HomeMy WebLinkAboutTen Mile Development CPA
CPA 04-003
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT Hansen-Rice, Inc.
January 20, 2005
ITEM NO.
5
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from December 16, 2004: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendme
to change approximately 48 acres from Industrial to Mixed-Use Regional for Ten Mile Development. LL(
SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
COMMENTS tf<t(!. Æp ¡:;rp vo..e
'-fõ clc
See previous Item packet / Minutes 7 ' L/ - /
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY.
See attached stan Comments - UPDATED
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER bEf>T:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
No Comment
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
No Comment
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: See letter from !TD; memo from Brad Hawkins-Clark
contacled~~.....J ÙC'.tQ,/J .......... Data: ~ Phone: c.((Ó5 -O~Ò l,fV'J
Emailed: Staff Initials: I-R
- -
Materials presented at public meetings shall become pn>perty 0I1he City 01 Meridian.
MAYOR
TammydeWeerd
otre;; dltrH
IDAHO
CITY HALL
(208) 888-4433 - Fax 887-4813
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211 - Fax 898-9551
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Keith Bini
Christine Donnell
Shaun Wardle
Charles M. Rountree
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 466-9272 - FAX 466-4405
STAFF REPORT:
P & Z Hearing Date: January 20, 2005
Transmittal Date: January 18, 2005
To:
Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and City Council
Brad Hawkins-Clark, Principal City Planner ~
Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager
RECEIVED
JAN 1 E 2005
From:
Subject:
City OfMeridial1
Ten Mile Develooment - UPDATED City Clerk Office
. Request for a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment (CPA) to
Change Approx. 48 Acres ITom Industrial to Mixed-Use Regional for Ten Mile
Development, by Hansen-Rice, Inc. (File #CPA-04-003)
. Rezone (RZ) of 61,63 Acres ITom I-L & L-a to a CoG Zone for Ten Mile
Development, by Hansen-Rice, Inc. (File #RZ-04-017)
. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Conceptual Planned Development for
Commercial/Retail Uses for Approx. 615,430 sq. ft, of Building Area in a
Proposed CoG Zone for Ten Mile Development, by Hansen-Rice, Inc. (File
CUP-04-051)
APPLICATIONS SUMMARY
[NOTE TO P&Z COMMISSION: All three (3) applications listed above were submitted to the
city concurrently, However, staffs original report for the December 16, 2004 hearing only
addressed the CPA application, In addition, the ACHD Commission did not act on the
applications until January 12, 2005. The P&Z Commission received testimony and deliberated
only on the CPA application at the December hearing. This report provides additional analysis
on the RZ and CUP applications and, if the Commission chooses to approve the applications,
includes recommended site specific conditions of approval.]
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) application proposes to amend the Future Land
Use Map of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan (adopted 8-6-02). The applicant is proposing to
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 1
change an existing Industrial designation to a Mixed Use-Regional designation for
approximately 22 acres ofland located on the west side of Eagle Road/SH 55, south ofE. Pine
Ave, The property affected by the CPA application is part of a larger land holding which
consists of 62+/- acres. The eastern portion of the site (ITonting Eagle Road/SH 55) is already
designated Mixed Use-Regional; the western 22 acres is designated Industrial on the Future
Land Use Map and would be the only portion within the total area affected by the CPA. (It
should be clarified that the CPA application proposes a new MU-Regional designation for the
entire 62+/- acres, even though approximately 40 acres already have the MU-Regional
designation,) With the exception of one (I) acre at the southwest comer of Eagle Road/SH 55
and Commercial that is zoned L-O (Limited Office), the balance of the property is zoned I-L
(Light Industrial) and within the city limits,
Approval of the subject CPA application would allow the applicant to obtain a commercial zone
(C-G) for the entire 62+/- acres, which would allow for the development of a commercial retail
center (see the accompanying CUPIPD conceptual site plan). The amendment would not change
the Future Land Use Map designation for any other parcels or for any other features of the
Comprehensive Plan. Per Meridian City Code (MCC) 11-15-4, the P&Z Commission must
approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment prior to any consideration of the annexation
request. (NOTE: Comprehensive Plan amendments for te~t changes are allowed at any time,
Comprehensive Plan amendments for !lli!ll changes are allowed only every six (6) months. It
has been more than six months since the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map has been
amended.)
The RZ application proposes to rezone the 61.63 acres ITom I-L and L-O (1 ac.) to a CoG
(General Commercial) zone. The CUP/PD application proposes a conceptual planned
development for a commercial retail center consisting of approximately 615,430 square feet of
building area. No specific buildings or detailed site plans are proposed at this time. If
approved, the applicant/developer would be required to submit detailed CUP applications for
all buildings in the future.
On January 12, 2005, the ACHD Commission approved the conceptual site plan with
modifications. They required the easternmost driveway to be relocated to the west and they
denied the proposed public road along the rail spur. They also made several special
recommendations to the City of Meridian, including a continuous right-turn lane on Eagle
Road, medians in Eagle Road and eliminating the need for any truck traffic to utilize Eagle
Road to access the site.
Due to several reasons outlined in this report, staff is recommending the P&Z Commission
and City Council deny the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan. (See analysis and the
formal "Recommendation" below_) We are also recommending the Commission take no action
on the accompanying rezone and conditional use permit applications until the Comprehensive
Plan is amended to allow commercial uses on the subject property.
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-04-0S!
Page 2
LOCATION
The subject property is located at the southwest comer of Eagle Road/SH 55 and E. Pine
Avenue, within Section 8, Township 3 North, Range 1 East.
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
North: Blue Cross ofIdaho office and Gemtone Center Sub, zoned I-L
South: UPRR and Olson & Bush Industrial Park, zoned I-L. A large warehouse building is
located on a 7.4-acre parcel that is surrounded on the east and north by the subject
parcel.
East: Distribution and warehousing facilities and vacant land, zoned I-L
West: Two undeveloped parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County), and Layne Industrial Park and
Gemtone Subdivision, zoned I-L.
All land adjacent to the subject parcels is designated as Industrial on the Future Land Use Map,
except for the following two properties:
- Blue Cross: Office
- B,W, Inc, county parcels to west: MU-Community
The most recent development activity in the immediate vicinity has been the Olson Bush
Subdivision south of the railroad tracks, being developed by Ronald VanAuker, and the
Gemtone Subdivision north of Pine Avenue. Staff also anticipates the 130+ acres west of the
subject property (owned by B.W. Inc./Dennis Baker) may be master planned through the city in
the near future. This development would result in the extension of Pine A venue to the west,
connecting Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road,
CURRENT OWNERS OF RECORD
Elixir Industries of Gardena, CA is the current property owner and Ten Mile Development,
LLC, (represented by Graye H, Wolfe) is the pending buyer/developer. Robert Cuthbertson of
Elixir has submitted notarized consent for Ten Mile Development and Hansen-Rice, Inc, to
submit the subject applications.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED & POTENTIAL USES OF THE PROPERTY
If the CPA application is approved, the applicant intends to rezone all of the property to CoG
and construct a retail center on the entire 62 acres with approximately 615,430 sq. ft. of
building area. The CUP/PD application presents a conceptual layout of the site, including
three (3) retail buildings on Eagle Road, several pad sites internal to the property and a
continuous block of anchor stores along the south property line. The site plan also proposes a
pedestrian pathway and a transit feature at the UPRR tracks. No specific uses are proposed at
this time; the CUP/PD application is conceptual only. Some retail uses are possible on the
property without amending the Comprehensive Plan (on approx. 40 acres), A rezone would
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 &CUP-O4-051
Page 3
still be required (since retail uses are not permitted in the existing I-L zone), but a CPA
application would not be required (for the 40 acres fronting Eagle Road).
Since the subject 62+/- acres is already annexed and zoned I-L (with the exception of one
acre as L-O), all of the property could be developed with uses permitted and/or conditionally
permitted in the I-L zone. No CPA would be required to develop the property in this manner.
Staff is not aware of any Development Agreement recorded for this property that would
require any CUP application or other special improvements or permits as long as all
development complies with current city ordinances. Under the 2002 Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Map Designation, the Eagle Road frontage of the property (approximately ~mile
west) could be developed as mixed use (also without a CPA). A subdivision application would
be required to split the property. The purpose of the MU designation on the Future Land Use
Map is to identify key areas which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or
transitioning areas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities are
encouraged (Page 97, Chapter vn 2002 Comprehensive Plan).
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT/JUSTIFICATION
Please refer to applicant's application and material for the 12/16/04 hearing (File CPA-04-003),
In summary, the applicant states three (3) primary conditions which warrant a change to the
map:
a. high visibility
b, ease of accessibility
c, potential future transit station
d, general positive impact to the city and valley (e,g. jobs, revenue and shopping)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS
Neither the Idaho State Code nor Meridian City Code has required fmdings for reviewing
CPA applications. The Commission and Council should base any decision upon the worthiness
and suitability of the application in lieu of the City's economic and planning needs, both
existing and projected. Idaho Code 67-6508 does state that "the plan shall consider previous
and existing conditions, trends, desirable goals and objectives, or desirable future situations
for each planning component." Therefore, in the absence of any required fmdings, Staff has
reviewed the subject application and offers the following analysis and recommendations for
the Commission and Council's consideration,
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan contains a variety of goals, objectives, and action items relevant
to this CPA application, The following policies most directly apply to the proposed project and
are repeated here for the Council and Commission's consideration during the hearing process
(staff analysis is in italics below policy):
. Action 3, Objective C, page 27 (Chap. IV): Allocate and identify locations/inventory
for industrial and commercial business parks,
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 &CUP-O4-051
Page 4
While the Future Land Use Map does not specifically call-out the subject properties as
an industrial "park, " the property is adjacent to three (3) existing industrial parks and
could be developed in a similar manner, This area comprises one of Meridian's primary
industrial development centers and provides land inventory for future industrial and
commercial business uses,
. Action 5, Objective C, page 27 (Chap. IV): Adopt a future land use map that
establishes areas where commercial and industrial interest and activities are to
dominate.
In 2002, the City adopted the Future Land Use Map and designated on the map areas
where commercial, industrial, office, residential, and public/quasi-public uses were to
dominate. The parcel that is the subject of the CPA application is depicted on the Future
Land Use Map as both industrial and mixed use.
. Action 5, Obj. D, page 43 (Chap. V): Require all commercial and industrial businesses
to install and maintain landscaping.
Staff expects that, regardless of the final outcome of this CPA application, the
applicant would comply with the Landscape Ordinance and provide the required
landscape buffers along Eagle Road and Pine Ave. (as conceptually shown on their
CUP site plan).
. Item 2, First Bullet, page 71 (Chap. VI): Large development proposals that are likely
to generate significant traffic should be assessed for their impact on the transportation
system and surrounding land uses. They should be examined for ways to encourage all
forms of transportation such as transit, walking and cycling.
A detailed Traffic Impact Study (prepared by Funkhouser Engineering) that provides
background traffic and projected trip counts for this development was submitted with
the CUPIPD application. ACHD is in the process of evaluating the TIS and has
requested additional information from the applicant. The TIS projects Avg. Daily
Traffic of 30,988 vehicles per day (744 per AM peak and 2,700 per PM peak) to be
generated by this development at 2010 build-out. The application also proposes a
transit stop on the south side of the site and notes that this would be a feature of the
retail center. The Future Land Use Map depicts a future transit station in this area
(intersection of Eagle Road and UPRR). Page 73 of the Comprehensive Plan has six
(6) specific policies pertaining to the "floating" transit locations. Retail centers
typically provide a strong compliment to transit stations, assuming the platform, uses
and access are designed according to transit industry guidelines.
. Item 2, Seventh Bullet, page 71 (Chap. VI): Eagle Road is the major north-south
arterial in Ada County. The capacity of this arterial should be protected by minimizing
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-0!7 & CUP-Q4-05!
Page 5
the number and location of private driveway access connections to this important
roadway. The City should recognize, adopt and help implement the Eagle Road Access
Control Study, prepared by ACHD in 1997.
The site plan depicts three (3) access points to Eagle Road/SH 55 (including one
existing access via Commercial Ct.). Staff does not believe this number of new access
points is in coriformance with the above policy. The City has not formally adopted the
most recent ITD Eagle Road Access Study (2004), but the Mayor and City Council
have encouraged staff to consider this study when making recommendations,
. Objective B, page 102: Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities
within the Impact Area.
The applicant also lists this policy as supporting approval of the development (see the
Hansen-Rice letter, dated 10-25-04, submitted with the RZ application), Staff believes
commercial opportunities have been planned and that the subject property is not one of
them nor should industrial land be removed from the Area of Impact to accommodate
additional commercial land. Page 100 of the Comprehensive Plan includes a table that
shows the breakdown of land uses in the Area of City Impact. 18. 7% of the Area of
Impact is already slated for either Commercial or Mixed Use land uses, and the actual
area is higher when factoring in excepted uses within approved PD's, Only 4.35% of
the City's Area of Impact is slated for Industrial land uses.
ECONOMIC & LAND USE ISSUES
Since trade area is one of the factors used in determining an Area of City Impact and since the
Land Use Planning Act requires a Comprehensive Plan to address economic development
issues as part of a city's long-range plan, staff is including the following analysis for the P&Z
Commission and City Council as part of this CPA application. We believe the majority of
these issues do not support amending the Future Land Use Map ITom Industrial to MU-R.
Industrial Land Base: As noted above, 4.35% of Meridian's Impact Area (or 1,142.5 acres)
is currently designated as Industrial. This compares to 9.2% of Boise's Area of Impact.
Approximately 350 acres of the 1,142 acres identified for industrial (31 %) is unincorporated
and/or does not currently have municipal services. If the subject CPA and RZ applications
were approved, it would remove 62+/- acres of I-L land from Meridian's serviceable land
supply. The primary areas where land is zoned for industrial uses and has services today are
adjacent to the UPRR, between Old Town and Cloverdale Road, and adjacent to the UPRR
and Franklin Road, between Meridian Road and Ten Mile. Approval of the subject CPA
application means the existing, serviceable area of industrial land would be reduced even
further than the area currently available (approximately 70% of the total allocated area),
CP A-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-O51
Page 6
Contil!Uous Block of Industrial Land: Creating contiguous, useable blocks of land for
industrial type uses is important to creating long-term, viable areas for businesses in this
industry to operate. These areas are few and far between in Meridian and staff believes it is in
the city's economic best interest to protect such areas. (This has been recently exemplified
with the Louisiana Pacific plant near Old Town where noise pollution has been a consistent
complaint from nearby residents.) If the CPA and RZ applications are approved, it would
allow retail uses to significantly encroach into a large, protected block of industrial land. The
subject property is surrounded on all sides by existing I-L land. There are existing warehouse
and/or manufacturing uses to the north, west and east. The Western Chemical warehouse
would be surrounded on two sides by the proposed development - a fact which the
application does not fully address,
Over-Supply of Mixed Use/Commercial Land: By adding an additional 62+/- acres of land
designated for mixed uses into Meridian's Area of Impact, staff is concerned with a potential
over-supply of commercially zoned land, especially for retail uses. While we understand the
applicant's argument that Eagle Road is a high visibility corridor and opportunistic for retail,
we are concerned about placing the proposed amount of retail at this location and believe other
locations are better suited for retail. For example, there is over 220 acres of vacant land
designated as MU-Regional located only a half mile north of this site at the intersection of
Fairview and Eagle. This area will experience higher traffic volumes than the Pine/Eagle
intersection and it is highly unlikely that any industrial uses will ever locate at that intersection
given the existing residential uses. Staff also anticipates that big-box retail will be a likely use
in the MU-Regional area around the future Ten Mile Road/I-84 interchange, We believe that
area is better suited for large retail uses than the subject property.
Transportation Issues: The demands on the local transportation system created by industrial
uses are typically less than those created by retail uses, at least with regard to vehicle trip
generation. From a traffic perspective, portions of Eagle Road are currently operating beyond
the planned capacity of the street (LOS D to F), Since this project will contribute a substantial
number of new trips to Eagle Road, there is a need to limit development until such time as
capacity becomes available. In addition, Pine Avenue is planned to be extended via private
development funding only - not public funding. As such, it is difficult to estimate when this
collector will connect to the west. Without Pine Avenue being extended, Funkhouser's study
projects 66 % of the site traffic will need to use Eagle Road, as compared to only 52 % if Pine
Avenue is extended. Having an inter-connected street system in place is important before any
new development, especially a retail project of this size.
While the Comprehensive Plan supports a transit station as a future form of alternative
transportation in this area (as proposed), we do not believe this is a viable "selling point" for
the Ten Mile Development at this time and should not be viewed as any kind of off-set to the
vehicle trips in the near future. In 2002, ValleyRide commissioned URS/BRW to prepare a
feasibility study of the rail corridor for commuter rail service. This evaluation presented a
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 7
number of challenges to rail right-of-way acquisition, grade crossings, and funding the system
infrastructure. The study estimated up-front capital improvement costs for a 45-minute
commuter rail service between Caldwell and Boise to be approximately $108 million - not
including the land purchase - and annual operating costs of $4.8 million. Given the need for
state legislative action to help ValleyRide raise the necessary funding and other inherent
challenges, staff believes it is premature to allow the proposed transit station to justify
commercial uses at this location.
Lack of Mixed Use ProDosed: The applicant is proposing a MU-Regional designation for the
property. However, the conceptual CUPIPD site plan does not show a mix of uses. It
proposes 100% retail uses. This does not conform to the intent of the MU-R areas, which is to
construct a true mix of uses.
IDAHO STATE CODE
Idaho State Code Title 67, Chapter 65, states that the commission may recommend amendments
to the land use map component of the comprehensive plan to the governing board not more
ITequentiy than once every six (6) months. [NOTE: A formal recommendation of the Maverik
CPA application (also being heard on January 20, 2005), could impact the approval timeframe
of this application.]
REZONE APPLICA nON
REZONE ANALYSIS
According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments. both
the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and
circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and
shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning
amendment, "
The following is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis by staff:
"A.
Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan and. if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive
Plan amendment;
The proposed CoG zone is not harmonious with and in accordance with the Future Land
Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan for the western 22 acres of the site, which is
designated as "Industrial", The applicant has submitted an application for a
Comprehensive Plan map amendment for this portion, The proposed CoG zone is
harmonious with the Mixed Use-Regional (MU-R) designation for the eastern portion of
the site. The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide for a combination of
compatible land uses that are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan and
to identify key areas which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-0t7 & CUP-O4-051
Page 8
transitioning areas (Page 97, 2002 Comprehensive Plan). The conceptual site plan does
not show a mix of uses. which is not in conformance with the intent of the MU-R
designation.
The proposed future transit center along the railroad is harmonious with the Future Land
Use Map, which designates a "floating" center in this general location,
Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan defines "Industrial" as areas designated to allow
a range of industrial uses to support industrial and commercial activities, Uses may
include warehouses, storage units, light manufacturing, and incidental retail and office
uses, Heavy industrial areas may include processing, manufacturing, warehouses,
storage units, and industrial support activities, Because staff is recommending denial
of the concurrent Comprehensive Plan amendment (CPA-O4-003) and the Rezone
application is for the entire 61.63 acres, staff fmds that the requested C-G zoning
does not conform to the stated purpose and intent of the Industrial land
designation.
B.
Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future;
If the subject Rezone application (RZ-04-017) is approved, staff does not anticipate that
the applicant intends to rezone the subject property in the future,
c.
Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the
fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning - for example, a residential
area turning into commercial area by means of conditional use permits;
The applicant is proposing to construct a retail center in the proposed CoG zone; retail
uses are a permitted use in the CoG zone. No other uses are shown on the master site
plan, Assuming all future uses are constructed in accordance with adopted city
ordinances, staff finds the area would be developed per the CoG district.
D.
Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the
area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad
access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion
similar to the proposed rezone area;
Staff finds that the signalized intersection of Eagle RoadJPine A venue, if improved per
ACHO and ITO standards and per the TIS submitted with the application, is a change in
the vicinity that could support retail uses. In addition, Presidential Subdivision at the
northeast comer of Eagle and Pine is currently being improved with services and retail
uses, Pine Avenue is not in the current ACHO Five-Year Work Program for widening
but is proposed to be improved with this application (to their west boundary - not to
Locust Grove),
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-O51
Page 9
E.
Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character
of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of
the same area;
Under the existing I-L zoning and under the Future Land Use Map (for the western 22
acres), the intended character of approximately 50-60% of the immediate vicinity is
industrial-oriented. The existing uses south and west of the site are light industrial.
Gemtone Center Subdivision north of Pine Avenue, while I-L zoned, is permitted to
construct professional office, which would blend with retail development.
The intended uses within the eastern half of the subject property are both retail and
office (and other possible uses). However, the applicant's master site plan does not
reflect a mix of planned uses. Based on the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance,
and the lack of a mixed-use site plan, staff does not find that the proposed use(s) will be
designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in
appearance with the existing and intended character of the majority of the land in the
general vicinity.
F.
Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
In general, Staff finds the proposed retail center will not be hazardous or disturbing to
existing or future neighboring uses. The primary impacts created by the development
will be traffic and light related. The nearest residential uses are in Crossroads
Subdivision, approximately 1,000 feet east on the north side of Pine A venue, East of
Eagle Road, Pine Avenue is already widened to 5 lanes.
G.
Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as
highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,
water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed
zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services;
Staff finds that the project can be provided sanitary sewer and water service via the
existing mains on and adjacent to the project site. However, the applicant has not yet
demonstrated how the existing sewer trunk in Commercial Court will be re-routed
through the project. It currently runs underneath landscaping and buildings on the master
site plan, which is not acceptable. Until the Public Works Department has had an
opportunity to review further civil drawings for the sewer re-routing plan, we are not
prepared to recommend approval of the application,
On December 3, 2004, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with
representatives of key service providers to this property. See detailed conditions ITom
these agencies at the end of this report, All public services and facilities noted above
CPA-04-003, RZ-04-017 &CUP-04-051
Page 10
appear to be adequate to serve this property. The Commission and Council should rely
upon comments submitted by the ACHD, the Meridian Fire Department, the Meridian
Parks Department and any other agency providing service to this parcel when
determining serviceability,
H.
Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities
and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, utilities and
irrigation services to serve the project. In addition, ACHD is requiring the developer to
construct a new traffic signal at the PinelHickory intersection. The primary public costs
to serve the project will be fire and police services. Staff finds there will not be excessive
additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services,
The Rezone application (and CUP) makes several references to a future UPRR transit
center as an asset to this development. This is in general conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan which identifies this location for a transit stop as well. If the
CUP/PO application and concept plan are approved, including the transit center, there
will likely be public funds involved in the construction of said transit center.
I.
Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment
and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the
general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare or odors;
As noted in more detail under Finding J, the proposed uses will generate significant
levels of new traffic. Staff recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the
approval of!illX development on this parcel. Staff believes that the amount oftraffic
generated by the proposed use(s) may be detrimental to the general welfare of the
traveling public if all traffic controls and mitigation standards recommended by ACHD
are not enforced/constructed.
J.
Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shaD be so designed
as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets;
As currently proposed (with three vehicular access points on to Eagle Road), staff does
not find the approaches will be designed as not to create an interference with Eagle Road
traffic. (See ITD's recommendation ITom the Eagle Road Arterial Study below,) The
applicant's traffic engineer, Gary Funkhouser, prepared a Transportation Impact Study
and a detailed supplement to the study which outlines the proposed vehicular
approaches, traffic impacts and proposed roadway improvements, A summary of the TIS
was included in the ACHD staff report, ACHD believes the need for a new signal at the
Pine StreetlHickory Street intersection is solely related to the development of this
property and that the developer would need to provide a $105,000 road trust deposit for
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 11
the signal. ACHD has made several "Special Recommendations" to the City of Meridian
and ITD in their report, They also believe the proposed truck access to Eagle Road
should be eliminated and relocated to Pine Ave, Staff also finds that any future use will
significantly impact the level and flow of traffic on the surrounding streets,
At their January 11, 2005 meeting, the Meridian City Council signed a letter of support
for the ITD Eagle Road Arterial Study (dated April 2004, by Cambridge Systematics).
Specifically, the report contained three (3) recommendations that impact the segment of
Eagle Road between Franklin Road and Fairview Avenue:
Section 3.2. #1. page 3: "Where a single large parcel is developed, . .,
municipal planning and zoning procedures should require identification of a
feasible internal (i,e. off the state highway) circulation plan to minimize the
number of direct access points to the state route, and to identifY local road
construction or modification needs to provide the level of access -required by
the new development"
Section 3.2. #2. page 3: "Secondary access," as used in the ITD access
management policy, should be defined as access to cross streets, rather than
to Eagle Road itself. Wherever possible, secondary access should be directed
to signalized locations on those cross streets,"
Appendix B. Segment 2 map: Recommends adding a landscaped median,
median/sidewalk lighting and other features with no break (except Pine Ave,)
in ITont of the subject parcel.
With any future detailed CUP applications, the applicant should comply with ITD and
ACHD policies in order to preserve the capacity and movement on the adjacent
roadways.
K.
Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of
major importance; and
Staff finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of natural features. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council
reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the
proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major
importance of which staff is unaware,
L.
Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
(Ord. 592,11-17-1992)"
Staff recommends that the Commission and Council review the analysis above when
determining whether rezoning of the subject property to CoG is in the best interest of the
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 12
City. Staff finds that the rezoning of all of the subject property to CoG would not be in
the best interest of the City for the reasons listed in this report,
[If the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the Rezone application, Staff offers the
following as recommended conditions of approval:]
REZONE COMMENTS & DA CONDITIONS
1.
Ap1Jlication Correction: The Rezone application and map do not recognize that there is a
one (1) acre section of the subject property currently zoned L-O (Limited Office), This
land was rezoned ITom I-L to L-O in 2002 (Ordinance No. 02-945), intended to become
a medical clinic. If the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the rezone to Citv
Council. the application and public notice must be corrected to reflect the Rezone of this
1 +/- acre ITom L-O to CoG and subtract this acreage ITom the I-L acreage,
2,
The legal description submitted with the application appears to meet the requirements of
the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission and places the parcel contiguous to
existing city limits,
3,
Prior to the rezone ordinance approval, the property owner shall. be required to enter
into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City of Meridian as a condition of
rezone. The DA shall require that:
. Uses shall be restricted to those allowed in the CoG zone and as agreed upon during
the public hearings for File CUP-04-05l,
. All future uses within the property boundaries shall be required to obtain detailed
conditional use permit approval.
. Based on the submitted TIS, a continuous right-turn lane is needed on Eagle Road
for the proposed access points, ITD should require a turn lane for any access that is
approved on Eagle Road, and should acquire sufficient right-of-way for those and
any future improvements.
. All access on Eagle Road shall be restricted to right-in/right-out operations only, and
that medians be installed in Eagle Road to restrict the access points, including the
Commercial Court access.
. Prior to any development applications being approved on the property, the owner
shall provide written documentation to the City that all parcels currently using
Commercial Court to access Eagle Road have relinquished their right to Commercial
Court and will be provided appropriate access to the public street system,
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 &CUP-O4-051
Page 13
. The current layout of the site requires trucks to access Eagle Road to serve the
proposed uses. The applicant shall re-design the site to eliminate the need for Eagle
Road access for trucks,
4,
Any existing domestic wells will have to be removed ITom their domestic service per
City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. All septic system(s) will have to be removed
ITom their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8, when service
becomes available to this site. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation.
5,
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting,
crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance
12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district,
or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval
submitted to the Public Works Department. Iflateral users association approval can't be
obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to
final plat signature.
6,
Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the
City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PD APPLICATION
CONDITIONAL USE/PD PERMIT ANALYSIS
The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each
proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if
they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3):
A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open
spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this
ordinance;
B.
Staff finds that the site may not be large enough to accommodate all of the required
parking for the building square footage shown on the concept plan. First, there appears
to be a discrepancy between the CUP application cover sheet (which shows approx,
615,430 sq. ft. of building area) and the site plan (which shows 562,628 sq, ft, of
building area). This should be clarified, However, even at the smaller figure, the required
parking of 1:200 sq, ft. of floor area would require 2,813 parking stalls, which is 186
stalls more than shown on the plan (2,627),
Other than the parking issue, it appears the site is large enough to accommodate the
proposed setbacks, landscaping, etc,
That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 14
F.
G.
H.
I.
Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance;
Please see the findings in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment portion of this report,
C.
That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with
other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character
of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential
character of the same area;
Please see the findings in section "E" and "F" of the Rezone portion of this report,
D.
That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,
will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity;
Staff is Please see the findings in sections "I" and "J" of the Rezone portion of this
report.
E.
That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of
proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services;
Please see the findings in section "G" of the Rezone portion ofthis report,
That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public
cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic
welfare of the community;
Please see the findings in sections "G", "H" and "I" ofthe Rezone portion ofthis report,
That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment,
and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or
general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare or odors;
Please see the findings in sections "I" and "]" of the Rezone portion of this report,
That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall
be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
streets;
Please see the findings in section "J" of the Rezone portion of this report.
That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
CPA-O4.003, RZ-O4-017 &CUP-O4-051
Page 15
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
Please see the findings in section "K" of the Rezone portion of this report.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONDITIONAL USE/PD)
Commercial Court Easement: Commercial Court, the private street that connects Eagle Road
with Commercial Drive on the west boundary and extends 2,600 feet across the middle of the
subject property, also serves as the primary ingress/egress for the 7+ acre parcel at the southwest
comer of the site. This outparcel, owned by another party (McCall Properties), is zoned I-L and
is not a part of this application, This parcel is land locked without the use of Commercial Court,
There is a recorded, private easement (Instrument No, 7640090, dated 7-21-76) between Elixir
Industries (owner of subject property) and Great Western Chemical Company (now McCall
Properties) that grants McCall Properties a non-exclusive, ingress and egress and utility
easement over the 50-foot strip of land known as Commercial Court. Also, a City of Meridian
sanitary sewer trunk line lies within the eastern half of the road (extends to Eagle Road).
To staffs knowledge, this easement has never been relinquished or amended and remains a part
of the title for both properties today. Other than showing-up on the Record of Survey, the
subject applications do not address this easement nor does the site plan represent how the
McCall Properties parcel's access will be preserved, While the City of Meridian is not a party to
the easement, it does significantly impact the design and feasibility of the development plan.
Staff recommends this issue be addressed by the applicant at the 1-20-05 public hearing.
Amenities: MCC 12-6-2.A.3 requires two or more amenities to be provided as part of each PD.
Meridian City Code does not exempt non-residential PDs ITom providing amenities, It does state
that "other amenities appropriate to the size and uses of the proposed development, as may be
proposed by the applicant and approved by the Commission and Council," can be approved.
While not called-out in the application, it appears the applicant is proposing a multi-use pathway
(on the south side of the site) and the transit center as amenities with this application. Staff
recommends that the applicant be required to provide two amenities appropriate for this
development. Staff further recommends that the applicant. at the Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting. clarify what the two amenities will be. See Site Specific Condition #4
below.
General Site Desim Comments: Staff offers the following overall design comments, based on
Sheet AO.OO, dated 8 Oct 04, These comments are not intended as conditions of approval, rather
to serve as the basis for further discussions with staff and at the P&Z Commission public
hearing:
a. Staff supports the placement/orientation of buildings on Eagle Road with the
parking located behind the structures;
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 16
b. We do not believe the outdoor seating areas near Eagle Road are adequately
protected and would need to be relocated toward the interior of the site;
c. We do not believe the rail transit station is integrated into the overall design of
the site. Some significant reconfiguration of buildings, walking paths and
landscaping at the southeast comer would be necessary to create this as a feature
of the project. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan (Chapter VI) has a policy
which recommends a park-and-ride facility be included with these transit centers
(not necessarily constructed by the developer, but at least an. area preserved);
d. Assuming the Commission and Council support ACHD's recommendation to
allow no truck access to Eagle Road, some internal drive aisle should be
designated for truck deliveries, preferably aligned with the future Hickory signal;
e, We would recommend a third north-south drive aisle with no adjacent parking be
constructed at the eastern end ofthe site;
f, We would recommend at least one bus shelter be designated on Pine A venue, in
accordance with Valley Ride standards,
Fencinl!.: The submitted site plan does not propose fencing, If no permanent fencing is provided
on the perimeter, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the
perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing should be installed in accordance
with MCC 12-4-10, See Site Specific Condition #8 below,
[If the P&Z Commission recommends approval of the CUPIPD application, Staff offers the
following as recommended conditions of approval:]
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/pm
1.
All conditions of the accompanying Rezone application (including the Development
Agreement) shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional UseIPD application,
2.
No new buildings are approved for construction under this conceptual CUPIPD
application (File No, CUP-04-051). All future buildings shall require approval of a
detailed CUP prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance application
and/or building permit.
3,
Provide at least two amenities, as approved by the City Council, for the Planned
Development.
4.
Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-13 of the City of
Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, All vehicular use areas shall be paved in
accordance with Meridian City Code.
5.
An underground, pressurized irrigation system shall be installed to all landscape areas
per the approved specifications and in accordance with MCC 12-13-8 and MCC 9-1-2.
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 17
9,
12.
13.
6.
Unless a waiver is specifically granted by City Council, all irrigation ditches, laterals or
canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and
contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be
approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with
written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department.
7,
All fencing shall be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10, If no permanent fencing
is provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around
the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit.
8.
A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required
and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking
areas. Storm water treatment and disposal must be designed in accordance with
Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best
Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and
policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which
has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to
development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary
applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection
Wells.
The applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and through this
proposed development (looped). Project designer to coordinate main sizing and routing
and new easements with the Public Works Department. Please provide the Public Works
Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements
for the proposed site, Flow and pressure ITom the existing mains should be monitored
with the Meridian Water Department.
10.
No Parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. Paint the curb red
and provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane".
11.
A revised site plan and landscaping plan reflecting all the required modifications to the
site plan and landscaping shall be submitted to the City Clerk's office at least ten (10)
days prior to the next public hearing for this application.
The applicant shall coordinate the location and design of trash dumpsters with Sanitary
Services Company (SSC) staff. Trash enclosures must be built in the location and to the
size approved by SSC. Prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) submittal, the
applicant shall submit a revised site plan, stamped approved by SSC, for the proposed
trash enclosure location and design. All dumpster(s) must be screened in accordance
with MCC 11-12-1.c.
No building or other structure shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered,
nor shall any building structure or land be established or change in use on this site
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-0t7 &CUP-O4-051
Page 18
2,
3,
4,
without first obtaining a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) ITom the Meridian
Planning and Zoning Department (MCC 11-19-1).
14,
All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of
Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may
be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the
amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping,
landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary
occupancy. Any temporary occupancy will not exceed 60 days to complete the required
improvements.
15.
This conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of 18 months. If
construction has not begun within this timeITame, a new conditional use permit must be
obtained prior to the start of development.
GENERAL REOUIREMENTS
1. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed in such a manner as to eliminate glare and
illumination of the adjoining roadways and properties, in accordance with City
Ordinance Section ll-13-4.C.
All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the
City Zoning and Development Ordinance.
All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Applicant's (or successor's) failure to comply with any of the terms of approval of the
conditional use permit shall be cause for revocation of the conditional use permit.
OTHER AGENCYIDEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS
MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
1, All Fire Department Connections (FDC) must be within 100 feet of a fire hydrant.
2,
3,
4.
Applicant shall comply with Appendix D of the International Fire Code for access to all
building walls with a height of 30 feet or greater (including parapets), It may be necessary
to increase fire lane widths to 26 feet.
Applicant shall coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department and prepare an addressing
plan for the site.
All driveways located behind buildings (as depicted on the conceptual site plan) shall be
posted as "No Parking,"
CPA-O4-003, RZ-Q4-017 &CUP-O4-051
Page t9
6, Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire
Department.
Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle,
The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec,
Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the
hydrant location,
Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners.
Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10',
5.
7.
8.
9.
Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water
Department.
a.
b.
c,
d,
e.
f,
All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of28' inside and 48' outside,
Provide a 20' wide fire lane for all internal and external roadways.
Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation.
10, Operational fire hydrants and ternporary or permanent street signs are required before
combustible construction begins.
11. Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13 '6", This includes mature
landscaping,
12,
Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the
International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an
average 0000' apart.
13, Maintain a separation of5' ITom the building to the dumpster enclosure,
14, All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface
as measured around the perimeter of the building,
15, Fire Sprinklers will be required for all buildings associated with this project,
16, Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes,
17, Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex,
18. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the
development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and
efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles, This cost of this
installation is to be borne by the developer,
CPA-04-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-04-051
Page 20
19. No Parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. Paint the curb red
and provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane".
20. Please contact the Fire Marshal at 888-1234 to work specific issues associated with this
project.
SANITARY SERVICE CO. CONDITIONS
1. SSC has no comments related to this application at this time.
CPA-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 21
PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
I, Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall meet the standards as set
forth in the August 2003 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan, pgs. 3-2 and 3-3,
sections B & C.
2,
Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from
one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the
city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway,
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
As outlined above, staff does not believe the applicant has presented sufficient evidence to
support the removal of more than 20 acres of existing, serviceable, industrial land from the
city. In fact, if both the CPA and RZ applications are approved, more than 60 acres of I-L
zoned land would be removed. Staff recommends denial of the subject CPA application, (We
want to emphasize that this application pertains only to the 22 + 1- acres at the west end of the
site. One alternative is for the applicant to rezone the eastern portion of the parcel that is
already designated as MU-Regional.)
If the P&Z Commission approves the CPA application and the property is rezoned, staff
believes it is highly questionable that the existing transportation inITastructure can support the
anticipated number of vehicle trips to be generated by this particular development. In addition,
we believe the CUP/PD application, as submitted, insufficiently addresses the following
issues:
0 the mixed use goals and purpose of the MU-Regional designation (i,e. no mix of
uses);
0 how the transit center would become an integral, accessible feature of the
development;
0 how the site would be re-designed with no direct access to Eagle Road and/or with all
truck access being taken from Pine Ave.;
0 how the buildings comply with the Comprehensive Plan policy to "create some form
of common, usable area, such as a plaza or green space (see Chapter VII, pg, 98); and
0 how the existing ingress/egress and utility easement within Commercial Drive will be
addressed.
Staff can not support the conceptual site plan as proposed. If the Commission approves the
CPA and RZ applications, we recommend the public hearing be continued to address these
issues and the "General Site Design Comments" listed under the "Special Considerations"
section of the CUP/PD application.
CP A-O4-003, RZ-O4-017 & CUP-O4-051
Page 22
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Planning & Zoning
Memo
RECEIVED
JAN 1 3 2005
'IbiI
Meridian P&Z Commission
City Of Meridian
City Clerk Office
FnImI Brad Hawkins-Clark ~
CCI Cjty Clerk, Dave McKinnon, Ten Mile Development File
DaII!I January 13, 2005
ReI
Allowable Uses in Gemtone Center Subdivision
At the Commission's December 16, 2004 public hearing for Ten Mila Development
(which is continued to tha January 20, 2005 meeting), staff was asked to provida
clarification on the allowable uses within Gemtone Center Subdivision. This is the
subdMsion located north of E. Pine Avenue, adjacent to the proposed Ten Mila
Development It is currently zoned I-L. Dave McKinnon, representing tha applicant,
tastified that professional office uses were permitted in the I-L zona, I testiflE!d that
office uses were not allowed. The question was raised while discussing the existing
and proposed surrounding uses. Office uses are, indeed, allowable uses within
Gerntone Center, subject to design review.
In March 1991, the Meridian City Council approved a CUP for a Planned
Development-Ganeral (PD-G) for approximately 290 acres on the east and west
sides of Eagle RoadlSH 55, south of Fairview Avenue. According to Tom Wright, the
land was originally assembled and annexed by Upland Industries (a subsidiary of
Union Pacific) in the mid-1980's. The existing Garntone Center Subdivision was a
part of that 290-acre land holding (although it was not platted until 1996) and was
included in the PD-G.
Under the City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances in effect at tha tima, a property
owner could apply for a PD-G with no specific site plan or uses. The permit, which
runs with the land and for which there was no expiration or sunset date, allowed for
a mix of uses and services, including residential, commercial and industrial, The
permit required all future uses to be developed undar "control guidelines" (par. #12,
pg. 4) and subject to "design review by city staff and Council" (MCC 11-9-607). The
permit also required 10% of the gross land area to be developed as open space.
While it appears necessary at some point for the City to address the applicability of
this PD-G to the undaveloped lots within both Gemtone Center and Treasure Valley
Business Center Subdivisions, for the purposes of the Ten Mile Development
applications, it is clear that uses other than industrial may be constructed north of
Pine Avenue in this general location.
RECE¡VE
DEC 2 1 2004
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
~ & ~ 'J~ 'Z)é4tIUct
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208.463-0092
IS December, 2004
Phones: Area Cod. 208
OFFICE: Nompo 466-7861
SHOP: Nompa 466-0663
WilliamG. Berg Jr.
City Clerk
City of Mèridian
33 East Idaho Ave.
Meridian, ill 83642
RE:
CUP 04-051/CP A 04-003/RZ 04-017
Ten Mile Development
Dear Will:
Nampa & Mèridian Irrigation District has no comment on the above referenced
applications for Conditional Use Permit, Comprehensive Plan Map, and Rezone for the
above-mentioned project.
Sincerely,
~-H/¿t~
Bill Henson
Asst. Water Supèrintendent
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
BHldbg
c:
Water Superintendent
File-Office/Shop
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABIE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
RECEIVED
DEe 2 1 2004
i ~JIll
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
DISTRICT 3- f~ O. BOX 8028 . BoisË, ID - 83707.2028 . (208) 334-8300
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
December 17, 2004
Will Berg, City Clerk
Meridian Planning and Zoning
33 East Idaho Ave.
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re:
Location: Meridian
Route: SH-55
Name: Hansen-Rice, Inc.
Case No. CUP-04-051,CPA-04-033
Dear Mr. Berg:
The Idaho Transportation Department has reviewed the application and determined that the
access to the development should be developed onto Pine Avenue. No direct access will be
allowed to Eagle Road. This section of SH-55 has been designated a Principal Arterial Type N,
ITD would like the City of Meridian to help us preserve this corridor.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on this application.
If you have any questions about the approaches of this development, please have the applicant
contact Mr. Ward at our office located at 8150 Chinden Blvd. in Boise or call (208) 334-8341.
If you have any questions about the development please contact me at 334-8340.
2l~
DAN COONCE, P.E.
District Traffic Engineer
. An Equal Opportunity Employer -
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 150f41
Zaremba: So, my other question: Were you satisfied that there has been a resolution
to the question about 24.20 feet of the property?
Huber: Well, that's for the man in the black robe to decide, I think, the 24 feet that's in
dispute. That will probably -- that will be worked out between the attorneys, between
the two property owners,
Zaremba: Okay.
Borup: So, that was -- okay. That was a dispute between the survey and an old deed?
Huber: Right.
Borup: Any other questions?
Huber: Thank you.
Borup: Thank you, Do we have anyone else that wanted to testify on this application?
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move that we close Public Hearing AZ 04-031,
Rohm: Second.
Borup: Motion and second to close the hearing. All in favor? Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Moe: Mr, Chairman, I move we forward to City Council recommending approval of AZ
04-031, to include all staff comments of the hearing date December 16th, received by
the city clerk's office December 13th. End of motion.
Zaremba: Second.
Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Public Hearing: CPA 04-003 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment to change approximately 48 acres from Industrial to Mixed-
Use Regional for Ten Mile Development, LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. -
SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue:
Borup: Okay. The next item is Public Hearing CPA 04-003, a request for a
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change approximately 48 acres from
industrial to mixed use regional by Ten Mile Development by Hansen-Rice,
Incorporated. This is located at Eagle Road and Pine. I'd like to open this --
Item 7:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Pagel6of41
Canning: Chairman Borup, before you finish that sentence, we forgot to ask you to deal
with Maverick Country Store, which is going to be tabled. Are there people here from
Maverick?
Borup: Oh.
Canning: Yeah. So, we probably need to deal with that. We are sorry that we made
you sit through that last couple confusing ones. We should have dealt with it sooner.
Borup: Yeah. That was from -- oh, that's right. That was not continued, it was just
moved to this, wasn't it. We probably should have had that earlier on in the agenda.
Canning: Yes. Sorry, sir, The applicant did not post the property, so we are going to
have to table it to the 20th.
Borup: Oh, this was not posted. Okay. I was not aware of that. You know, just -- we
can open the hearing, but we will not -- is the staff ready for a report or --
Canning: Sir, I think we need to get some direction from the attorney.
Borup: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, since there had been some notice
issues, my recommendation would be to simply set the matter over, so it can be
properly noticed. If there are people here tonight, they certainly can submit their
testimony in writing, so it can be part of the record, but there isn't going to be a hearing
tonight, because it hasn't been noticed properly, So, you shouldn't be taking testimony
at this juncture, you should take testimony when it's all completed, because, otherwise,
there isn't any staff report, there isn't any report tonight, because, again, it hasn't been
completely noticed properly. I know some of the folks received notice, the mail notice
has gone out, they don't send another mailed notice, but the posting is required as well
to have a hearing, so to properly hold a hearing, you need to have all the notices
completed. So, they can submit written testimony if they want to, that can become part
of the record, but if they want to testify in person, they are going to have to come when
we can hold a hearing properly.
Zaremba: Do we know the hearing date that's going to be posted on the posting notice?
Nary: I think that's what you decide it to be,
Zaremba: So, they haven't even started to be posted yet.
Nary: Right. They have ten days -- they have a ten-day window to post it. I think this
was one they didn't post it. I don't think they posted the wrong date, I think they didn't
post at all.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 17 of41
Canning: Chairman Borup?
Borup: The 20th would be the next available date?
Canning: We would suggest the 20th, The 6th agenda is looking pretty light, but you
have already kind of pre-committed to putting the last item on the agenda to the 6th and
we were trying to keep to the Comprehensive Plan amendment ones, so you will
probably have Ten Mile on the 20th also or -- we were afraid of putting all three of them
on the 6th, I guess is what it comes down to.
Rohm: And you will be talking to the applicant about that posting?
Canning: He was in this morning -- or this afternoon.
Rohm: You might suggest that they have a community meeting,
Borup: A neighborhood meeting?
Rohm: Neighborhood meeting, just to give these people an opportunity to talk to them
before we come back before this Commission on the 20th.
Canning: And, Chairman Borup, with your indulgence, if those folks can raise their
hand, I will take a quick hand count, so that they have some idea,
Borup: Yes. All those that are here for the Maverick application? I count seven.
Canning: Seven. Thanks. Seven. Thank you.
Borup: Would you like to make that a little bit stronger and say we would like to see that
meeting before --
Rohm: I would. I'd like to see a neighborhood meeting before it's brought back before
this Commission.
Zaremba: I definitely support that idea,
Borup: So, at this point it's not a recommendation from this Commission, that is a
requirement.
Canning: Chairman Borup --
Borup: Can we do that before the hearing?
Canning: I think you can, It says you can do that. It doesn't say you have to do that in
a hearing, but can they take an action without a hearing being open?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 18 of41
Borup: Yeah. I was wondering that, too,
Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, probably not. I tell you what, make
a very strong recommendation that when you hear it on the 20th it would nice if you had
a neighborhood meeting, but I don't know how you can make them do it.
Borup: I was just going to say, I think we can do it that way and, then, on the 20th if it
hasn't happened, we can make a decision then.
Zaremba: I would convey to the applicant that if they don't want to risk having it
continued again from the 20th --
Canning: I will --
Zaremba: -- be prepared with a neighborhood meeting before that is a good idea.
Canning: Sounds like a good spin.
Borup: January 20th. Sorry.
Zaremba: 2005.
Borup: Our meetings are the first and third Thursdays of each month. So, this is our
last meeting for December, Sorry we didn't get that earlier for those that were here.
Zaremba: So, to make sure I'm clear, Items 10 and 11 are moved to January 20th,
2005; is that correct?
Borup: Yes. It's my understanding, January 20th on 10 and 11.
Moe: If they get their notice out.
Borup: Yes. Okay. Thank you, director. I was not aware of the notice, I think where I
left off was ready to turn our next hearing -- if I didn't open it, it is open at this point and
start with the staff report,
Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission, The
application before you is combined, as you read both this staff report and the staff report
from Maverick, the one you just moved to your January meeting, they are both
Comprehensive Plan amendments and I think both of our staff reports reminded you
that as Comprehensive Plan amendments, the state talks about this body needing to
recommend changes to the land use map only once -- only twice a year and I so just
clarify that up front, that the staff is recommending that you not close this hearing. We
have talked briefly with the applicant, too, and I think they are in agreement with that,
too. So, it doesn't seem like there is an issue, but just a reminder on that front. And we
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 19 0£41
had also requested, even though there is three applications associated with this project,
we are focusing on just the Comp Plan amendment and that's what my staff report --
Borup: That's the only one we opened.
Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Thank you. We will deal with -- the property is kind of formerly
known as the Elixir property and I guess could still be known as that, since they are the
property owners today. Eagle Road fronts the property on the east. Union Pacific on
the south. Gemtone Industrial Park on the north and there is some county property,
along with Layne Industrial Park to the west. There is two different projects there on the
west that would abut this project, so -- the application is requesting a little -- about a
third of this property that you see highlighted here to be removed from the industrial
designation and put into the mixed use regional designation. As you can see, it is today
already annexed and is zoned light industrial as the gray color indicates, This aerial
photo gives you a little bit of a sense for what's on the subject property and what some
of the surrounding uses are. Blue Cross Insurance headquarters is located here
immediately to the north. A future Pine extension. Pine is constructed to approximately
this point and would be extended to the west in the future with development -- private
development dollars, ACHD does not have that extension built in as far as public
funding, so that -- that would be anticipated to be in that alignment, but would be reliant
on development there. There is a warehouse -- well, two warehouses. One larger one
and one smaller one on the property here in the southeast corner. The Coors building
and some other industrial uses on the opposite side of Eagle Road. Olson Bush
Industrial Park is on the south side of the railroad tracks there and as you can see the
Layne Industrial Park that I mentioned is largely built out. Here is a shot at the
Comprehensive Plan that incorporates the area. The red outline here is the same
property. As you can see, it's split with the designation that's in the Comprehensive
Plan. Mixed use regional is on approximately 40 to -- 40 acres or so and, then, there is
about 22 acres that is on the back western half that is designated industrial, which is
what it's zoned. So, the application for the Comp Plan amendment really is dealing with
this, even though the other two following applications that you will deal with in January
do propose a rezone of this entire area that's outlined in red from the industrial to a C-G,
General Commercial, and, then, they have a conceptual plan for a retail project on the
site. So, I know we have a few new commissioners since -- I think since we have had a
comp plan amendment, at least to the land use map. These are a little bit unique in that
you -- you're almost kind of putting on your planning hats and taking off your zoning hats
as far as Planning and Zoning Commission with these Comp Plan amendments. In
some ways you're almost thinking as economists and I don't know if we are asking you
to fully be full fledged economists here tonight, but there is recently some of the issues
as we talked about in the staff report and as Dave McKinnon talked about in his
response, you know, some of the issues in thinking about land use and, you know, do
involve some projections and a lot of crystal ball work, frankly. So, you know, there are
no required findings in the ordinance for Comp Plan amendments. The Land Use
Planning Act doesn't say that there is specific findings, so this is really just does the
Commission feel that the industrial land and/or commercial or some other use is most
appropriate here and in 2002 when this map was adopted the Commission and the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page20of41
Council and the community at large felt that what's represented here was a reasonable
shot at a mix of uses, So, I think I will just go ahead and just basically touch on the
broad categories that were addressed in the staff report. The applicant on page four, I
just summarized, and, hopefully, you read the application itself, but I did summarize.
There is kind of four areas that they feel warrant this area industrial being changed.
One of those is high visibility, The next one is ease of accessibility. The third one is a
potential future transit station. And the third one is just a general positive impact to the
city and the valley because of jobs and revenue that would be generated with the retail
project. I, then, went on to highlight some of the specific Comprehensive Plan policies
that I felt were applicable to your review of this and generally found that there are --
there is definitely some policies, as with any analysis that we do of the Comprehensive
Plan, that support a project and some that don't. I guess in this case I felt that there
wasn't enough to warrant the change and as such we are recommending denial of the
change. The issues that start on page six of the staff report, the first one I have
mentioned was industrial land base and this is a -- basically a look at what the
Comprehensive Plan designates. I'm just going to change screens here real quick and
show you -- I guess I got that even more crooked, didn't I. This is from our
Comprehensive Plan and it is -- was generated by Intermountain Demographics, which
was one of the consultants for the team that put together the Comprehensive Plan, This
is the 1997 to 2020 Ada County employment forecast and, again, most of the data that's
available for economic analysis is county based, so recognize that there is, you know,
some guesswork, if you will, when it comes to going to a city area of impact, because
normally these numbers are county, but for -- and, again, this is countywide, but it does
show that the 1997 employment for industrial is 36,922, the 2020 forecast was 67,964,
with an increase of 31,000. And that, again, is in Ada County over the next 15 years or
so. In terms of how does job growth translate to land use, you know, certainly when it
comes to industrial land you are normally going to have -- take up more land to have an
industrial use than you will most any other use and the way that it's shown here on page
six, I mentioned, is 4.3 percent of our area of impact that's designated for industrial.
That compares to Boise's 9.2 percent. There is approximately four percent -- I'm going
to switch this Comprehensive Plan here for a second. This is the breakdown of land
within the future land use map that you can see for office a hundred -- almost 200 acres
in the area of impact, which is about three-quarters of a percent. The industrial about
4.35 percent, a little over 1,100 acres. Commercial -- straight commercial takes up
about 5.4 percent of the area and, then, the mixed-use areas are shown here as well.
We do already show 8.35 percent of the area in mixed use regional, which is what 40
acres of the property already is and what they are proposing to add to, So, I guess why
I'm showing these, just let you see that there is -- you know, there is -- these are just
what is shown on there. There is a lot more office land that's actually used for office
than what's shown here, because office uses are allowed in commercial districts, We
also have some projects, you know, at Bridgetower, for example, that have residential
zoning, but have office uses in them. So, that, you know, these numbers are going to
change a little bit. But generally this is the ratio and our feeling was that we need to
plan for the future industrial areas. Whether or not they are here today, it's somewhat
sacred territory that if it's well placed we need to hold it so that once those industrial
demands do come, whether they are here today or not, there is a place that serviced
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page21of41
that they can go and have good access for the large trucks, et cetera, that are part of
that use. This next item that I pointed out was just a -- was a contiguous block of
industrial land and the point there being that normally the industrial uses -- the goal
being to operate them in a block that is going to help to mitigate some of the noise and
vibrations and truck impacts, et cetera. As you can see, the industrial use here on the
north and the south and the west, you would have the retail basically punch in into that
area, you also have this southern area which is vacant today, is not a part of the
applicant's application, but remains industrial on the Comp Plan, they have not
proposed to change that, so the - there is some benefit we feel to having a block that is
large enough to operate some industrial uses that will not negatively affect others,
Residential-wise you really don't have much affect in this area, As you can see, there is
really no residential uses, except for Crossroads Subdivision, which is the closest, about
a quarter mile across Eagle Road. Eagle Road is probably going to mitigate any kind of
impact that industrial uses would have here, since it has its own barrier, if you will. The
third area we talked about -- or I talked about in the report was on page seven, That's
the oversupply of mixed use and the commercial land. There is a lot of land that's in our
area of impact that's already designated for mixed use and/or commercial. We question
whether or not we should be adding more to that. The transportation issues, there was
a traffic study that was presented -- or that was submitted with the application. Ada
County Highway District has asked the Funkhouser -- Gary Funkhouser, who prepared
the study, to go back and do some additional analysis. I believe they are in the process
of doing that. They are going to come back to ACHD with some revised numbers.
Generally, though, what his estimate is right now is that approximately 30,000 new
vehicle trips would be generated with the 60 plus acres of straight retail and, you know,
we -- staff doesn't need to tell you about Eagle Road or about Pine in terms of its
impact. Normally, though, / think you find that the industrial -- most industrial uses are
going to generate far less impact on the system than the retail will. Now, all this to say,
as was pointed out many times in Dave McKinnon's response, much of the property is
designated mixed use regional today. That does not mean that it has to go that. I mean
the land today has a right to develop as industrial land without changing this map,
because they already have the zoning, The other thing is that mixed use regional would
actually allow for some light industrial uses. It doesn't all have to be commercial. Their
concept that they submitted does not show any mix of uses, it is straight retail. They did
clarify that that doesn't necessarily have to be the case, but just wanted to point out that
the mixed use, again, is different than the commercial, which you see up here at the
corner of Fairview and Eagle and that's something that especially with a future transit,
should that happen -- and, again, that doesn't mean that it's on the east -- or west side
of Eagle Road, it just, you know, potentially somewhere in this area. This is, obviously,
probably the side that it's going to go on, because the east side is largely built out at the
railroad tracks, but -- and, then, there was just two clarifications that I wanted to make.
In Dave's reply he mentions about the Gemtone subdivision to the north being office
park. The Blue Cross building, obviously, is office, but there is Tri-City Meats, Food
Service America, and Yellow Freight, among others, that are already in Gemtone today
and operating, So, it is designated for industrial uses. Let's see, I guess that was the
main classification, And, then, just to clarify on the staff report, again, on the last page
we do just reference the Idaho State Code section there for your guidance, which,
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page 22 of41
again, just references the Title 67, Chapter 65, that states about recommending
amendments to this, So, generally, to summarize, I think staff feels that the industrial
land is an important element of our total mix in our land uses and as Meridian grows
there is a lot of benefits, we think, to having a designated area where it's existing built
out, where there is good access to the 1-84 Interchange and makes a pretty compatible
use for the Union Pacific and other areas in this area. So, I think that kind of
summarizes where we are coming from. If you have got any questions,
Borup: Questions from the Commissioners at this point? Mr. McKinnon,
McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Dave McKinnon,
735 South Crosstimber, Brad's given you a lot to chew on. I'm going to give you more.
So, let's just jump right into an overview of the site. And Brad just finished up with a
clarification that he said and I'd like to address right away with Gemtone, This is
Gemtone industrial park and he said this is industrial. He talked a little bit about
contiguous land and making sure that all the industrial is kept with the industrial zone. I
have talked with Mike Ford of the Yanke family and also worked with the City of
Meridian Gemtone -- this phase of Gemtone came in. As recently as last month in the
Idaho Business Review Mr. Yanke representing - Mr. Ford representing the Yanke
family spoke to the paper saying this would all be high end office use. So, this whole
area adjacent to the north side of our property will be an office use. It will not be an
industrial use. Again, as Brad pointed out, you have the office use immediately north of
you, so on the north side we are completely bounded not by industrial, but by office
uses. As you remember, those of you that were on the Commission when Gemtone
came in, this rail spur piece that runs down to the railroad, this small triangular shaped
piece with this funny arch in here, was also approved for an office use. There actually is
a building lot within the subdivision for an office use. There is a 25-foot wide strip that
runs all the way down to Machine Avenue. This small little stub street right here is
Machine Avenue and that connects with this piece of property with the 25-foot strip that
leads all the way down to there and this piece of property as well is part of Gemtone.
And that was all approved for office uses, so on the north side it's all office. On this side
it's mixed use and this will be coming to you soon, it's called Pinebridge Subdivision, it
has been applied for by Dennis Baker, and this piece of property is going forward with a
commercial designation off of Pine Street. Pine Street is not going to be your basic
collector, Pine Street will be a 96-foot right of way. It's going to be a five-lane road. The
initial projections from Ada County Highway District were to be -- for Pine Street to be
70 feet wide after you get off of Eagle and continuing all the way through to Locust
Grove at three lanes, with a 70-foot right of way, In recent discussions with ACHD they
have revised their numbers, because they realized the traffic counts that they were
looking at were inaccurate and revised it to a 96-foot wide right of way for five lanes of
traffic. So, this is going to be an actual five-lane collector coming off of that. Bigger in
size than most of the section line roads and the arterials that you see in Meridian, so
this is going to be a big street. They recognize traffic is going to be on this street and
they have prepared for that. As Brad talked to you about the contiguousness of the
industrial zone, this piece of property right here is adjacent to a railroad, The piece of
property that we are dealing with tonight we are asking to be changed to the mixed use
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page230f41
regional has no access to the railroad. The only access that this piece has to a major
thoroughfare is coming off of Pine Street with the office to the north, commercial to the
west, and some commercial to the east on Eagle Road. So, they would have to go --
with industrial traffic through office, commercial, office to get to this site or they could go
through the commercial site to get to it. So, Brad talked about contiguous blocks, Well,
this is actually an island within -- it's an island of industrial within commercial, office, and
commercial. It's not a large contiguous block, because this will be going to a
commercial zone, we are asking for the CoG zone. The Comprehensive Plan supports
this C-G zone, which would be the commercial zone, Office to the north, And, again,
commercial to the west. This is actually an island of industrial. There is no access to
the railroad. The only access that you could get to this site would be if you came off of
commercial through Layne Industrial Park to get to this site and so if you wanted to
keep industrial with industrial, you would have to be bringing it in through this site,
otherwise, you're having this piece in between everything else that's industrial. So, I'm
going to jump on to the issues that Brad had. I noticed you guys received my letter
tonight and as Anna and Brad pointed out earlier tonight, Mavericks had to be
continued, We realized that you will probably want to move both of these forward
together and we are more than happy to move to January 20th, but we'd like some
feedback from you tonight as to how you feel about the Comprehensive Plan
amendment that we are requesting. And on January 20th we'd like to discuss with you
at that time a Conditional Use Permit for the conceptual site plan for this to go retail and
at that time we'd like to discuss the annexation. So, if that's something that you guys
are agreeable to, I'd like your feedback with that. If I could have you all go ahead and
grab the response letter I had prepared for you. As far as the order if Brad Hawkins-
Clark's presentation and his staff report, I'd just like to go through that briefly, as I know
you haven't had a chance to review it, because I gave it to you tonight. Do you guys all
have that? Just on the project summary, Brad, can you go back to the first slide that
was on this presentation? Item number seven, when you make your motion, if you
make a motion to approve or deny this in the future, the request of the Comprehensive
Plan map amendment as noted on item number seven here, it says approximately 48
acres from industrial to mixed use regional. The actual request is for 22 acres from the
industrial to the mixed use regional. As Brad pointed out, we are dealing with basically
one-third of this site to be requested for the mixed use regional as its shown in industrial
on the Comprehensive Plan. The remainder of this site is shown as mixed use regional
on the Comprehensive Plan. So, the majority of this site is already shown as
commercial. And so in the future we might get that corrected if you make a motion to
continue it, you may make the motion to continue it with the correction to the item in the
packet that you have in front of you. It's also in the staff report under the first bullet item
on page one, request for Comprehensive Plan, it says 48 acres, That needs to be
revised to 22 acres. Regarding the location of this, that's the site. Brad got that right
on, This is exactly the piece of property we are talking about tonight. The surrounding
properties -- I have been through the surrounding properties with you, What we are
talking about is taking the island of industrial and making it part of something that's a
larger project. Within the Comprehensive Plan they talk about contiguous blocks and
developing them all together. I have been drilled by City Council saying why can't you
get everybody together and do a development all at once and that's what we are trying
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page24of41
to do, we are trying to develop this site as one large project, rather than a chunk of it
one-third that is industrial and the rest of it is commercial, we are trying to develop it as
one project, rather than separating it out. What we are doing is taking one project that's
got a little bit of industrial -- a third of the area is industrial and saying based on the idea
that this is expensive land, it's on a very highly traffic corridor, we are not talking about a
general industrial type of use that you see out by the airport that has large wide lanes
and roads for truck traffic, we are talking about the most highly traffic north-south
corridor in the state of Idaho. Eagle Road is that road, it's very high traffic, and right
now because of that, the land values have gone up and it makes it more profitable to be
used for a commercial use, rather than industrial use. The actual amount of traffic and
the value of the land starts to price out the industrial users, because it is that valuable at
this time. If I could get you to go on to page two. The proposed and potential uses of
the property. Again, the majority of this site is already -- Brad, if you can go to the
Comprehensive Plan map, The majority of this site is already set aside for the type of
use that we are requesting. It's for the mixed-use regional zone, I have put in three
bullet items that are found on page 98 of the Comprehensive Plan saying there is
limited on upper -- no upper limit on nonresidential uses. Over 200,000 square feet of
nonresidential buildings are forecast in these areas and so we already -- the City of
Meridian at one time already planned for this area to have the large nonresidential
buildings and have a lot of commercial uses in this area. And, number three, that this is
a major employment center and that you can have all the uses. and other mixed uses
here. If the 63 acres -- or 62 acres are all brought together, this would be a major
employment area for the City of Meridian, It would be for the retail sector. Brad showed
you some numbers that were there, you know, showing that retail is on the rise. Eagle
Road is great for retail, because of the amount of drive-by traffic that is on Eagle Road.
There will be some trip generation. I'll talk about trip generation in a minute. Eagle
Road is a busy road and we will talk about that and talk about some of the mitigation
efforts that we are working on there. Moving to the applicant's justification. Brad talked
about already, We believe that this is a highly visible piece of property. I'd rather see
this with the commercial types of uses, rather than industrial uses. We feel that this is
more appropriate now at this time to go with the commercial uses, as it's surrounded by
office and commercial. In addition to that, the way -- we are not talking about the
conceptual site plan tonight. I don't know if Brad has that as a slide for you to look at,
but if you have taken a look at it -- if you look in your packet, you can just envision this,
the back of those buildings will be facing the railroad. The back of the buildings would
be facing the only other existing industrial uses, So, in effect, the commercial uses here
would act as a buffer to the office uses and you're dealing with the back of a building,
rather than the front of the building, facing on the industrial uses. If this is to go
industrial, you typically have large buildings back in here, backing up to it, with no buffer
before you get to Pine. With the commercial use the back of the buildings would be
facing against the industrial uses, providing a buffer for the commercial use and
providing a buffer from Pine Street, from the noise from the industrial to the south and
providing a more attractive appearance on Pine Street. Industrial -- industrial buildings
are not the prettiest buildings. If you have driven up and down Eagle, Brad mentioned
you have Coors across the street, if you have driven by Coors, the truck site, they
typically have large open areas that are chain link fenced with barbed wire to keep
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 25 of 41
people out, because that's what the industrial use is, it requires the land -- it's not the
prettiest and, again, I'd emphasize that Pine is going to be a 96 -- it's going to be a 96
foot piece of right of way, it's going to be five lanes, and we'd like it to be attractive,
although it's not necessarily a gateway like Eagle, it will be a highly trafficked roadway
and it should be attractive in the City of Meridian. Down to the Comprehensive Plan
analysis. As Brad pointed out, there is items for good and for bad. One item I'd like to
point out just at this time is that the transit station, the developer is in agreement with
the transit station on the site plan. You don't have it in front of you, but in this area they
did put in an area for transit, a transit station. We agreed with the city that this is a good
spot. We think that right now would be the time to set aside that area and decide that
that's the appropriate location for that. We are doing that in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan and we agree with that. We realize we will be generating traffic,
but if we can put a transit station in this area, we have a way to mitigate for some of the
traffic that is created. Onto the items that Brad talked about, the industrial land base,
Talking about that is almost a sacred cow. There is a lot of area in the City of Meridian
that is already industrial zoned and not being used for industrial uses. Case in point
Gemtone Subdivision, It's all office use. And we have a lot of industrial uses in
Meridian and there is a lot of industrial areas outside of Meridian as well. If you were to
take a look at Nampa and Caldwell and Boise, a majority of their industrial uses are on
the outskirts of town. You have them by the airport with the avigation easements, they
won't allow residential uses there. Most commercial businesses don't want to operate
near an airport. They have a great amount of land out there that can be used for
industrial types of uses. Meridian doesn't have that. What Meridian has in this area is a
very heavy traffic flow on Eagle Road, which would support a retail development, rather
than an industrial development. The next item that Brad talked about was the
contiguous block. Again, this really is not a contiguous block of industrial -- industrial
zoning. I have said that a few times, The oversupply of commercial uses, commercial
property, Brad showed you a map -- I guess a graph from the Comprehensive Plan
saying here is all the different types of uses that we have got and the land that's
designated for that. There is a number of commercial sites in Meridian that are
designated that have no ability to be serviced right now. In Brad's staff report there is a
couple mentions of the Ten Mile interchange that in the future that will be an area that
we will see a lot of commercial growth. However, that area is not in play right now, is
because the Black Cat Trunk hasn't been constructed out to that area to provide sewer.
Water is not there yet. Plus the Ten Mile interchange hasn't happened, so there is not
the vehicle count there to support the retail uses. We have the vehicle count here to
support the retail uses and so this is the appropriate place for this type of use that we
are requesting, As far as transportation, it's a busy road. I drive it every day. My office
is just off of -- actually, it's just off this map right there. I drive up and down Pine Street
every day onto Eagle Road. It is a busy road. Pine Street needs to be continued, Pine
Street, once it's continued to Locust Grove, will, then, be able to provide a second north-
south access within this area. As I said before, coming soon to a P&Z commission just
like you, this piece of property will be coming through with Pine Street to be extended all
the way. With the construction of Pine Street at 96 feet wide, it will be able to take a
traffic flow off of Eagle Road over to Locust Grove. The Locust Grove overpass is
scheduled right now for construction in the next few years, If you have driven up and
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page26of41
down Locust Grove lately, you know that Franklin Road improvements have included a
new large traffic light with a road widening on Locust Grove in anticipation of the Locust
Grove overpass, In addition to that on the opposite side of the freeway they have
already installed the wider lanes for Locust Grove overpass to come through, So, a
secondary north-south road is coming and so traffic will be able to be pulled off of Eagle
Road through Pine Street, through Pine Bridge, over to Locust Grove and so there will
be an additional north-south route as a part of this subdivision. This subdivision will be
entitled to that, because this portion of the roadway will need to be constructed with this
site and this is the time to do that. We are talking about 22 acres, It's not the 48 acres.
Overall in the City of Meridian in the area of impact there is over 26,000 acres in
Meridian. We are asking for a Comprehensive Plan change for basically what would be
one tenth of one percent of the land available in Meridian, It's not a great deal of land in
Meridian, It makes sense. It's a highly visible area, there is a heavy traffic flow, it's a
great deal of traffic that will be generated and carried on Pine Street. We feel it would
be more appropriate for this land to be commercially zoned as a part of that, so that it
would be able to be a more attractive streetscape for Meridian. We'd ask for your
support at this time to change the Comprehensive Plan for these 22 acres to allow a
mixed-use regional designation to be placed on the Comprehensive Plan. Do you have
any questions?
Moe: Just a couple. Basically, you speak of mixed use regional, but I keep hearing
nothing but commercial coming up, so I'm assuming you're just looking to do all
commercial within that zone.
McKinnon: The conceptual site plan that was generated was for -- was for retail uses,
but in my letter and as Brad pointed out, that is a conceptual site plan.
Moe: And, then, the only other thing, I'm still a little bit unclear of, the property to the
north, which was stated, is planning to be office. Has that already been approved to be
office?
McKinnon: Yes, it has.
Rohm: I was -- I was, actually, still working for the city when that happened, It was
Becky McKay Bowcutt that brought that through and I have had discussions with Mike
Ford from the -- representing the Yanke family that that is to be office.
Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, if I could just clarify. I believe that that's wrong
information. The land is zoned industrial today, There was no planned development to
allow an excepted use. The Comprehensive Plan designates it industrial. It would take
a Comp Plan amendment and a rezone to do anything but industrial uses,
Borup: Maybe we need to clarify which property we are referring to, Let's just clarify
which property we are talking about. Is that what you were referring to, Commissioner?
Is that what you were wondering about?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 27 of41
Moe: Yes, it is.
Borup: Just the property directly north of Pine.
Zaremba: Well, I remember some discussion about this odd shaped piece. I don't
remember exactly, but I thought that was going to be an industrial use, I thought what
they were proposing was a paint manufacturing facility or something like that.
McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I just spoke with Mike and
when he came through with that, he was assured from Becky that that could be used for
office and it was an office use.
Borup: Without re-application?
McKinnon: Without re-application. If you remember -- Brad, can you go back to the
Comprehensive Plan? There we go, We have got a Wendy's going in right here. This
is industrial zoned, That's Wendy's. Right now in the industrial zone you have ShopKo,
you have Applebee's, that whole Corner in Crossroads currently is zoned industrial.
This whole subdivision is zoned industrial, yet we have Krispy Kremes and we have got
Blue Cross, Blue Shield, the main center there. That's zoned industrial, it's not zoned
office at this time. This was all part of a larger planned development many years ago
and when this project came through, office uses were discussed and that's what the
Yanke family has intended to do for this area is the office uses, There may be
something that we can clarify with staff. We are asking for this to be continued, but this
was to be office uses here and the office uses were -- the way it's subdivided, these
long, narrow pieces, actually, don't fit well with an industrial use, You typically see a
large land user, rather than small narrow pieces for industrial uses. It's right next to the
Blue Cross, Blue Shield. This is an office site, And we can go through that with staff.
Again, this is something that we are asking to be continued, but -- and just talking with
Mike just now, the intent was for office use there,
Moe: Then one other question I have. On the aerial photo is there not -- you know, the
buildings there on the south property, are those planning to stay or are those going to
be removed or something when you start development?
McKinnon: These buildings right here?
Moe: Those two, yes.
McKinnon: I believe, actually, that they are going to be scrubbed, They are all going to
be scrubbed. Just as a side note, this was, actually, one of the retail buildings, for those
of you that were old timers, that's the old Club Wholesale. The precursor to the Costcos
and the Sam's Clubs. This was a warehouse retail site initially. It wasn't an industrial
site initially, it was warehouse retail.
Borup: Do we have other questions from this Commission?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Comnrission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 28 of 41
McKinnon: Okay. I think there is some other people signed up to testify here, but I
guess I would reserve the right for rebuttal if you have any questions.
Borup: Okay. This is the time for other public testimony. Who -- do we have anyone
here that would like to come on up at this time?
Ford: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Mike Ford, Post Office Box 5405,
Boise, I represent the Yanke family that owns what is Gemtone Subdivision, which will
be called Crossroads Professional Park, Before buying the property several months
ago, first of all, the seller of the property assured me that office could be built there. I
asked Becky Bowcott McKay to clarify that for me to make sure. She assured me that
we could get a building permit and build office without any kind of design review,
anything else, In reviewing the covenants for the subdivision, Blue Cross has a
covenant that there will be no industrial built back there on Gemtone. Only high quality
office, That's in Blue Cross's covenants when they bought their property, So, if I went
back there today and started building industrial, I'd get sued by Blue Cross, If the city --
Borup: That's part of the same subdivision?
Ford: Same subdivision. Right. If the city tells me that I can't build office, then, I guess
I go back and ask for my money back from the seller, because that's what we were
assured. Now that's my problems that I'm giving here during these folks' hearing. As
far as these folks' hearing goes, I would much rather see the west end of that property
in some kind of retail office, other than industrial. Industrial is not going to be attractive
to what we plan on doing on the north side of Pine. I just -- if you look at Blue Cross's
property, I believe Blue Cross's property is one of the most attractive, well maintained
properties in the City of Meridian. I'd hate to think of what they spend on maintaining
their landscaping, To build industrial buildings around that, I think would certainly not be
fair to Blue Cross and I assure you Blue Cross didn't think that that could happen. As
far as the other industrial to the north, I don't have one of those fancy things, but -- this
property right here today is industrial, that little strip right there, that's Diamond Lines
Trucking. We own that property. Diamond Lines is begging me to find them properties
somewhere else to build them a facility, so they can get out of here. They do not want
to have to have their trucks coming in and out of this traffic and stuff that is generated
there. I know an individual that is talking to Yellow Freight right now about the same
things. Yellow Freight wants out of there. Yellow Freight does not want to be having
their truck drivers coming in and out of there with the traffic that's going on, Ada County
assessor, you know, he's really proud of this property. You can't afford to do this
property industrial. I'm not sure what industrial user that they can find that can afford to
go in there and do property -- to buy the property. The development that's gone on
around there has driven these property values so high that it makes no sense for
industrial to go in there. Any questions?
Borup: Questions for Mr. Ford?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeling
December 16,2004
Page 290f41
Ford: Thank you,
Borup: It does sound like maybe you need to clarify. At this point you -- the zoning is
industrial. It is zoned industrial? And was there a conditional use? Sir, you need to
get on the microphone.
Ford: They are telling me that a number of years ago -- and I'm not sure -- I wish Sheri
was still here, because she would have remembered.
Borup: Well, it doesn't really matter what someone remembers --
Ford: I think it was of record.
Borup: Right. It needs to be on the record.
Ford: It was of record and -- so I don't know, I mean, again, we have got a real mess
here if that is the case.
Borup: But it's all public record, so it should be able to be clarified. Thank you.
Ford: Okay. Thank you,
Borup: Who is next? We didn't have anybody sign up, so I don't know if -- Mr.
McKinnon said there was several that wanted to, so this is your opportunity,
Jensen: Mr, Chairman, Commissioners, staff, I'm Marv Jensen, 476 West 1000 South
in Orem, Utah.
Borup: Right. You were the only that did sign up.
Jensen: I'm here representing RC. Willey. We are pleased to see additional retail
come into the area here, but the one thing that we are very very concerned about is
traffic and I think that speaks for itself. You're all concerned about traffic and we are
impressed that some effort is going to be made on Pine Street to carry some of that
traffic, but it's going to not solve the problem, If there is going to be 30, 40 thousand
additional trips created by this property on that road, you have got to do something or
cause Ada County Highway District to do something on that road to even handle it. And
so we are going to be interested all the way through in the hearings on the traffic issue,
We want something to be done on the traffic issue. We have customers now that turn
around and go back, they can't get to us from either direction, and we just need to face
that. You know, I have been coming up here for six years now on this building and Ada
County tells me every year I come up. we are going to do something, We are going to
do something, but it's always in the future and those roads are still highly congested and
this will just add to it. We are glad to see it come, the retail, but not the added
congestion.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 30 of41
Borup: Don't they come together?
Jensen: They do and so that's our request is that you really consider strongly before
giving approvals additional mitigation for the traffic and we will be interested to see the
new traffic study, the addendums that come out to that and what they propose, Pine
Street is one thing. A transit station might be something, But you have got to do
something on Eagle Road and Franklin Road to alleviate the horrible traffic mess that's
there, Or, you know, the retail zone -- the retail that you're going to get there will create
a lot of jobs and it will create a lot of sales tax revenue for the city, We realize that and
we look forward to having additional retail and competition in the area, but if people
can't get there, they are going to go somewhere else. They are going to find other
places where they can get to and not to have to wade through so many light changes at
every light to get where they want to. So, that's our concern is, please, consider very
carefully -- I know you already are, but we just want to echo it, the traffic impact of
additional retail right now in this area. Thank you.
Borup: Thank you? Questions from the Commissioners? Do we have anyone else?
Thank you.
McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, again, Dave McKinnon,
representing the applicant tonight. Traffic is a big issue, Hopefully, some of the
mitigation efforts we are making will work to help alleviate the conditions that are there
right now. Just for your edification, the traffic has been extremely bad recently, because
of a number of different issues, partially with the fact that there is a large sewer line that
is going in on Cloverdale, the north-south lane of traffic on Cloverdale has been closed
recently in the last few months to keep people from driving across it, because they are
doing a large amount of work there, everybody was having to come to Eagle. In
addition to that, Franklin Road has been going through a widening process that has also
forced a lot more traffic to come onto Eagle Road that wasn't dissipated to other areas.
At the same time, infrastructure, of course, always comes after the people, The Idaho
Transportation Department is working on the Eagle Road study. The City of Meridian
has not yet adopted the most resent study, However, I know that the Mayor and Steve
Siddoway, the transportation planner, have a meeting with Idaho Transportation
Department to work with them on mitigation efforts on Eagle Road, similar to like you
will see on State Street soon with barriers or center medians on Eagle Road. So, there
is some effort being taken by ITD to mitigate the traffic friction that's caused by people
pulling off and on. In addition to this, this site is actually going to be a little bit easier to
reach than what you would see on a hard corner, because it is mid block, which is
where the City of Meridian wanted to see a mid mile -- the City of Meridian wanted to
see commercial accesses with the Comprehensive Plan. Because it's not at the hard
block, there is a traffic light right there, people can get to it from different locations,
rather than having to make a turn through traffic. I'll just addressMr. Ford's comments,
I was working for the City of Meridian at the time when Gemtone came through. There
is notes of record and it was represented at the P&Z meeting and at City Council that
this property would be office. I'm more than happy to work with staff to talk to them
about that and to eliminate any concerns that Mr. Ford has tonight on behalf of the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeling
December 16, 2004
Page3!of41
Yanke family. I would ask for your support tonight. I know that you're going to continue
this, so we can move this forward with the Maverick piece of property, but I would love
to have some feedback to see what your opinions are with the requested
Comprehensive Plan amendment before we go to continuance until January 20th and
meet again.
Borup: Any other questions, discussion, while Mr. McKinnon is here?
McKinnon: Okay, Thank you.
Borup: Comments from the Commission at this point or do we --
Rohm: Mr. Chairman, my first comment would be the most compelling testimony that I
heard out there was the land value. If, in fact, you have Ada County assessing it at one
value based upon its neighborhood or the neighboring properties being retail and you --
and their assessment is at that level and, then, you require these people to develop as
industrial, their tax base and land use are not in agreement and it seems that the
applicant and their testimony has a pretty good point in that regard, I don't know that
that's the final thing that we should be looking at here, but I think that that is a real
significant issue.
Borup: Commissioner Moe?
Moe: Yes. I guess I would tend to agree with Commissioner Rohm, but my biggest
concern is, reading through the staff reports and whatnot, I do have a concern that we
don't have enough industrial property in this area, but at the same time, after hearing
testimony tonight, I have got some concerns I would like to know for sure what is going
on with the properties to the north of this property to verify that office is possible or
planned, as well as I would like to know what Blue Cross does have in -- I'd like to know
exactly just what the status of that is, because I would hate to see that we lose a great
neighbor in Blue Cross, because of something that we want to do as far as going
industrial. So, having said that, that's what I'd like to -- definitely before the next hearing
that we get some closure on those issues, so we know exactly what's going on,
Borup: Yeah, My understanding on Blue Cross that was covenants within that
subdivision. This would be a different subdivision, so --
Rohm: Wouldn't there have been a -- in the development agreement at the time that the
original subdivision was developed, some language speaking to what can be
constructed within that entire subdivision, though? I would think that that would have
been addressed not only for the Blue Cross -- for the entire area. Wouldn't there have
been some discussion? 1--
Moe: We are still in Public Hearing.
Rohm: Oh. Okay.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page320f41
McKinnon: Mr. Chairman?
Borup: Would you like some comment from Mr, McKinnon?
Rohm: Yeah. Go ahead, Dave.
McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Rohm, actually, it's just the Gemtone site,
The whole entire property that you outlined from the railroad north to Fairview, that
wasn't all part of one subdivision. However, this was part -- this area was basically a
part of a larger subdivision, Blue Cross is a part of it as well. There was a -- there used
to be a file sitting on the file cabinet back in Meridian and Brad might remember this, it
was -- it's in tatters and it's kind of falling apart, it's an old application and there was a
whole bevy of uses that you could put on this site, You know, Krispy Kremes was one
of the uses that the previous planning director Sheri Stiles said was one of the things
that could be approved on this site. Recently you guys have approved a drive-thru for a
Wendy's in the industrial and you have also approved a medical office building in the
industrial. Those are all under construction at this time. There were a number of uses
that were allowed there and Gemtone, when it came through, there was discussion
about Blue Cross and Blue Cross's CC&Rs requiring that this all be developed as office
and there is a record of that. The development agreement for this site may be
somewhat hard to piece back together, based on my recollection of the file, but there is
testimony at the hearing for Gemtone in regards to Blue Cross,
Rohm: Well, I would think that it would behoove you to reconstruct that to some degree,
McKinnon: I would be happy to,
Borup: Yeah, Because just the straight zoning does not -- as mentioned, does not
allow for that industrial zone, so there would need to be another -- in the development
agreement or some other agreement.
McKinnon: And, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, again, keep in mind when
the Comprehensive Plan was adopted it's a conceptual idea and they took the basic
land uses that were there. On the Comprehensive Plan they didn't show this whole
area as industrial, but that's what it's zoned, This is conceptual; it doesn't necessarily
match the zoning. Zoning doesn't have to match this. This is based on the existing land
uses and as Brad put it, you know, your best guess looking at a crystal ball in the future
saying how is it going to happen in the future and how does it impact the city
economically and for design.
Borup: But Gemtone is zoned,
McKinnon: It is zoned, it is annexed, and it is approved for office uses, to the best of my
knowledge, and I guess if we are moving forward until January 20th, we have time to
get that straightened out and we will be able to present that to you at the next meeting.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16, 2004
Page 33 of 41
Rohm: My only additional comment is along the lines of the staff report. You know, it's
our responsibility also to make sure that we maintain a certain amount of industrial land
available and so, you know, we have got to take a look at both sides of that coin, Dave,
so, you know, it would be nice for you to bring some of that additional information back
when we continue this hearing.
Borup: Anything additional, Commissioner Zaremba?
Zaremba: Interestingly enough, we have an I-L zone to struggle with here, Always my
bugaboo, Staff did an excellent job of summarizing. Some of the thoughts that came to
me first and .. and I always struggle with Comprehensive Plan amendments in that the
Comprehensive Plan went through a lot of public hearings and a lot of thinking and a lot
of hearings, a lot of Angst, a lot of research and to make changes to it for me requires a
pretty high threshold of they were wrong,
Borup: But by that same logic, we would never change it. It would stay like the way --
Zaremba: I don't know if I'm at that threshold, With it already being so stingy on
industrial properties -. and maybe this is one more assignment to hand Mr. McKinnon
before it comes back on the next one -- if there were some trade, if there was an ability
to couple this kind of Comprehensive Plan amendment with saying here is where I think
the Comprehensive Plan ought to be changed to include industrial that it currently
doesn't somewhere in our area of impact -- and I don't know if it's fair to leave that on
you to go looking for that, but I certainly hear the argument about the value of these
pieces of property and that retail or office uses are more likely to be what's supportable
in that area, but industrial has to be somewhere and I don't know if it's a requirement,
but if you had any suggestions about somewhere else in our area of impact that we
ought to be doing industrial that we are not, I would be more comfortable about that kind
of a trade. Just a personal opinion.
McKinnon: I'll do my best.
Zaremba: Thank you,
McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, do you have any homework for me as well?
Borup: Probably not. My comment -- I mean when I read the staff report, I agreed with
everything, I mean it all made sense, And Commissioner Rohm said there was one
thing that struck him the strongest and me it's probably Pine Avenue, This is where --
this is a mile section where we have a signal light. If there is any place that the traffic is
going to be helped it's at that light and with Pine Street extending through -- I mean after
thinking about that tonight, this is making more sense to me, and mainly because of
Pine, I'm still very concerned about the traffic on Eagle. I don't know what we are going
to do with that. But Pine Avenue with existing signal light probably lends itself more to
some type of commercial than industrial, but --
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
December 16,2004
Page34of41
Zaremba: I'm known for sideways moves in discussions, but I will just make a comment
on Eagle Road. My recollection is that the latest traffic count in this area of Eagle Road
is something like 54,000 vehicles a day. A year ago I asked the motor vehicle
department if they could tell me how many vehicles were registered in the City of
Meridian. They could not, so I turned to the Air Quality Board, figuring they may have
information like that. They could tell me in the 83642 zip code, which includes much
more than the incorporated city, it goes -- I believe the southern boundary is Hubbard
and nobody knows where the heck that is, It's way below everything that anybody
thought of and the northern boundary is the bench north of Chinden,
Borup: Especially for our impact area,
Zaremba: Well, it's much greater than our area of impact. And, basically, from
Cloverdale to the county line. So that entire area there are 39,000 vehicles registered,
54,000 of them are driving up and down Eagle Road. My point being this traffic is not all
Meridian traffic. The majority of it we have no control over, It's coming from Eagle,
Star, Emmett, Horseshoe Bend, probably trying to access the interstate, Eagle Road is
the only road -- north-south road in Meridian that has all three elements of access. It
has a river crossing, it has a railroad crossing, and it has an interstate interchange. The
majority of the traffic that's there isn't us, it's other people, because we aren't everyone
of us, 39,000, driving on Eagle everyday. I don't. It's other people, And the effort to
control that, you know, shouldn't be laid on Meridian's projects, your project, or other
projects across the street from it. Yes, something needs to be done, but we can't say
that Meridian isn't going to have economic growth because everybody's traffic is going
through here. We can't just stop that. Yes, it needs to be solved, but it is not entirely
us. So, that's just a sideways comment.
Rohm: Well -- and to continue that, I think as development continues you're also going
to see Locust Grove develop and you're going to see Pine go all the way through and
you're going to see Franklin Road improved from Eagle Road east and all of the things
that are currently on that wish list will all help calm some of this issue on Eagle Road,
Even as they finish Cloverdale's expansion, that's going to calm some of this. So, all
that being said, this isn't something that's created today and it's not going to be solved
tomorrow, it's a continuing effort as the area develops, so --
Zaremba: Of course, the other piece of it is how do we capture that through traffic to
make them stop in our shops and buy stuff and to put a nice retail center in a location
like this, in addition to the other retail things that are happening up and down -- if they
are driving through here we may as well stop them and have them leave some money
here if we can.
Rohm: Thank you.
McKinnon: Thank you.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeling
December 16, 2004
Page35 of4l
Borup: Okay. Any other discussion? Are we ready for a motion to continue?
Moe: Probably need to close the Public Hearing,
Borup: Well, not if we are going to continue it.
Moe: I'm sorry. You're right.
Borup: This is on the Comp Plan amendment.
Moe: Yeah. That's right.
Zaremba: I'll do it. Mr, Chairman, I move that we continue the hearing on CPA 04-003
to our meeting of January 20, 2005.
Rohm: Second.
Borup: Motion and second to continue, All in favor? Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8:
Public Hearing: RZ 04-017 Request for a Rezone of 61,63 acres from I-L
& L-O to C-G zone for Ten Mile Development, LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc.
- SWC of North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue:
Item 9:
Public Hearing: CUP 04-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Conceptual Planned Development for commercial/retail uses for
approximately 615,430 square feet of building areas in a proposed C-G
zone for Ten Mile Development, LLC by Hansen-Rice, Inc. - SWC of
North Eagle Road and East Pine Avenue:
Borup: Okay, So, we probably ought to open and continue the other two, which are
going to be dependent upon this one -- positive results on this one for them to proceed.
I'd like to open Public Hearing RZ 04-017 and Public Hearing CUP 04-051 at this time,
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move that we continue RZ 04-017 and CUP 04-051 to our
regularly scheduled meeting of January 20, 2005.
Rohm: Second.
Borup: Motion and second, All in favor? Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 10:
Public Hearing: CPA 04-004 Request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan Future Land Use Map from Low and Medium Density Residential to a
~~_i'~~
~
tk........:::t:tut1ô ~
John S. Franden, President
Sherry R, Huber, 1st Vice President
David Bivens, 2nd Vice President
Carol A. McKee, Commissioner
Rebecca W. Amold, Commissioner
January 11:(, 2005
TD:
Elixir Industries
17905 South Broadway
Gradena, CA 90248
RECEIVED
JAN 18 2005
City of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Subject:
MCUP04-051/ MRZ04-017/ MCPA04-o03
Southwest corner of Pine Avenue and SH-55 (Eagle Road)
On January 12, 2005, tha Ada County Highway District acted on your application for the above
referencad projact. Tha attached rapor! lists site-specific requirements, conditions of approval and
streat improvements, which are requirad.
If you have any quaslions, please fael free to contact me at 208-387-6178.
Sincerely,
c.~
Christy Richardson
Planning Raview Suparvisor
Right-of-way & Development Services, Planning Division
CC:
Project file, Construction Services, Drainage, Utilities
City of Meridian
Glenn Walkar Hansen-Rice, Inc. 1717 East Chisholm Driva Nampa, Idaho 83687
Gary Funkhouser
Ada County Highway District. 3775 Adams Street. Garden CIty, ID. 83714 . PH 208-387-6100. FX 345-7650. www,achd,ada.id.us
./~i","
~ Ada County Highway District
Right-of- Way & Development Department
Planning Review Division
This application requires Commission action due to the size of the development. This item is scheduled to
be on the regular agenda on Wednesday January 12, 2005 at 6:30PM. Please refer to the attachment for
request for reconsideration guidelines. Staff contact: Christy Richardson, 208-387-6178-phone, 208-387-6393-fax,
crichardson(ii)achd,ada.id.us
File Numbers:
MCUPO4-D51 I MRZ04-017 I MCPAO4-003
Site address:
Southwast corner of Eagle Road and Pine Avenue
Owner:
Elixir Industrias
17905 South Broadway
Gradena, CA 90248
Applicant:
Hansen-Rice, Inc.
Glenn Walkar
1717 East Chisholm Drive
Nampa, Idaho 83687
Representative:
Bergay Land Surveying
1103 Wast Main Street
Middlaton, Idaho 83644
Application Information:
The applicant has submitted an application to tha City of Maridian requasting a comprehansiva plan
amendment, razone, and conditional use approval to construct a 615,430-square foot commarciallretail
shopping centar on 61.63-acres. The applicant is proposing to rezone 61,63-acras from I-L and L-O to CoG,
The site is located at the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Pina Avenue.
Acreaga: 61.63-acres
Current Zoning: I-L and L-O
Proposed Zoning: CoG
Vicinity Map
4.
2
A.
Findings of Fact
1.
Trip Generation: This developmant is estimated to generate 30,988 vehicle trips par day based on
the submitted traffic impact study. This estimation does not include pass-by trips, of approximately
3,100VTO.
2.
Impact Fees: There will be an impact fee that is assessed and dua prior to issuance of a building
permit. Tha assessed impact fea will be based on the impact fea ordinance that is in affect at that
time.
3.
Impacted Roadways
Pina Avenue:
Frontaga: Approximately 2,045-feat
Functional Street Classification: Minor arterial (on 2030 functional classification map)
Traffic Count: East of Eagle Road was 6,849 on 12-16-04
Traffic count: West of Eagla Road was 2,406 on 12-16-04
Leval of Service: Better than C
An acceptable Leval of Service for this segmant of roadway is Level of Service D based on the
COMPASS Planning Thresholds
EaDie Road (State HiDhwav 55):
Frontage:
Functional Streat Classification:
Traffic count:
Approximataly 1,350-feat
Principal Arterial under ITO jurisdiction
South of Fairviaw Avanua was 43,103 on 4-29-03
North of Franklin Road was 45,751 on 2-20-02
Leval of Servica: Greater than LOS E
Spaed limit: 50 MPH
An acceptable Level of Service for this segment of roadway is Level of Service E based on the
COMPASS Planning Thresholds
Hickorv Avenue:
Frontage: None
Functional Streat Classification: Collector
Traffic count: South of Fairview Avanue was 1,738 on 2-5-03
Lavel of Sarvice: Better than LOS C
An acceptable Level of Sarvice for this segment of roadway is Level of Service D based on the
COMPASS Planning Thresholds
Roadway Improvaments Near the Site
. Pina Straet east of Eagle Road was constructed in 2003 from Eagle Road to the east for
approximately Y. mile. This roadway was constructed for 5-lanes, but was striped for 3-lanes
until such time that traffic volumes warrant the need for a 5-lane section,
. Pine Avanue west of Eagla Road was constructad as 3-lanes for approximately 500-feet to
sarve as the access to the Blue Cross building, and 2-lanes further west.
. Eagle Road is improved with 6-lanes on this segment.
. Commercial Streat east of Eagle Road is a public dead-end street with no other access at the
current time. This street serves several industrial and commercial users.
. Commarcial Court west of Eagle Road isa private dead-end street.
1.
3
5.
Five Year Work Program
. Locust Grova Road, Franklin to Fairview: Construct 5-lanes in 2006.
. Locust Grove Road, Ovarland to Franklin and Overpass: Construct 4 to 5-lanes in 2006.
B.
Findings for Consideration
Traffic Impact Study
This study was conducted for the proposed comp plan amendment, rezone and conditional use
application, A changa from "industrial" to "commercial" creates a significant impact to the surrounding
roadways.
Findings from the TIS submitted by Gary Funkhouser:
. Eagle Road has approximataly 43,000 vpd in the vicinity of this site,
. Pina Avenue has approximataly 1,300 vpd adjacent to the site,
. The retail cantar is projacted to ba complete by 2010, and traffic impacts wera analyzed for
tha buildout year 2010 conditions.
. The sita is estimated to genarata 30,988 vpd. Pass-by trips rapresent 13% of tha total traffic,
and would generate an additional 3,100 vpd (not included in the overall 30,988 vpd),
. Trip distribution varies dapending on whethar or not Pina Avenua is constructed out to Locust
Grove. If Pine Avenue is connectad: 15% of the traffic is projected to travel north on Hickory;
33% wast on Pina; and 52% on Eagle. If Pine Avenue is not connected: 34% of the traffic is
projacted to travel north on Hickory; and 66% on Eagla.
. The Destination 2025 Plan calls for Pina Avenue adjacant to the site to be 3-lanes. With the
addition of this sita it is racommended that it ba 5-lanas.
. The Eagla Road Arterial Access Study recommends that medians be installed along Eagle
Road with four types of median braaks at non-signalized areas. CommarcialCourt doasn't
show a median break. A full access madian break should ba considerad at this location.
. With the proposed access on Eagla Road, a continuous right turn lana should be installad
throughout the site's eastam boundary.
. The intarsaction of Pine and Hickory will require signalization within the next 7 to 10 yaars.
Whan Pina is widaned, the underground conduit and i-boxes should ba installed.
. Tha long range transit plan calls for a rail transit station near the Eagla Road crossing.
. Extansion of Pine Avenua from Hickory to Locust Grova should be put in ACHD's Five Year
Work Program.
. All drivaways shall have a minimum of 100-feet of outbound storage and 50-faet of inbound
storaga.
Traffic Conditions for Fairview/Hickory Intersection LOS DELAY
I (s/vehicle)
2004 Background C 24.7
2010 Background C 20.4
2010 Background + site + Pine connection to Locust Grove C 33.6
2010 Background + site + Pina to Hickory E 79,3
Traffic Conditions for Fairview/Eagle Intersection LOS DELAY
(s/vehicle)
2004 Background F 71,5
2010 Background F 96,6
2010 Backqround + site + Pine connection to Locust Grove F 103,2
2010 Background + site + Pine to Hickorv F 98,6
Traffic Conditions for Pine/Eagle Intersection
2004 Back round
2010 Back round
2010 Back round + sita + Pina connaction to Locust Grove
2010 Back round + site + Pine to Hicko
F
F
F
F
126,8
164
275,6
267,9
With the 2010 background plus site traffic, the Eagle/Pine intarsection will continue to operate
at a LOS F. Tha current delay for 2004 is 126 sacondslvehicle, In 2010 with the site, that
delay is axpactad to mora than double and the dalay is estimatad at over 260 seconds/vehiCle
(over 4 minutes/vehicle).
Traffic Conditions for Franklin/Eagla Intersection LOS DELAY
(s/vahicle)
2004 Background F 72,5
2010 Background F 99
2010 Background + site + Pina connaction to Locust Grove F 98
2010 Backaround + site + Pina to Hickory F 146.2
With tha 2010 background plus site traffic, tha Eagle/Franklin intersection will continue to
operate at a LOS F. Tha Currant delay for 2004 is 72.5 saconds/vahicla, In 2010 with the site,
that dalay is expected to more than double and the delay is estimated at ovar 140
secondslvahicle (over 2 minuteslvehicla).
(Traffic Impact Study submitted by Gary Funkhousar, prepared October, 2004)
Additional information was requastad by ACHD staff on Dacember 7, 2004, and a TIS
supplamant was submitted.
. If the site was developed under the current comprahensive plan, approximately Y:.
mixed use and Y:. industrial, tha site could genarate 17,462 VTD, The same trip
distribution as noted above would be valid.
. A 125-foot long dedicated right turn lane will be nacessary on Pina Avenue for
southbound Eagle Road.
. Dual left tum lanes are neadad on Pina Avanua for northbound Eagle Road and
should be 170-feat in length.
. At tha intersection of Pine Avenua and the proposed main entrance/street, dual left
turn lanes will not be naeded, and stacking raquirements vary depending on the leg of
the intarsection. If Pine is 5-lanes, then a through right is sufficient for eastbound
traffic.
. In relation to mitigation of Eagle Road intersections: this project will improve lanes
adjacent to the site. and impact fees generatad from the site will be used to mitigate
offsite intersections, The ultimata Eagle Road cross section will be dual lefts, 3
through lanes and a right turn lane. Tha intersections will need to be wide anough to
accommodate u-turn traffic.
. The existing southbound right turn lane on Eagle Road at Pine is long enough to
handle turning traffic, but will be blocked by through traffic queues, To avoid blocking
it would need to be three times its current length,
. The northbound left on Eagle at Pine will need to be a dual left. The length of the
existing turn iane will be adequate because it will be blocked by through traffic before it
is full.
(Traffic Impact Study supplement submittad by Gary Funkhouser, prepared December, 2004)
4
3,
4,
5
2.
Pine Avenue Improvements and Right-of-Way
Pine Street is constructed to 5-lanes west of Eagla Road at the signalized intersection.
Approximately 150-faat west of the intarsaction the roadway narrows and then terminatas. The TIS
estimates that if Pine Avenua is not constructed out to Locust Grova Road at the time of
development, approximately 34% (ovar 9,000 VTD) of tha site's traffic will use Pine Street to Hickory;
and if Pine Avenue is connected to Locust Grove Road, approximately 15% of the site's traffic will
use Pina Street to Hickory, and 33% of the site's traffic will traval west on Pine Street.
Pina Streat is classified as a minor arterial on the 2030 Functional Classification Map. This segment
of Pina Straet is not listed in tha ACHD Five Year Work Program or the Capital Improvements Plan.
No funding has been identified for this roadway,
Based on the projactions from the TIS, ACHD recommends that the applicant be required to construct
Pine Street abutting tha sita and dadicata sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the improvements,
The applicant will not ba compensated for any improvamants or right-of-way. Tha roadway should be
improved to a 5-lana section with bika lanes on the south side, as well as curb, gutter, and a 7-foot
attached sidawalk, or a 5-foot detached sidewalk separatad from the roadway by a minimum 5-foot
wide landscape strip. Tha roadway should be improvad abutting the entire site, At tha intersection of
Eagla Road, additional tum lanes will be required on Pine Street to provide a 7-lane streat saction,
basad on the submitted traffic impact study (2 westbound through lanes, 2 northbound turn lanes, 2
aastbound through lanas, 1 southbound right turn lana).
ACHD strongly recommends that tha applicant work with tha property owners to the west to provide a
Pina Street connection to Locust Grove with this application. This extension would allow more
vehicles to usa roadways other than Eagle Road, and would alleviata tha Eagle Road intarsectlons
that currantly oparata at a lavel of service graater than "E". Locust Grove Road and the Locust Grova
Overpass are listed in the FYWP for construction in 2006,
Pine Avenue Access
. The applicant is proposing to construct a driveway on Pine Street in alignment with the
Regance driveway on tha north side oftha streat, located 320-feet west of Eagle Road.
ACHD policy allows driveways on minor artarials to ba located 315-faet from signalized
intarsections if there are no intervaning right-inlright-out drivaways, and if less than 1,000 daily
vehicle trips are projacted to usa tha driveway. Due to the numbar of trips genarated by this
site and the poor levals of service on the surrounding roadways, traffic will likely stack beyond
the driveway at 320-faet. District policy requires driveways with more than 1,000 VTD to ba
locatad a minimum of 440-feat from a signalizad intersection. The proposed driveway doas
not meet policy for full access and is not approved in the proposad location. Ralocate the
drivaway to be locatad a minimum of 470-feet west of Eagla Road, to provida sufficient offset
from the intersection, and a minimum 150-feet of offset from the Regence driveway.
. The applicant is proposing to construct a driveway in alignmant with Rosario Street. This
driveway location meets District policy and should be approvad as proposed,
The applicant is proposing to construct a public street in alignment with Hickory Street. ACHD
is not approving a public street at this location (see below), but will approve a driveway at this
location,
Proposad Public Street
The applicant is proposing to construct a public street off of Pine Street intersecting Hickory. The
street is curvilinear in design, would serve the sita, as well as connect to Machine Street to the west.
Machine Street will be extended to Pine when the property to the west of this site develops, in a more
straight/direct preferred alignment. ACHD will not accept this proposed public street.
8,
6
5.
Pine StreetfHickory Straet IntarsectionlSignalization
Tha submittad traffic study indicates that a signal will be neaded at the Pine/Hickory intersection
within the next 7 to 10 years. This intersection is not listad in tha FYWP or CIP and no funding
source has baen identified for this improvement. The need for a signal is solely relatad to the
development of this property. The applicant should be requirad to provide a road trust for one-half
the cost of the signal, and should ba raquired to install all related improvements such as conduit and
j~boxes with the construction of Pine Street. The applicant should provide a $105,000 road trust
deposit.
Stacking raquiraments at this intersaction should be as recommanded by the supplement to tha traffic
impact study. Single laft turns will be sufficiant at this intersaction, and for eastbound traffic a
through-right is sufficient for a 5-lana roadway for thosa traveling to the subject site,
6,
Eagle Road Improvaments and Right-of-Way
Eagle Road and the Franklin/Eagle, Pine/Eagle and Fairview/Eagle intersections all operate at a LOS
F, and will continue to operate at a LOS F with much greater dalays. The delays at these
intersections will continua to lengthan, from two to four times the current delay, The TIS does not
provida any racommendations to mitigata the worsening conditions along tha Eagle corridor.
Based on the submitted TIS, a continuous right-turn lana is needad on Eagle Road for tha proposed
access points. ITD should require a turn lane for any access that is approvad on Eagle Road, and
should acquira sufficiant right-of-way for those and any future improvements.
7,
The length of tha existing southbound right turn lane on Eagla Road at tha Pine intersaction has
sufficient stacking for tha traffic ganarated by this sita, however, traffic in the through lanes will block
the tum lane. Tha northbound left turn lane at the Pine intersection is currently operating as one left
turn lane, but another laft tum lane is constructed and not usad, Tha length of those lanes is also
sufficient, but through traffic will block the turn lanas.
Eagle Road Access
The applicant is proposing to have a truck access driveway in alignmant with Commercial Street, and
in the prasent location of the private sagment of Commercial Street. The TIS recommends full
access at this intersection bacause Commarcial Street on the aast side of Eagle Road has no other
access. Howaver, property owners on the east side of Eagle Road hava workad out an agreament to
construct a north-south road to connact to Pina Streat, which is schedulad for construction in 2005.
This will allaviate tha need for full accass movement on Eagla Road at Commarcial Straet, and will
provide a safer route for large trucks and all vehiclas.
The applicant is also proposing two right-in/right-out driveways on Eagle Road in addition to the
Commercial Court access. Access on to Eagla Road should be limited, as the site will have adaquate
access off of Pine Street, and access to the signal at Eagle Road,
ACHD recommends that all access on Eagle Road be restricted to right-in/right-out oparations only,
and that madians be installed in Eagle Road to restrict the access points, including the Commercial
Court accass.
Access to Adjoining Properties
The applicant is proposing to eliminata Commercial Court as a private street, however there are
parcels at the west end of the street that also use that private straet for access to the public street
system. The applicant should provide written documentation that all parcels currently accessing
Commercial Court will be provided appropriate access to the public street system.
2.
3.
4.
5,
6.
7
9,
Site Design
The current layout of the site requires trucks to access Eagle Road to serve the proposed uses,
ACHD racommends that the applicant re-dasign the site to eliminata the need for Eagle Road access
for trucks. This could ba accomplishad by either providing specific drive aislas through tha site from
Pine Street, or by locating buildings nearar to Pine Street. Tha site should be designed to have
minimal impact on Eagle Road. Site traffic, including truck traffic, should be directed to Pine Street
whare thare is a signalized intersection at Eagle Road, rather than directly to Eagle Road where there
are higher volumas, higher spaeds and no signals.
C.
Special Recommendation to City of Meridian and ITD
1,
Based on the submitted TIS, a continuous right-turn lane is needed on Eagle Road for the proposed
access points. ITD should require a turn lane for any accass that is approved on Eagle Road, and
should acquire sufficiant right-of-way for those and any future improvements.
2,
ACHD recommends that all access on Eagla Road ba restrictad to right-in/right-<Jut operations only,
and that medians be installed in Eagle Road to restrict the access points, including the Commarcial
Court access.
3.
ACHD recommends that the applicant provida writtan documantation to the City that all parcels
currently accessing Commercial Court will be provided appropriate access to the public street system,
4.
Tha currant layout of the site requiras trucks to access Eagle Road to serve the proposed uses.
ACHD recommends that tha applicant re-design tha site to eliminate the naed for Eagle Road access
for trucks,
D.
Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1.
Construct Pine Street abutting the site and dedicata sufficient right-of-way to accommodate tha
improvaments. The applicant will not be compensated for any improvements or right-<Jf-way. The
roadway shall ba improved to a 5-lana section with bika lanes on the south side, as wall as curb,
gutter, and a 7-foot attached sidewalk, or a 5-foot datachad sidawalk saparatad from the roadway by
a minimum 5-foot wide landscape strip. At the intarsection of Eagle Road, additional turn lanes will
be required on Pine Street to provida a 7-lane street section (2 westbound through lanes, 2
northbound turn lanas, 2 eastbound through lanes, 1 southbound right turn lana), The roadway shall
ba improved abutting the antire site.
The proposad driveway on Pina Street in alignmant with the Regance driveway on the north side of
the street, located 32Q-feet west of Eagla Road, ;s not approvad, The drivaway shall be located a
minimum of 470-feat west of Eagla Road, to provida sufficient offset from the intersection, and a
minimum 150-feet of offset from the Ragence driveway.
Construct a drivaway in alignmant with Rosario Street, as proposed.
Construct a driveway in alignment with Hickory Street, as proposed.
The proposed public street off of Pina Street intersecting Hickory is not approved, A driveway may be
constructed in this location.
Provide a $105,000 road trust deposit for the cost of the signal at Hickory and Pine,
9.
10.
11,
E.
8
7.
Stacking requirements at the Hickory/Pina intarsection shall ba as recommended by tha supplament
to tha traffic impact study. Single left tums will be sufficient at this intersection, and for aastbound
traffic a through-right is sufficient for a 5-lane roadway,
8.
Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
D.
Standard Conditions of Approval
1.
Any existing irrigation facilities shall ba relocated outsida of the right-of-way,
2.
All utility relocation costs associated with improving streat frontages abutting the sita shall be borne
by the developer.
3,
Replace any existing damagad curb, guttar and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the
construction of the proposed davalopmant. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file
numbar) for datails.
4.
Utility straet cuts in pavemant less than five years old are not allowed unless approvad in writing by
tha District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details.
5,
All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy
Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplamants, Construction Servicas proceduras and all
applicable ACHD Ordinancas unlass spacifically waived herain. An angineer registerad in the State
of Idaho shall prepara and certify all improvement plans.
6,
The applicant shall submit revisad plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or
other required parmits), which incorporates any raquired design changas,
7,
Construction, use and property devalopment shall be in conformance with all applicabla requirements
of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
8.
Payment of applicable road impact fees are requirad prior to building construction in accordance with
Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance,
It is the responsibility of tha applicant to verify all existing utilities within tha right-of-way, The
applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair axisting utilitias damaged by the applicant. The applicant
shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking
ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Oparations 387-6190 in
the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromisad during any phase of construction.
No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and
signad by the applicant or tha applicant's authorized rapresentativa and an authorizad represantative
of the Ada County Highway District. Tha burdan shall be upon tha applicant to obtain written
confirmation of any change from tha Ada County Highway District.
Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other
regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises
the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a
waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the
time the change in use is sought.
Conclusions of Law
9
1,
The proposed site plan is approvad, if all of the Site Spacific and Standard Conditions of Approval are
satisfied.
2.
This additional traffic created by this devalopmant will have a significant impact on tha existing
transportation system. Conditions in this area alraady excead Lavel of Service OF", and dalay times
will continue to langthen up to four times the current dalay. No mitigation has been identified from the
submitted Traffic Impact Study to address the decline in level of service.
Attachments
1.
2,
3,
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Reconsideration Guidelines
Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action
1.
Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action: A Commissioner, a membar of ACHD staff
or any other parson objecting to any final action taken by the Commission may request
reconsideration of that action, provided the request is not for a reconsideration of an action previously
raquested to ba reconsidered, an action whose provisions have been partly and materially carried
out, or an action that has created a contractual relationship with third parties,
a. Only a Commission member who voted with the prevailing side can move for reconsideration,
but the motion may be secondad by any Commissioner and is voted on by all Commissioners
presant.
If a motion to reconsider is made and seconded it is subject to a motion to postpone to a
certain time.
b. The request must be in writing and daliverad to the Sacratary of the Highway District no later
than 3:00 p.m. on the day prior to the Commission's naxt scheduled regular meeting following
tha meeting at which tha action to be raconsidared was taken. Upon receipt of the raquest,
the Sacretary shall cause the same to be placed on the agenda for that next schadulad
regular Commission meeting.
c. Tha request for reconsidaration must be supported by written documantation setting forth new
facts and information not presented at the earliar meating, or a changed situation that has
devaloped sinca tha taking of the earlier vote, or information establishing an error of fact or
law in the earlier action. The requast may also be supported by oral testimony at the meating,
d. If a motion to reconsider passes, the affect is the original matter is in the axact position it
occupied the moment bafora it was votad on originally. It will normally be returned to ACHD
staff for further review. Tha Commission may set tha date of tha meeting at which the matter
is to ba returned. Tha Commission shall only take action on tha original matter at a maeting
whare the agenda notice so providas,
e, At the maeting whare tha original matter is again on the agenda for Commission action,
interested persons and ACHD staff may presant such written and oral testimony as the
Presidant of the Commission determines to be appropriata, and tha Commission may take
any action tha majority of the Commission daams advisable.
f, If a motion to reconsider passes, the applicant may be charged a reasonable fee, to cover
administrative costs, as established by the Commission.
10
11
- rr-
~L'm.~'1
it ~ In - ¡'L
- r-l I'ì ~ L
If: ,u U 7 r:
I r
--...
- ¡[[ , ~ IP =
~ r( ~I
-
'-- -
- ::/ -
Ii ~ ........ -ì. ~
b F------õ !"".
- ~ ;J
~Effi'!<;'"' 1T rn
I- Z' ~..
¿ I '7
SITE
I
I I ". ~
I T
:1 I
-
I J I II
1 I I 1 I ,~
-J I I =- ,-
~
J=~~ ~
I 01 /
r~ ~~~ J 1
:\~ I r I I
I
---'-' ," I I
1'- ï V Jø;.
-II 3'"
-- - .
-- - .
~<!i:ll
~\.
------..2""
1IIIll,.~IGI<:II!
. 1 1 I.:
. 1 1 18-+-1
. 1 1 18-+-1
. 1 1 18-+-1
. 1 1 18-+-1
H~~
H 18-+-1
H 8-+-1
1- -
- """"".. En
-_n.
I
IJ.
c
II
II
.... ....
'l r
~
TEN MIL. D.""'LOPMENT LJ.<:. SMA 1--
M....DI.AN,IDAfoIO ...-....----
....-."'--
_D NEW ,..TAIL CENT." ---
MAoeT! "'T! f'LAN '--~~"'t-.....
12
13
II
Development Process Checklist
II
I2SISubmlt a development application to a City or to the County
I2SIThe City or the County will transmit the development application to ACHD
I2SIThe ACHD Planning Review Division will receive the development application to review
I2SIThe Planning Review Division will do ~ of the following:
DSend a "No Review" letter to the applicant stating that there are no site specific requirements at this time.
DSend a "Comply With" letter to the applicant stating that if the development is within a platted subdivision or part 01
a previous development application and that the site specific requirements from the previous development also appl:
to this development application,
DWrlte a Staff Level report analyzing the Impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating thE
proposal for Its conformance to District Policy.
I2SIWrlte a Commission Level report analyzing the Impacts of the development on the transportation system and
evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Polley,
I2SIThe Planning Review Division will hold a Technical Review meeting for all Staff and Commission Level reports.
DFor ALL development applications, including those receiving a "No Review" or "Comply With" lette~
The applicant should submit two (2) sets of engineered plans direcUy to ACHD for review by the Development Revle..
Division for plan review and assessment of Impact fees, (Note: If there are no site improvements required by ACHD,
then architectural plans may be submitted for purposes of impact fee calculation.)
The applicant Is required to get a permit from Construction Services (ACHD) 'lor ANY work in the right-ol-way, includin\
but not limited to, driveway approaches, street improvements and utility cuts,
DPay Impact Fees prior to issuance of building permit. Impact fees cannot be paid prior to plan review approval.
DID YOU REMEMBER:
ConstnJCtjon (Zone)
0 Driveway or Property Approach(s)
Submit a "Driveway Approach Requasf' form to Ada County Highway District (ACHD) Construction (for approval by
Development Services & Traffic Services), There is a one week turnaround for this approval.
0 Working In the ACHD Right-ot-Way
Four business days prior to starting work have a bonded contractor submit a "Temporary Highway Use Permit Application" to
ACHD Construction - Permits along with:
a) Traffic Control Plan
b) An Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plat, done by a Certffied Plan Designer. il trench Is >50' or you are
placing >600 sl 01 concrete or asphalt.
Construction (Subdivisions)
0 Sediment & Erosion Submittal
At least one week prior to setting up a Pre-Con an Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plat. done by a Certified Plan
Designer, must be turned into ACHD Construction - Subdivision to be reviewed and approved by the ACHD Drainage
Division,
0 Idaho Power Company
Vic Steelman at Idaho Power must have his IPCO approved set 01 subdivision utility plans prior to Pre-Con being scheduled.
0 Final Approval trom Development Services
ACHD Construction - Subdivision must have received approval from Development Services prior to scheduling a Pre-Con.
14
To: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
Date: January 19th, 2005
Re: Ten Mile Development Staff Report
REOElVElJ
JAN I 9 2Oœ
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY'ClERK OP-dCF
Dear Commissioners,
Please excuse the late arrival of this letter, but we have had only one day to review the
Staff report for the Rezone and Conceptual CUP portion of the Ten Mile Development
project located at the southwest comer of Pine and Eagle. You should have received a
separate response letter in regards to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment portion of the
application concerning our previous Public Hearing,
This letter will follow the body of the staff report beginning on page 8, commencing with
the Rezone application and following the order of the report to its conclusion and
recommendation. A "no comment" remark signifies agreement. We offer the following in
response to the staff analysis and recommendations:
Rezone Analysis
A. Staff points out that approximately 22 acres, or roughly one third of the subject
property is designated as industrial on the City's Comprehensive Plan, yet no
justification is offered as to why the property was split in this manner. Staff seems
supportive of the CoG designation for the remainder of the site as it complies with
the MU-R designation of the Comprehensive Plan. As with the requested
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) we feel that based on the surrounding
office, industrial and retail uses, and the excessive costs of the land due to the
highly visible location of the project, the entire project should be zoned CoG.
Furthermore, please keep in mind that the entire project is conceptual in nature at
this time and is subject to change, and it may be a more mixed project in the
future.
B, No comment.
C. No comment.
D. No comment.
E. While I disagree with Staff's statement that 50-60% of the surrounding area is
industrial in nature, I would point out that one of the purposes of the MU-R
Designation is to provide compatible land uses in a transitioning area, like when
land uses transition ITom industrial to commercial to office to residential uses.
Additionally, the future land use map is a guide, not an ordinance mandating a
specific zoning designation. This property is surrounded by a mix of uses and
zoning designations, many of which do not comply with the Comprehensive Plan,
but when looked at collectively the general vicinity will provide the mix of uses
envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan for this location. Again, please note in
response to Staff's statement of the "master site plan does not reflect a mix of
planned uses" that this conceptual plan is jnst that - conceptual. It can and will
change as the site is developed further, and as needed, will incorporate more of
Staff's suggestions.
F, No comment.
G. Again, we are working with a conceptual site plan and can adjust the utilities to
meet the requirements of the City. In addition, this was previously discussed with
Staff at the pre-application meeting and it is our intention to connect both ends of
the sewer system as agreed upon by both parties.
H. No comment.
1. No comment.
J. We will agree to comply with ACHD and ITD requirements and
recommendations. Changes to the conceptual plan can be made to limit access to
Eagle Road and change the truck routes mentioned in the report,
K. No comment.
L. We feel that the rezone to CoG is in the best interest of the City for the following
reasons:
Commercial (C-G) uses will be designed to be more compatible with
office uses located on the north side of Pine (Gemtone).
Value of the land supports commercial use, not industrial, equaling a
higher base tax rate for the City, (See attached land value comparisons-
as requested per the previous Commissioners meeting on December 16th,
2004.)
Industrial users are trying to leave the area due to existing traffic
conditions, whereas commercial users are searching for development land
in area.
The added cost of the Pine Street construction and a new traffic light
cannot be offset by the value of industrial land (versus commercial land),
(See attached ACHD impact fee comparisons.)
Pine Street will become a major corridor into Meridian and will be more
attractive if commercial buildings, rather than industrial buildings, are
built adjacent to Pine.
Rezone Comments and Conditions
1-6.
No comment.
Conditional Use Permit Application
A.
Parking should be a moot issue; this is a conceptual site plan only. Further
parking analysis will need to be completed with the detailed CUP applications
that will follow. Uses and parking requirements can be handled at that time,
Regardless, being short 186 spaces when over 2,600 are provided is a good
indication that there is lots of room for parking, especially considering the fact
that depending upon the use of the building, a factor of 1 :400 could be
achieved,
B-I.
Addressed in the above responses for the Rezone application,
Special Considerations (Conditional Use PID)
Commercial Court Easement: Discussions are being held with the adjacent owner of the
McCall Property as to resolutions for incorporating in to the design an access to these
sites. It is our intention to incorporate in to the design a concept that will create a positive
impact on all the parties involved.
Amenities: No comment, other than to point out the transit center, the multi-use pathway
and the plazas are all considered amenities for this site and will be developed in
accordance with Staff's recommendations.
General Site Design Comments:
a, No comment.
b. No comment.
c. The transit station is not the focal point of this project, but we can change
the overall conceptual layout to accommodate the transit station.
Considering the transit station will be set aside prior to any transit
program, the requirement of additional land for a park and ride seems
excessive a this point, however there will be plenty of parking for the
overall project that could be a joint use.
d-f. No comment.
Conditions of Approval
1-15,1-4, Fire, SSC and Parks:
No comment.
Staff Recommendation
I know this may come as a surprise, but I disagree with staff's recommendation for
denial. The split designation (II3 industrial and 2/3 MU-R) of this property should not
hinder the owners of the property to develop the land in a manner that is not
economically prudent. We know that industrial users have a hard time pulling large
trucks onto Eagle, and that several industrial uses are trying to leave the area, The costs
associated with the construction of Pine and a new traffic light make the land
development costs rise on an already expensive piece of ground. The land is valuable for
commercial uses because of the vehicle trips and the surrounding commercial uses, not
because of the industrial uses located on the other side of the railroad track.
We have heard testimony ITom a neighbor who would like to see the project be zoned C-
G rather than I-L and I have had discussions with other neighbors who feel likewise,
The site plan is conceptual in nature, and the end result will be different ITom what you
see today. The CoG zone will allow for a greater mix of uses than requiring the land to
remain as I-L. If additional service/office/restaurant uses are needed they can be
incorporated into the future site design.
The transit center is accessible, but based on the fact that there is no transit system in
place or being planned for in the near future we do not know for sure how it will need to
be designed. Keep in mind this is conceptual and we are making a place of it.
We agree to work with ITD and ACHD on mitigation of traffic.
We intend to incorporate the easement, and adjacent properties associated to it, in to the
design in a manner that is of benefit and agreeable to all parties involved (also, as
required by law).
Based on surrounding uses and future development in the City of Meridian we feel that
the proposed rezone, CPA and Conceptual PD are in the best interest of the City, If you
have any questions please feel ITee to contact me at 336-5355 or via the internet at
dmckinnon@congerlITou?com.
Sincerely,
Dave McKinnon
I '
~
HANSEN-RICE, INC.
1717 E, Chisholm Drive, Nampa, Idaho USA 83687
Ph, (208) 465-0200 . Fax (208) 465-0272 . www,hansen-rice,com
City of Meridian - Planning and Zoning Commission
33 E, Idaho St.
Meridian,UD 83642-2300
(208) 884-5533
coPY
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter and following information is in regards to the December 16th, 2004
Commission's public hearing regarding the Ten Mile Development property at the SW comer of
Pine and Eagle roads. The following is a summary of related property values in order to compare
the site values to comparable and available land
To the extent possible, both the market values and assessed values have been provided for
the subject site and three comparable sites: Site "A", Site "ß" and Site "e", Page 1 (this page) is a
brief explanation of the following pages, Page 2 is a summary of land sales in the valley, with the
three comparable sites highlighted. Per Mark Bottles Real-estate, the unit price per acre has been
provided in order to be able to compare these sites with the subject site, The following pages will
also include Ada County Assessor parcel detail information and should include both the assessed
and market values in the upper-right hand comer of the page, The calculations are on the middle
of the page. After each Ada County Assessor parcel detail information page, there will follow a
parcel map and a vicinity map.
A conclusion of the values for the subject site and comparable sites are provided below for
ease of comparison:
Site Acreal!e Assessed Value ner Acre Market Value ner Acre
Subject Site: 62 $163,320 $
Site "A": 28,8 Not Available $43 560
Site "ß": 77,8 $2,204 $55,656
Site "C": 14 $99,457 $62,531
As can be seen, the value of the subject site is quite higher than that of the comparable
sites. The goal of this analysis is to prove that this site, as noted above, is significantly more
expensive than other sites in the same area, thus pricing itself out of the range of industrial
development. Furthermore, this analysis does not include properties to the west of Meridian, of
which could be expected to be even much more affordable than the comparable sites and subject
site as shown above,
Thank you for your time,
ÇL{
James L. Escobar
Hansen-Rice, Inc.
(208) 442-4227
"Dedicated to Excellence and Quality"
Ada County Assessor Land Records Divsion
HNe-q--
Pagel of 1
~Et~~ \111'03, 3J.O rv",...re..
Mh~-r~ !'t
land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old interactive map
Assessor links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration
. Information
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. Motor Vehicles
. Levy Rates
Ada County links
. Ada County Home
Page
. Commissioners
. Treasurer
. Clerk/Auditor/Recorder
. DevelopmentServices
. Human Resources
[Previous Search] (New Search] [Print View]
Property Details for Parcel 51108417233
Gerierallnformation
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
Subdivision:
Section:
53,316
I.L
03 Tax Districts
SECT
3N 1E 08
3N1E08
Property Description
PAR#7233@N SIDE OF SE4
SEC83N 1E
#417232-8
Property Address
725 NEAGLE RD
MERIDIAN, 1083642
Parcel Valuation Details
Parcel Valuation History
fl 53.3---.~ ,.." 1??,;l7~ ",.......'L
$6,677,000 t: ---
$6,677,000
$5,806,100
Assessed value for year 2004
Assessed value for year 2003
Assessed value for year 2002
Property Characteristics
Land
(Previous Search]
[New Search] [Print View]
(p, (,77,fif) -I- 3,tJt/ð, 'fro,.. lD,rIB,1ðOQ (,~..~~ ~
~/(P3. "?W,.r ALI'e-
Contact Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
Us
http://www.adacountyassessor,org/propsys/index.html?action=details&parcel=S 11 084172..,
1/14/2005
Ada County Assessor Land Records Divsion
Pagel on
;";'~o~::-:¡[>A(Îá.',. '9()Ilf~?Y~~S:~~$.6f': ',¡~" ....r'.'Œ"'y~""'.." .
¡',..";,,,JLal1Cl RecortiSiG 15\.""...'
'"',,,.> ,"',". '"c, "',.' " ,,",',., " "'\, ,",
. Ada County Home
Page
. Commissioners Property Characteristics
. Treasurer Commercial
. Clerk1AuditorlRecorder'-and
. Development Services
. Human Resources
Land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old interactive map
Assessor Links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration'
. Information
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. Motor Vehicles
. Levy Rates
Ada County Links
[Previous Search] [New Search] [print View]
Property Details for Parcel 51108417710
General Information
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
Subdivision:
Section:
S,660
I-L
03 Tax Districts
SECT
3N 1E OS
3N1EOS
Property Description
PAR #7710 OF SE4
SECS3N 1E
#417700-8
Property Address
3001 E COMMERICAL CT
MERIDIAN, 1083642
Parcel Valuation Details
Acreage
Assessed Valuation
Value Method
$943,200 INCOME
$153,500 INCOME
$400,000 INCOME
$1,952,200 ARKET
$3,44S,900
Parcel Valuation History
Assessed value for year 2004
Assessed value for year 2003
Assessed value for year 2002
Assessed value for year 2001
Assessed value for year 2000
y ~8. 7 c>.v&"" ;. J .3"1(" r t.. ;l«:> tV ..ct"(.
$3,448,900
$3.391,300
$3,265,100
$3,160,600
$3,145,700
[Previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Contaçt Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
.. Us
http://wWw.adacountyassessor.org/propsys/index,html?action=details&parcel=S II 084177...
1/14/2005
C)
c
;3..
Co
cu
:æ
-
CP
C
"-
CP
-
.5
~
c
j
0
0
cu
"tJ
«
i g c
f~qh}~j
.. " j! " J ¡\ . i Q
.!!!r--
<tIr--
Or--
en",
c...
<tI~
:2:
EJ
EJEJOmlilITIIIII
$ ~ s
j i ~z ~~~ j
~ ~ ~nu H
:i!iõiõ5muæQ:¡¡
~~ ~X X~
:
~ Ii
. Ii z-
~ ~ ~ i!I U.
h n Lit
~~'....~~~
... ...
, . g
'I! e ~
i:' ,i
!lEJ[1;]
~Ê
~h,;
"'-~ s
H~M
Hh
oo~< c
EgQ§
lJ:¡;.h
~ E",.
1"i~O~
nrh
- ~",oo
c co. B
ËEw~
~;¡¡~ê
§.~~t
H~~
~.;~~
¡'¡;"ø
1! "",:0-
m ~¡¡: ~
~~--~
øo'¡¡..,
hH
~n~
E~~~
~~n
Àda County Assessor LanClRecords Divsion
HL "fI.."
=:/I-ΠT\
Page 10[ 1
Å=.';;1ef¡~>é.p: ¡\lor ^".4.II...",,&£
Mf\f-l'.6.'f:4t.t3,:'¿O pv- ""'"~
!:!ij~"~"".i¡'~~ìáC(.rUfJtY~S~&!"S(J¡"..\\....:/.... .,
~,,;;.~:!i:LitJl(jReç() rC/ S/r:; I$<iji
Land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old Interactive map
Assessor Links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration
. Information
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. Motor Vehicles
. Levy Rates
Ada County Links
. Ada County Home
Page
. Commissioners
. Treasurer
. Clerk/Auditor/Recorder
. Development ServiCes
. Human Resources
[Previous Searchl [New Search] [Print View]
Property Details for ParcelS1211438925
General Information
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
Subdivision:
Seètion:
28,800
l-L
03 Tax Districts
SECT
3N1W11
3N1W11
Property Description
PAR #8925 IN2SE4
SEC113N1W
PARCEL A RlS 6060
#438900,B
Property Address
50 N WARD AVE
MERIDIAN, ID 83642
Parcel Valua~ion Details
Valuation
Method
$0 INCOME
$0
Parcel Valuation History {-- No ~';fi6SS£1) ÿAUJE A\lÞ,\U¡!IL£
Assessed value for year 2004 $0
Property Characteristics
Land
[Previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Contact Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
Us
http://w'ww.adacountyassessor.org/propsys/index,html ?action=details&parcel=S 12114389...
1/14/2005
m
r:::
c.
c.
res
:æ:
-
G>
r:::
'-
G>
-
r:::
>.
-
r:::
:::J
0
0
res
"
«
.G! »
11 ~ <
~ ~ n i ¡ . I!
:,,~:~¡ i 2Õ
[] []DDf!iJ~1!I1III
!I :;/ S I
j I ~2 ~i j H ~ ¡ J~
f ¡¡ ~~ fi~ Ii 1 ~ ~ ~ ¡¡ ~ 1-.8
"ii!!ð"L",~¡¡..9~L~ oiõ,s
'\. '\. '\., , '\. '\. '\. <. '\. '\. '\.
SS
Šn
~:&
..!!v
¡'Iv
CIJ¡g
c...
"'~
:;:
I!I!DFB
~~
~ê~ .
s~H
"-¡;;!j~
Uzæ
~:~i
H~8
8:~h
~ E", .
."O~
E >0"- ~
H@,.
~~~:s
~-,,~g
-o;~~'
~~5~
~ I;;¡~
S~~.e
.g,s:,¡¡
-¡;;"roF
~¡~~
æJ' -"E
!iiJ~:11
" >.~-
'" .1;
"Omo
o.~¡¡,E
~.Æ';¡
~n~
~.:-/:': LL.'.--........ '---'." '.'
C~~/
I '.~
J j
< . ¡
U.
t
Sc~t
"g
íIX
"'C!'
c:
fIiI
"'E
1tI.
::;¡"
0
.3:
f
I
1-
'r
O!
üJ
>
«
z
II)
ø
~
9
Q
-'f;
-
I
E
D
Ii)
11
3
a
¡¡; ¡,
m:
:e
10
g
N
0
f>.da County Assessor Lànd Records Divsion
I'.:
,;þ"'::" ;(,C,~då'Ç;(JU~t'J','(' A's"~' SÚS$(Ji'(," (:Te.(':,,'}<~' 'c,:;
\('f~:(,;}.'.."-ân(JRèc oréis/GI $..i¥:i.
"".'L", ",',', """'." ".' ,', ',' '", ,',' "",' "ic""
. Ada County Home
Page Property Characteristics
. Commissioners Residential
. Treasurer Agriculture
. ClerkiAuditor/RecorderLand
. Development Services
. Human Resources
Land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old interactive map
Assessor Links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration
. Information
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. MotorVehicles
. Levy Rates
Ada County Links
tl
Page 1 of 1
AS7~$e.D: 1:>2 I -;ZO~ por.....r~
t'\.\~-r, J¡56,£'~(' per...UL
s
"
(Previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Properly Details for Parcel 51121212485
General/nfonnation
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
Subdivision:
Section:
67,761
CoG
03-8 Tax Districts
SECT
3N 1E21
3N1E21
Property Description
PAR #2485 E2 NW4
SEC 21 3N 1E
#212475-8
Property Address
3905 E OVERLAND RD
MERIDIAN, ID 83642
, Parcel Valuation Details
Assessment
Roll
Primary
Primary
rimary
Prima
State
Cate 0 Code
O-IRRIGATEDAG
100-HOMES/TE ON AG
10-RES IMPROVEMENT
20-IMPROVEMENT
Acreage
Assessed Valuation
Value Method
$67,800 INCOME
$70,000 ARKET
$21,500 OST
$2,000 COST
$161,300
Parcel Valuation History
$161,300~ @'&7.fJø..re.S .}J., 37; /.......t.-
$149,300
$141,900
$140,800
Assessed value for year 2004
Assessed value for year 2003
Assessed value for year 2002
Assessed value for year 2001
1{,1,300.,. ID,;2cX):::- 171 ,~oc::!. 77.8..£t'r.s =
;;¿ , ;¿ C1-/ / qU"¿"
[Previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Contact Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
Us
http ://www.adacountyassessor,orgipropsys/index.htrn1 ?action=details&parcel =S 11212124,..
1113/2005
~da County Assessòr Land Records Divsiori
Page 10f1
. .
','Y',-':'!5,i'!',~~Ú9t}Ilì¡tt;f~sa$~()t:'.'.;.\,.~'.'.',. "';?...;.','..
.*:'t¡;,..,ai(à (lâ.l3êçô ttJ}(GlS', \ ,'..~
Land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old interactive map
Assessor Links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration
. Information
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. MotorVehlcles
. Levy Rates
Ada County Links
[Previous Search] [New Search] [Prim View]
Properly Details for Parcel 51121212550
General Information
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
Subdivision:
Section:
10,000
CoG
03-8 Tax Districts
SECT
3N 1E21
3N1E21
Property Description
NW4NE4NW4
SEC213N1E
Property Address
E OVERLAND RD
MERIDIAN, ID 83642
Parcel Valuation Details
Parcel Valuation History
Assessed value for year 2004
Assessed value for year 2003
Assessed value for year 2002
Assessed value for year 2001
Assessed value for year 2000
$10,200 &.::'" CAD..uof> "'~I,{)~t..r~
$10,600
$10,200
$10,000
$9,700
. Ada County Home
Page
. Commissioners
. Treasurer
. ClerklAuditor/Recorde,1Previous Search]
. Development Services
. Human Resources
Property Characteristics
Agriculture
[New Search] [Print View]
Contact Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
Us
http:/ /www.adacountyassessor.org!propsys/index,html ?action=details&parcel=S 11212125".
1/13/2005
Ada County Internet Mapping
JNIEIS.
B
JNIE22
.- "
'"
This map la a user gana",tad static output from an Intamat mapping ,Ita and Is tor gana"'l
",farenca only. Data 'ayan¡ that appaar on this map mayor may not ba a=..ta, current,
orotherwlsa rellabla. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. Usoand
distribution of this map subJact to dlsdalmer noticas at www.adaoountya"essor.org.
N.'O."or.""
Mop,s>.....
rI -_L
rI =""'R
rI S&<ß10N
¡I~,
¡I ""'ROTA'"
rI 011>"
~ w.Io,
;::.' So""'nl>
¡¡g 8."",
0 P"ka
City LIm~a
D-
O_a
D G""'CI~
¡:s¡ E....
Ii!iI .ta,
G ""'dla.
III 0-
Map Scale
1: 12411
\ ¡ LUF
f.. "'1"A..'^. '1:,' .{.."oj,. '-,
J l
- liJ /1 t..)..J
. - J ' .-" 1
. ~
ca::.
¡"
m
....
u..
W
/e-
..
a
LU
~
Z
ið
~
9
~
I;
I:)
Q
¡
iiJ
"
g,
ID
:i
10
c
ð
N
@
Ada County Assessor Land Records Divsion
L?'.'">:'-':;'L>~~i¿¡..Cb~lr1t}'A$$~$$I,¡-¡¡O:(jE~';' i'~ "...,.'.. ~r
~';;it...;.;ß....~.i1I1Ç1...:RfJ£qi;(:/s.ll~ Is..;;;,;','
land Records
. Main Page
. Property Search
. Online Map
. Contact Us
. Disclaimer
. Help Index
. FAQ
. About Us
. Image Documents
. Old interactive map
Assessor links
. Assessor Main Page
. Administration
. Infol1l1atlon
. Appraisal
. Exemptions and
Reductions
. MotorVehicles
. Levy Rates
Ada County Links
. Ada County Home
Page
. Commissioners
. Treasurer
. ClerklAudltortRecorder
. Development Services
. Human Resources
..
"
Page I of 1
hS£:;'~.D :"crr. t. ,,7 'V"""&.-
MA"'~1}(,:?,531 fV'..u«-
~
[previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Property Details for Parcel 51211438950
Genera/Information'
Property Acres:
Zone Code:
Primary Code Area:
Group Type:
SubdMsion:
Section:
14.000
I-L
03 Tax Districts
SECT
3N1W11
3N1W11
Property Description
PAR #8950 Vll2SE4
SEC113N1W
PARCEL B RIS 6060
#438900-S
Property Address
2130 W FRANKLIN RD
MERIDIAN, ID 83642
Parcel Valuation Details
Parcel Valuation History
Assessed value for year 2004
Property Characteristics
Commercial
Land
[Previous Search] [New Search] [Print View]
Contact Us I Help Index I Disclaimer I About
Us
http:1 Iwww,adacountyassessor.org!propsys/index.html7action=details&parcel=S 12114389,..
1/14/2005
Ada County Internet Mapping
MOÞ>r-.', 0 Park,
,t NI_""""" City.......
,t 11&8\'"",. 0 ....
,t """'ON 0 0""
" ~'tL 0 ._..,~
" INTERsTATE f§] ..~.
,t 0".., I!!!I ...,
MI".,Stre... §!I """'Io.
,t LO"-'L II <thw
¡I ."",",
¡/ """ATE
¡oI "S1O!!NTIAL
,t
,t -,
Slred.-
(..,...>
!îII w.to,
0 P...."
EJ Schoo',
Map Scale
1: 3461
tI'i '
@'
¡to!' ,
M'
, ,
.' , (!,~
1-...- ¡' L, ...J~f-l~T
I 121hA'Ø ,.. j I
\ .) Cì~f~ðï
. liL ;.l.ll. 0°. !1 i¡ ~!~l'.
' J i ... ::¡¡ .IlL
N li1der Rd S' -r 1 3: "'r-'I
! \I ! ~I¡.
:!:i ,
-~I
e r
~ J
~
Z
ið
g.
.~
...
Q
I::
-
I
!;;;
D
I))
i
;¡¡¡;
a
g.
III!
:i:
10-
Ci
Ö
N
@
D)
c
Q,
Q,
CIS
:E
-
CÞ
C
...
CÞ
-
C
~
c
::::s
0
0
CIS
"
«
~ € c
I~Hf!ll~
11] E!lD&:iI~IIIg¡ .
" ~ ~ ;
H ~~ ~d j ~ i ! JO ~
f un hn ! U h ~ II 'H
~~~X,~ ~~~~~ 8DO
..!i....
r¡....
cn[;;
a...
"'~
::;;
¡;;~
u~
"°02'
~~j~
H~i
'¡¡J¡>'f
~g~ §
h~.¡¡
EEl<.
.~o~
E >-" 3
U@1õ
-"-"'iI
~Ë~~
d~ê
~~~.~
õmz]
°8:",,"
~~~.g
a¡;;,,-¡¡
un
~:¡¡.. Ë
~~if
.:;¡;~~
~~H
u~~
,EXHIBIT A - Traffic Impact Fee Schedule
Service Area:
1 - NORTHWEST
Land Use
.
Si",leFamily 210 0.505 1,00 7.50 0.384 $1.043 11,517
Apartment 22D 0,310 1.00 7,50 0.384 $1.043 $931
ResidenUaJ CondolTownhc""e 230 0.260 1.00 7.50 0.384 $1.043 $781
Mobile Hcme 240 0295 1,00 7,50 0.384 $1.043 $."
Hote, 310 0295 1.00 7.50 0.384 $1.043 S'"
MoteJ 320 0.235 1.00 7.50 0.384 $1,043 $706
Automobile C.... Con"r 942 1.690 0.72 7,50 0.384 $1,043 13.655
Au1omcblle Parts Sal.. 643 2.990 0.57 3.75 0,384 $1.043 $2,560
Ban~ Drtve-lI1ru 912 22.870 0,53 1,88 0.384 $1,043 $9,127
B'lIding Mat""... and Lumber 812 2.245 0.74 7.50 0.384 $1.043 $4,99g
B""iness Pa" 770 0,645 1,00 7,50 0.384 $1.043 $1,937
Ch"",, 560 0.330 1,00 3.75 0.384 $1,043 $4..
Ccnwnience Markel (24hrs) 651 26.205 0,39 1,88 0.384 $1.043 $7,695
Disco'nt Club 861 2.120 0.77 7.50 0.384 $1.043 $4,903
F..Hlandh1g Dlsco,nt SIers 815 2.530 0.83 7,50 0.384 $1,043 $6,30.
FrsHlandingDisco,ntS,persto.. 813 1.935 0.72 7,50 0,384 $1.043 S4,185
F'mi1ursSlo.. 890 0.230 0.47 7.50 0,384 $1.043 $325
Gamen Co""'r I Nu""", 817 1.900 0.74 7.50 0.384 $1.043 S4,223
-""Paint Store 816 2.420 0,74 7.50 0,384 $1.043 $5,379
Hcme Improvement S,perst"", B62 1225 0.52 7.50 0.384 $1,043 $1,913
Hospital 610 0.580 1.00 7.50 0.384 $1.043 $1.772 .f8831 :lOD
~, II~ ' --. .it)¡"~
" $1,043 . $1,472 .
~mJf_"ng 140 0.370 1.00 7.50 0,384 $1.043 $1.111
Mini.W....hcuse 151 0.130 1,00 7,50 0,384 $1.043 S39O
NswCarSaI.. 841 1.320 0.72 7.50 0,384 $1.043 $2,955
PhennaoylDrug sin.. (Nc Dri_lI1ru) 880 4210 0.47 1.88 0.384 $1.043 $1,490
Phsnn,cylDrug stc.. (With Dri- lI1ru) 881 4.310 0.51 1.88 0.384 $1,043 $1,655
_umnt - Fest Fond wi drtve-Ihru wlndc 934 17.320 0.50 1,88 0.384 $1.043 $6,521
-....,- High T"""""'r 932 5.460 0.57 3.75 0.384 $1.043 $4,674
-mnt-Qu,' 931 3,745 0.56 $1,043
614 1.355 0,66
650 5.225 0.84
... 2.075 0.72
150 0.235 1,00
710 1,00 7.50
720 1,00 7.50
750 1,00 7,50
'.
Gas S_n with Conv Mid ~'sfmg pc""cn 945 6.690 0.44 1,88 0.384 $1.043 S2216
Gas Sta6on (vehide fueling _no) 944 6.930 0.58 1.68 0,384 $1,043 13,1126
Go" Course (Hcle) 430 1.370 1.00 7,50 0.384 $1.043 S4,115
Mo,ie Theater wi matinee (seat) 444 0,035 1,00 7.50 0.384 $1.043 $105
PoblicPa..-C1ty(acre) 411 0.072 1,00 3,75 0.384 $1,043 $108
Quick L,brlceticn (servidng posffions) 841 2.595 0.58 1,88 0.384 $1.043 S1.133
Se"-Service CarWash (Stau) 947 2.770 0.58 1,88 0.384 $1.043 S1,210
Ordinance #200
~fTh~s ~¡¡ @. ~ ODD...,:
~;21 ;/3o,;;¡oO -Je:83¡;J.OO ~~,3¡. 7, DOO
Page A-1
,...,r... 'I" iMp--\- ç;.<.<h ~.-.. 1"'1:;,"'\ J..,þ~pNl't-
To:
Members of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
RE:
Ten Mile Development CPA Follow Up Letter
RECEIVED
JAN 9 2005
City Of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Date: January 3, 2005
Dear Commissioners,
Last time we met we discussed several major issues related to the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment (CPA) requested by Ten Mile Development for the 60+ acres located at the
southwest comer of Eagle and Pine, With the understanding that we would be meeting
.¡¡gain this month, you asked me to perform a little homework and get back to you with
the results, so here they are:
Gemtone Subdivision, located north of the proposed project, like other subdivisions in the
area is zoned industrial (I-L) but the intended and existing uses are far ITom it. Mike
Ford, representing the Yanke Family accurately testified at our last hearing that the land
just west of Blue Cross is intended only for office use, likewise the Blue Cross building is
an office use in the I-L Zone. The CC&Rs of the subdivision, reviewed by the City prior
to approval, are explicit in their requirement for high quality offices or like uses,
Furthermore, the dimension of the lots, as subdivided, does not support industrial uses,
Mike Ford has provided to City with additional information regarding the approval of this
subdivision dating back to the early nineties that reflect the non-industrial nature of this
Subdivision.
Other subdivisions and uses in the general area zoned I-L include all of Crossroads
Shopping Center, Krispy Kreme, Wendys, Primary Health, Kinkos, and Starbucks,
Among those several industrial uses that are located in this area, some (Diamond Lines
and Yellow Freight) are looking to move elsewhere due to the traffic congestion that
currently exists on Eagle and Fairview. Just as Commissioner Zeremba pointed it out
there is a great deal of non-Meridian traffic on Eagle Road, lets not fight it and force
industrial traffic onto Eagle Road, lets get them to stop and spend their money here,
ACHD has now issued their Staff report for this project and they are recommending
approval of the project with several key requirements, with the most important
requirement being the dedication and construction of Pine Street to full five-lane roadway
within a 96' right-of-way. This is a straight developer born expense, meaning that ACHD
will not be compensating the developer for the dedication ofland or for the construction
of the roadway. This only adds to the cost of developing this property making the need
for the land to be used for the highest value (commercial) even greater,
The value of this land, in addition to the development costs associated with the
construction of Pine, combined with the non industrial uses located on the north side of
Pine make commercial uses the most viable use for this property,
~ it N\;\
I /}O ' rFŠ"
5-ttWL ~~
The widening and construction of Pine Street will help to reduce the traffic, in addition to
the recent Franklin Road improvements and the future overpass on Locust Grove this
project will do a great deal to help reduce the traffic burden on Eagle Road.
The suggestion by the commission to find out ifthere is a possibility of swapping some
non-industrial land located somewhere in the area of impact for loss of the existing
industrial land is not outside of the realm of possibility, I have had preliminary
discussions with an industrial developer who would like to see some additional land
elsewhere in the city become designated as "industrial" on the comprehensive plan.
Follow up phone calls and meetings will take place prior to the January public hearing,
Please do not forget that the majority of this property is designated as Mixed Use
Regional and not I-L as it is currently zoned, This land is much more valuable for
commercial uses than industrial uses. The surrounding office and commercial uses have
driven up the price of the land and the several adjoining property owners have stated that
they would prefer to see commercial uses rather than industrial uses located adjacent to
them,
There is already a large amount of Industrial land available and it.is currently under
utilized, There is an existing market demand for additional commercial land on the Eagle
Corridor. Land on the Eagle corridor is becoming too expensive for industrial
development. This property is located in the center of the Treasure Valley and can
support additional commercial development as a destination center supplemented by
"drive by" traffic.
Hopefully I did all of my homework correctly, you won't have any additional questions
and we can approve the CPA without any further testimony. However, if you have any
question or comments please feel ITee to contact me at 887-7760 or via e-mail at
davem@pinnacle-engineers.com. Otherwise, I look forward to seeing you at our next
meeting.
Sincerely,
David McKinnon
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
January 20,2005
ITEM #
5
DATE
CPA 04-003
PROJECT NUMBER
Ten Mile Development
PROJECT NAME
NAME (PLEASE PRINT) FOR AGAINST NEUTRAL
'- ú~lf.1- R A JtflÁ.A ~ ,/
J