.
Yearsley: Well -- and, actually, with that -- you know, I don't know how hard it would be
just to bring that one leg of the road down just a little bit just to allow him a driveway into
his property. I don't know how hard that would be to --
Miller: Is it required?
Yearsley: Yeah. To make that requirement.
Miller: Okay. Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Miller.
Miller: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend
approval to City Council for file numbers AZ 14-003, PUD 14-001, PP 14-001 -- and not
that one. As presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 6th, 2014, with
no modifications.
Oliver: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve the public hearing for AZ 14-003,
PP 14-001, PUD 14-001. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
Congratulations.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Yearsley: Any last comments before we have one last motion? Okay. I would entertain
one more motion.
Miller: I move to adjourn.
Oliver: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
March 6, 2014
Page 39 of 39
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Vote was
unanimous. We do stand adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:13 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
~ I~~ ~
-CHAT DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
~~ ~~~ ~
JAYCEE HOLMAN, CITY CLER
QO~,TED AUCUST
~GO4 'jYA
e ~ City of
~ ~ ~ IDAHO
a
~ CL'A7 ~
ns~~6. a~fle TlE A9~~6 ~r~