Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-14 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Joe Borton Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Brad Hoaglun Councilman John Overton Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PROCLAMATIONS \[Action Item\] 1. Family, Career and Community Leaders of America (FCCLA) Week Proclamation PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics RESOLUTIONS \[Action Item\] 2. Resolution No. 23-2372: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Dutch Bros Ustick and Eagle (H-2022-0077) by Andrew Bowman, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., located at the four (4) lots at the southwest corner of N. Eagle Rd. and E. Ustick Rd. intersection Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0077 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to allow the requested drive-through use by updating the overall concept plan of the approved Development Agreement (Inst. #2019-121599). B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a new 1,154 square foot, dual drive- through Dutch Bros. coffee restaurant on approximately 1.2 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault. Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 4. Public Hearing for U-Haul Fanklin (CR-2022-0008) by Hillside Architecture, PLLC., located at 1030 W. Franklin Rd., on the north side of W. Franklin Rd. halfway between N. Linder Rd. and N. Meridian Rd. Denied Application Materials: https://bit.ly/CR-2022-0008 A. Request: Council Review of the Director's decision on the Administrative Application (A-2022-0232) to restrict Franklin Rd. access to emergency access only. Motion to deny made by Councilman Borton. Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 5. Public Hearing for Sagarra (H-2022-0027) by Accomplice, located at south side of W. Orchard Park Dr., west of N. Fox Run Way and east of N. Linder Rd. Continued to March 21, 2023 Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0027 A. Request: Planned Unit Development for a residential community containing a mix of single-family detached, single-family attached, townhome and multi- family units with a reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A- 6; and two private streets. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 114 building lots and 16 common lots (including 3 private street lots) on 17.49 acres in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts. Motion to continue to March 21 made by Councilman Hoaglum, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 10:29 pm Meridian City Council February 14, 2023. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:02 p.m., Tuesday, February 14, 2023, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Jessica Perreault, Brad Hoaglun, Liz Strader and John Overton. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Sonya Allen, Stacy Hersh, Brian Caldwell, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_ John Overton _X_ Jessica Perreault _X—Luke Cavener X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call this meeting to order. For the record it is February 14th, 2023. It is 6:00 o'clock p.m. We will begin tonight's regular City Council meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: We didn't have anyone sign up for the community invocation; correct, Mr. Clerk? Johnson: Yes, Mr. Mayor. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: All right. So, with that we will move on to adoption of the agenda. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I move adoption of the agenda as published. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 2 of 86 Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. PROCLAMATIONS [Action Item] 1. Family, Career and Community Leaders of America (FCCLA) Week Proclamation Simison: First item up is a proclamation for Family Career and Community Leaders of America or FCCLA. We have a proclamation. Dr. Bub, if you and your team would like to join me at the podium. It's always a fun time to get a new proclamation, especially when they involve -- involve our youth. So, I'm going to go ahead and do the proclamation and, then, I will turn it over to whoever would like to say a few words -- multiple people, perhaps, from that standpoint. But as I mentioned, this is FCCLA Week, so we will do the proclamation. Whereas Family Career and Community Leaders of America, FCCLA, is a national nonprofit, family focus, inner curriculum student organization for family and consumer sciences students through grade 12 and whereas the FCCLA helps youth assume their roles in society through family and consumer sciences education in the areas of personal growth, family life, college readiness, career exploration, leadership and community involvement and whereas the organization extends classroom learning through chapter service projects to develop leadership and employability skills that helps young men and women learn how to plan, make decisions, carry out program evaluations and take action through working with other youth and adults within their school, community and state and whereas FCCLA offers members an opportunity to work together for everyday purposes for the improvement of themselves, as well as their families, careers and communities and whereas the week of February 13th through 17th, 2023, has been designated National FCCLA Week with a theme Incredible. Therefore, I'm, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim February 13th through 17th, 2023, as FCCLA Week in the City of Meridian and encourage the residents of our community to acquaint themselves with the activities and values of Family Career and Community Leaders of America and provide support and encouragement to the students who are working to achieve knowledge and experience that will help them for future responsibilities as active and concerned adult members of society, dated this 14th day of February 2023. So, on behalf of the City of Meridian congratulations on this proclamation and we appreciate you being here on Valentine's Day dressed in red for Incredible. So, we will go and take a picture and, then, turn it over for comments. Meers: So, we asked to get this proclamation signed as a way to promote the community to help and encourage growth in our FCCLA chapter. We really just wanted Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 3 of 86 to reach out and encourage sponsorships and knowledge of what we are and what we do. Grantham: I was asked to be here just to kind of oversee them as our project and I'm really grateful to have this opportunity and I just wanted to thank all of you guys for including us in your agenda and your decisions tonight. Lauren: As Macie said, we just want to thank you for not only being here to support us, but allowing us to take up your time. But, yeah, we are super excited to have this opportunity. So thank you. Meers: I'm Tara Meers and I go to Meridian High. Lauren: I'm Misha Lauren and I also go to Meridian High. Grantham: I am Macie Grantham and I also go to Meridian High. Simison: Thank you. And I love Valentine's Day, we are seen wearing red, such an appropriate theme today. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under public forum? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. RESOLUTIONS [Action Item] 2. Resolution No. 23-2372: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Okay. Then with that we will move on to Item 2, which is Resolution No. 23- 2372, a resolution of the Mayor City and Council of the City of Meridian appointing Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning Zoning Commission and providing an effective date. So, Council, after a lot of work, a lot of interviews, a lot of time invested by myself, our Planning and Zoning Commission chair, staff, we -- we -- we have found two people that I think really will help round out and provide great direction for our Planning and Zoning Commission. So, the two individuals you -- you have their applications before you. But I will just take a few minutes to -- to -- to chat. You know, I have had the pleasure of meeting Enrique over the last three years and I think that when -- when you talk about community, he -- he really gets it and understands it. It's -- it's a priority and his focus from his kids and their involvement, to how he gives back of his personal time and, then, in his professional role in the -- in the banking industry and understanding commercial banking, that that Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 4 of 86 has a -- a real value as we are talking about these projects and I don't -- I think it's always, you know, important for Council and others to kind of look at that perspective, have an understanding of what the market is doing. What is feasible. What is not feasible. I think that will bring some real insight to this. But he -- he brings a great perspective that I'm -- I'm really excited to have on the Planning and Zoning Commission. The second one is Jared Smith. Jared is -- you know, he's been active and engaged on our Transportation Commission. In fact, Mr. Hood, when he saw the applications, you know, he gave me his feedback and he said I think he would be a great addition. You know, he's -- he's proven himself on the Transportation Commission to ask -- ask very thoughtful questions and learn and I think that having that Transportation Commission experience will actually be very valuable on Planning and Zoning, because those are issues that are often -- between schools and roads those are two of the biggest issues that we hear regularly and so having that perspective and that background and that dedication, I -- I think it will be another important added benefit and at least in our conversations at this point in time, you know, because Mr. Hood said he would hate to lose him off the Transportation Commission. As of right now he is not leaving the Transportation Commission, he is going to see if he can -- what the workload is in this -- in this juncture. So, we are -- we are -- we are not -- I guess it's kind of like when your kid gets married, you know, you are not losing a child, you are gaining another part of the family and I think that that's what we are doing here. We are -- we are keeping that connection, but we are -- we are growing that. But he -- he -- he's a lot like me in his view of policy. You know, that -- that public policy viewpoint, fair and equitable treatment under laws, under codes, under policies has an important way to help guide appropriate growth and development and to treat people fairly. So, it's with great pleasure that I bring these forward -- two people for your consideration and they are here in the audience. Hopefully, you won't ask them questions beforehand, but, you know, afterwards I'm sure they would be happy to make any comments if you would like. So, with that I will turn this over to you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thanks, Mayor. I -- I typically try to refrain from comments, you know, obviously, until we have -- we have appointed the people. But in this particular case I just want to commend you. I think these are two great appointee recommendations, two great community leaders that care about Meridian, care about serving our community and I couldn't be more pleased to see these both as recommendations. Simison: Thank you, Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 5 of 86 Cavener: If nobody else has any -- anything to say, I -- I move we approve Resolution No. 23-2372 appointing Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Riviera to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the resolution is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Simison: I would invite Jared and Enrique to come up and make any comments if you are so inclined at this time. Rivera: All right. Well, thank you. I'm Enrique Rivera. It's -- Council, Mayor, appreciate this opportunity and it's -- it's an honor to serve this community and to serve the City of Meridian through the P&Z Commission. So, I look forward to the opportunity and to serving my community and -- and growing Meridian. So, thank you so much for your time. Simison: Thank you, Enrique. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you, Council Members. Sorry, I have to lean down a little bit. I -- I'm just humbled and honored for the opportunity to be appointed to this position. I have thoroughly enjoyed my time with the Transportation Commission, getting to hear from the Community and help, you know, solve the issues that -- that people come to us with and getting to learn tons from my fellow commissioners and from Miranda and -- and staff. So, I'm -- I'm very humbled and very honored for this opportunity. I would also like to thank the staff who oversees the Transportation -- or the Planning and Zoning Committee -- Planning and Zoning Commission for their welcoming nature and -- and how much time they have dedicated to getting us up to speed. It's, you know, a different ballpark, especially coming from Transportation as an advisory role to something that has some -- some actual authority in Planning and Zoning. So, it's been very helpful from legal staff to the -- the planning staff. You know, very thankful to the city staff around that and -- and also -- and she's going to not very -- I would like to thank my beautiful wife Mina who is sitting here behind us for her support and I'm sure not at all glares that I'm receiving for calling her out. But thank you so much. I'm really, really grateful. Simison: Thank you. I'm sure this is just how she thought Valentine's night was going to go, so -- thank you both. Look forward to seeing your work. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 6 of 86 ACTION ITEMS 3. Public Hearing for Dutch Bros Ustick and Eagle (H-2022-0077) by Andrew Bowman, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., located at the four (4) lots at the southwest corner of N. Eagle Rd. and E. Ustick Rd. intersection A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to allow the requested drive-through use by updating the overall concept plan of the approved Development Agreement (Inst. #2019-121599). B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a new 1,154 square foot, dual drive through Dutch Bros. coffee restaurant on approximately 1.2 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. Simison: Okay. With that we will move on to Action Items for this evening. First item up is Item 3, a public hearing for Dutch Bros, Ustick and Eagle, H-2022-0077. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Hersh: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. The applicant is here to present their project for Dutch Bros, Ustick and Eagle. The applications that were submitted with this were a development agreement modification and a conditional use permit that was approved by the Commission. The site consists of 1 .2 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at the southwest corner of the intersection of North Eagle Road and East Ustick. History is there is an existing DA that governs the future development of the site. The concept plan included in the DA depicts four commercial buildings on the site, with associated parking. The building approved at the southwest corner of the site includes a drive through. The Comprehensive Plan FLUM designation is mixed-use regional and the summary of the request is the applicant requests approval of a modification to the existing development agreement to update the existing concept plan. The proposed drive-through is associated with 1 ,154 square feet of restaurant. Commission approval of the CUP is contingent upon Council approval of a modification to the existing DA to update the conceptual development plan for the site to allow for the proposed development. The proposed -- the proposed amendment to the DA will result in a reduction in commercial square footage due to a smaller footprint of the proposed use. Access is proposed via an existing driveway connection to the shared driveway from East Ustick along the west boundary of the site and a recorded cross-access easement via North Centrepoint Way, North Cajun Lane, and East Seville Lane. The access to Centrepoint Way to the west is indirect until such time the property to the west develops and direct access via Ustick Road is prohibited. The proposed use is required to comply with the specific use standards for drive-through establishments listed in the UDC and referenced in the staff report. A reference -- a restaurant is a principally permitted use in the C-G zoning district. Additional parking is required for restaurant uses at one space per 250 feet square feet of gross floor area. Based on the 1,152 square feet, a minimum of five parking spaces are required and a total of 14 are proposed, exceeding the UDC standards. Conceptual building elevations were Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 7 of 86 submitted for the proposed structure as shown. Building materials consist of fiber cement siding, CMU Willamette Graystone, metal roofing, canopy soffit and natural northwestern spruce and glazing. The final design is required to comply with design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Commission did recommend approval of the CUP at the January 5th, 2023, hearing. In favor at the Commission hearing was Nick Wecker, for Barghausen Consulting Engineers, and in opposition was none. Commenting was Nick Wecker. Written testimony -- there is none. Key issues were none. Key issues of discussion by Commission for the project were none. Commission changes to staff recommendation was none. Outstanding issues for City Council was none. But I just also wanted to point out as a note that directly to the south of this there was a project approved for Centrepoint Apartments and the -- I also wanted to point out another item. The overall site plan on the east side is a little bit different than what's in the site plan for Dutch Bros by itself. There is a patio and that directly connects to the ten foot pathway and there is also a ten foot connection to the north sidewalk as well. And that concludes my presentation and I stand for any questions you may have. Simison: Thank you, Stacy. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record, please. Wecker: My name is Nick Wecker and I'm with Barghausen Consulting Engineers. My address is 5951 West Riva Capri Street in Meridian and I'm a senior planner with Barghausen and I'm here representing Dutch Bros. We are the civil engineering consultant for Dutch Bros and I'm working on this entitlement application. We have a -- it looks like I have control here. We have a presentation packet I can share. Okay. Yeah. So, the -- this first exhibit shows the -- the concept plan. It doesn't have the details for the -- for the patio space as mentioned in -- in the staff report, but gives an overview of -- of the modification that we are proposing here to have the Dutch Bros at the southeast corner of the site and also there would be a standalone 4,700 square foot multi-tenant building adjacent to it as well and that is a change from the original development agreement that had both pads shown for retail pad one and pad two. So, pad two would become the Dutch Bros drive through. Pad one would remain multi- tenant retail on a smaller scale at approximately 4,700 square feet. The modification as proposed in front of Council last year had three drive-throughs proposed on the site. We have removed a drive through and now there is only two, the existing Jamba Juice, which is near pad four and, then, pad two, like I said, would become Dutch Bros. This shows the adjacent apartment complex that was referenced in the staff report as -- is a recent CUP approved project and here is our more detailed site plan that shows the vehicle stacking. We have stacking provided -- over 500 feet of stacking that can accommodate up to 26 vehicles in the queue at one time. We have the patio space that will have tables and benches. The opposite side of the drive through window itself will have a walk-up window that is covered by about 300 square foot canopy. It provides weather protection. The walk-up window will be connected to the existing sidewalk infrastructure along Ustick Road and will be connected near the corner as well for Eagle Road as well. It allows pedestrians to reach the walk-up window without crossing drive- through lanes. For comparison purposes, we put together an exhibit kind of -- so that Council can see visually the scope of -- of our drive-through lane compared to a lot of Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 8 of 86 the existing Dutch Bros locations in the City of Meridian. The old concept for Dutch Bros had one drive through window on each side, so there would be two separate drive- through lanes and as you can see from these exhibits, the locations on Overland, Fairview and Linder have under 225 linear feet of -- of queuing total in comparison to our site that will have over 500 feet of -- of queuing space. This exhibit here breaks down table of -- of the differences. The next closest existing Dutch Bros, aside from the new one on Chinden -- the older model provides only vehicle stacking for 11. The proposed site will accommodate up to 26 vehicles in the queue without any -- any spillover. The other unique aspect of this new model for Dutch Bros as well is the bypass lane is incorporated. The existing older locations within the city do not have bypass lanes and so all vehicles must reach the window to receive an order at the existing locations. This new location will have a bypass lane that allows vehicles to receive their coffee drink order and exit via the bypass lane without getting to the window necessarily and what that allows us to do is be able to get more vehicles in and out of the drive through and minimize the potential for any spillover outside the -- the drive-through lanes. And, of course, there will still be runners -- employees outside the Dutch Bros buildings, part of their operation that takes orders while the vehicle is in line, similar to like the new location if you have been near Costco at Ten Mile and Chinden, it will be a similar operation with -- with the runner system. And, yeah, I thank you for your consideration tonight and I'm happy to answer any questions anyone has. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: A couple comments and maybe a question. Mr. Wecker, thank you. Appreciate the new design and your ability to accommodate more vehicles. Your location off of Milwaukee is kind of fascinating. A couple of the locations are kind of fascinating in terms of what you have to do when you don't have enough queue for people. Wecker: Right. Strader: Is this the design going forward for all your locations? Wecker: Yes, it is. And it's been really successful so far at the -- the new Chinden location in the -- in the Costco shopping center area and it's really -- it's a similar model. I think this one interacts with the -- with the right of way a little bit better for pedestrian walk up, but in terms of queuing capacity, it's right up there with that one and it's more -- more than two times -- more than double any other location in -- in Meridian. Strader: Thank you. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 9 of 86 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I have some specific questions about the -- the Dutch Bros project and then -- and, then, some general questions about the site plan. Wecker: Sure. Perreault: Can you bring up the slide, actually, where you are showing the site plan for that -- the entire area -- not necessarily with the apartments, but -- Wecker: Yeah. This one here? Perreault: Yeah. Can you bring up the one that's now currently proposed? Wecker: Yeah. Be this one here. Perreault: There we go. Thank you so much. So, is there going to be a pedestrian connection between the parking lot on the east to the sidewalk there on Eagle Road? On the east side. Wecker: In this pad here? Perreault: The east side of the development. Wecker: Oh. Perreault: Yeah. Is there going to be a walkway on that east side at all? Wecker: It shows a little bit better on -- on the detailed site plan here and our portion of our -- our patio space here is what's connected to that east side and so via the patio space it's -- it's connected. It's an actual delineated pathway on the north side to -- to Ustick. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, if you are in the parking lot how do you walk to that? How do you get access to that without going through the -- the driving area to get to the sidewalk? Wecker: Good point. Yeah. So, there is 14 parking spaces. If you were to park in one of these spaces and go to the walk-up window, you would cross this striped pathway here to the patio space and go around to -- to the walk-up window. Perreault: Okay. Mr. Mayor, I just have one more question. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 10 of 86 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, with the building that's -- Building A that's a 4,700 square foot building that hasn't yet been developed, it sounds like that could be a multi-tenant building and you could potentially have even like four, possibly five tenants in there. Wecker: Yes. Perreault: And depending on what goes in there will depend on the parking ratio. So, if you have a restaurant in there you would have a higher parking requirement than a non- restaurant use. So, if I'm -- most of your parking is going to come from that building and not from Dutch Bros. Is that accurate? Wecker: That's correct. Dutch Bros mainly is a drive-through oriented use. Perreault: So, if I was parking on the east side of that parking lot and I needed to walk over to that building on the west side, what's going to be the safest way for me to get there without getting -- I mean that drive aisle there is going to be -- if -- if you have -- if the entrance to the Dutch Bros drive through was on the east side, right, they are going to enter on the east and exit on the west -- is that correct? Wecker: Yeah. So, they will -- they will enter here and -- and exit right here. Perreault: Opposite. Wecker: Yeah. What's that? Perreault: Sorry. Can you run that by me again? I was of the understanding that they are going to enter on the east side and exit on the west side. Wecker: No. They are -- they are entering on the west side right here where my cursor is -- Perreault: Okay. Wecker: -- and, then, the drive-through window is right here and so they will actually exit right here where my -- my cursor is. Perreault: So, then, you are going to have a lot of -- of individuals driving through that drive aisle -- yes. That whole drive aisle. Wecker: Yes. Perreault: So, if someone was parking on the south side of this section, how would they safely get to Building A? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 11 of 86 Wecker: It's still -- there is still part primary parking in front of Building A. I understand -- so like vehicles may -- that are entering the Dutch Bros drive-through will utilize this aisle as well, but they will have to watch for vehicle traffic before crossing like they would, you know, any typical shopping center. But there is adequate parking provided in front of Pad A where that someone wouldn't necessarily have to park over here and go all the way to Building A, because we have actually exceeded the parking requirements based on 4,700 square feet of retail and so if there is multi-tenants within there it would still be the same parking requirement, because the building is only 4,700 square feet. If we had to modify that, then, we would have to do another development modification to increase that area. So, the parking requirements remain the same. But there is adequate parking in front of Pad A to serve that -- serve that building. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, parking ratios change if it is a restaurant use versus not. It's one -- one space per 250 square feet versus one space for 500 square feet. So, if you are going to put any kind of restaurant use in Building A your ratio will change. Wecker: Yeah. But we will still be subject to the parking that is provided. So, if we were to add a use that would demand more parking than this center could provide, it wouldn't be allowed by the Planning Department to have that type of use in this building, because we are subject to only having this number of stalls. So, we would have to do some kind of -- like if this wasn't developed -- for whatever reason we had to do another development modification to show that parking would be adequate for -- like if it's a restaurant or a more heavy generated use, would -- would be in Pad A, then, we would have to modify the development agreement again. But based on our -- our contemplation for retail, it is -- it is adequate to serve Pad A. But we are subject to only this number -- you know, fixed number of parking spaces and, therefore, the Planning Department wouldn't allow like a use permit for a use that requires more parking than is -- is provided. Perreault: I apologize, Mr. Mayor, I have -- Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: -- additional questions. So -- so, maybe I'm not clearly explaining my concern. If you don't anticipate needing these many -- this many parking spaces on the south side of this -- this section, why are they there? I guess I'm not -- my concern is pedestrian safety walking through. If you are -- if you are accessing Building A and you park on the east side of this development -- and apparently we need this many parking spaces, because that's what's being proposed, how is that person going to safely go across that parking lot to access Building A? There is no sidewalk whatsoever. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 12 of 86 Wecker: But it's also serving all of these paths together. So, somebody parking here may be going to Building B. Primary parking for Building A is still going to be on -- on the west side and it's really no different than like the Costco shopping center where there wouldn't be a dedicated walkway along this -- along this parking row to get somebody from A to B. So, we provided the -- the number of, you know, crossings per code, but there isn't a requirement per code that I'm aware of that would have us provide a -- a crossing all the way from -- from one side of the center to the other. But we still believe that there is still adequate parking -- primary parking to park in front of Pad A -- that somebody going to Pad A is likely not going to park over here and, then, walk all the way across. There is nothing stopping them, obviously, and there is no dedicated walkway, but it's not contemplated or required per code to provide that. So, they would be walking across along this aisle. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I -- I'm aware that there is not a code requirement. I think you have to have a certain number of stalls or a certain amount of space required. I'm asking -- not asking whether it's a code requirement, I'm assuming that you are going to anticipate having -- that -- that if this was fully parked -- I mean that the spaces are there. So, the parking spaces are intended to be used; correct? Wecker: Correct. Perreault: Okay. So, if -- if all of the spaces -- unless you are planning on limiting parking for the multi-tenant building to the south, that they can't park in the parking spots for Building A -- unless you are going to -- to have the parking lot set up that way, you have no control where people park for each individual building. Wecker: No. Perreault: You have to make it safe for people to cross across this entire parking lot to go to any one of these four buildings and in this situation I don't see that safe passageway. So, I'm not asking if it's code, I'm asking how does somebody safely get there. Wecker: They will look -- Perreault: So, my proposal is -- Wecker: -- both ways and when they are crossing the aisle to get to the building. It's -- it's no different than -- than a shopping center, like a Costco, where you are walking to the entrance -- where you are parked a lot further away. I understand the -- the concern, but we -- we haven't contemplated a -- a walkway from -- from far end to far end to Pad A. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 13 of 86 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: In order for me to be comfortable with a yes vote on this I would like to see some more safe pedestrian passage through here. Wecker: Okay. And if that's a condition then -- then we can work through it. I'm just saying at this point we haven't. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Mr. Wecker, I think I see where Council Member Perreault is coming from. I guess my question is somewhat similar, but it's just maybe walking us through -- your organization did a great job of doing their due diligence about providing ample space to stack cars and certainly when -- when Dutch Bros first came to Meridian we weren't aware how popular these locations are and so I -- I commend you for doing your due diligence about getting cars in. I think that part of my concern I think -- I think where Council Member Perreault is coming from is just the safety as cars are -- are leaving and so some of this may already be decided, I'm trying to figure out as cars leave where they should go and where they would go and I -- I would assume that the intention is that they -- they exit and maybe they follow maybe right where your cursor is and they exit out. That brings one, two -- I think three conflict points as they are exiting. Maybe the idea is they go up a little bit higher kind of by -- I guess where number 16 is and exit out. And I apologize I'm -- I'm kind of rambling a little bit. I'm trying to more think out loud as I'm talking to you, but those -- those two islands by the number 16 seem to have made a little more sense with the previous site plan, but to me don't necessarily make as much sense with this current layout. Did -- did your organization -- I mean wrestle with any of this? I mean help me understand why this is the best configuration to move, you know, what's going to be a lot of cars kind of the longest distance for this particular parcel to get back out onto Ustick Road. Wecker: It provides -- it provides some flexibility. I think what we had previously showed in our initial submittal that didn't make it to Council was -- was parking all the way across, but staff had -- had commented that they would like to see less parking provided on this site and so we had turned it into a drive aisle here in this middle part. But I would -- I would -- for the majority of people leaving Dutch Bros I would assume that they were going to leave as my cursor -- following my cursor here, because that would be the most direct way out, whereas people entering likely are going to go this way into the drive through. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, maybe a follow-up. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 14 of 86 Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Sorry. Councilman Cavener. Sorry. Cavener: That's okay. Great compliment. Thank you, sir. That drive aisle by the number 16, why not relocate it to where the entrance is to the stacking lanes? That seems to benefit the -- the Dalton Royal. Clearly if I'm exiting the Jamba Juice I don't need to access that drive aisle to go anywhere, unless I'm going to Dutch Bros. But that drive aisle, kind of where the -- the property lines meet, seemed to be a -- a more efficient way to move vehicles and ensure less conflict points as people are exiting. Wecker: Yeah. Just for clarification are you talking roughly here? Cavener: Yeah. Wecker: Yeah. And I think the issue with that was -- was Building E and tenants not wanting to have that in that location, because, then, there would potentially be vehicles in front of their -- their ADA stalls and their primary parking in front of their building and so that was a note of concern from them. So, that's why it doesn't follow that general flow to not encourage vehicles to go this way. Cavener: Yeah. Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Yeah. Mr. Wecker, just -- just -- I think some -- some feedback. I appreciate where the -- the applicant or the owner of Building E is -- is coming from their business. I -- I tend to -- I guess for me place traffic efficiency and, therefore, traffic safety above maybe their proposed needs. I -- I'm not quite sold that this is -- that is the right drive aisle location for this particular project. Just for consideration, the thing that -- another consideration with that, too, as well, is if you are starting the queuing here and let's say in the event that Dutch Bros was -- was busier than -- than this queuing can handle, then, you actually have a longer queue not having people stack up here, which could also impact our driveway onto the right of way. Whereas, one, this is a longer queue and -- or, two, we can have operations have vehicles go around this way and be able to stack this way into the wash -- or into the -- into the entrance to the drive through and so I think that's another consideration as well, rather than having the entrance delineated here. Cavener: Yeah. And -- and, Mr. Mayor, if I may, just some feedback. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I hope that doesn't happen. I think -- I would hope that your due diligence to having this extended drive aisle solves that. But to your point, particularly probably opening weekend there is going to be a -- a line all the way down Ustick for people to get in, but I would much rather have cars stack up on a drive aisle than stack up in front of a business or in front of these parking spots. And, again, I think you have -- I think Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 15 of 86 you have cracked the nut on entering this facility. I just -- I don't think that you have been as successful in addressing how vehicles are going to exit. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Wecker, could you -- let's talk about the exit there between Jamba Juice and the American Family Care Center. If you can show a bigger picture -- if they -- instead of going back to Bourbon to go out to Ustick they want to go farther south as that develops, so they can get onto Eagle Road -- yeah. Coming out -- nope. They are going to come right between the Royal Dalton and the American Family care -- whatever that is. The care center. Wecker: Yeah. Hoaglun: Yep. So, there is that parking lot between the two buildings and it looks like they can exit -- that is going to be planned to be going -- continuing south right there. Now, if you head down -- yep. There we go. Now, what will that go to in -- in the future? Wecker: I think -- yeah. Previously. But with the apartment CUP that is no longer contemplated for cross-access and so you can see a little bit of landscape strip on that -- on that previous version that -- that would not have, you know, cross-access between both developments. Hoaglun: Okay. So, the only way then, Mr. Wecker and Mr. Mayor, is to go back out to Bourbon and, then, head south and, then, come -- Wecker: Correct. Hoaglun: -- around if you want to exit to Eagle Road -- Wecker: Yes. Hoaglun: -- and head south. Okay. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Cavener: Not right now. Wecker: I would like to address the -- your consideration for the -- as we have been talking more I have been thinking more about somebody parking here. We could make consideration for, you know, having some kind of walkway along here, so that it directly connects both Pad A and Pad B. So, it does look like, you know, some kind of Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 16 of 86 connection there is feasible as a condition of approval to be able to incorporate -- incorporate that. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: If this wasn't going to be such a heavy use drive through it wouldn't -- it wouldn't be as big of a concern. So, you -- you are saying it's not in code and you are kind of comparing it to other -- other areas of the city, but this is going to be your flagship location and it's going to have very heavy drive-through use, which means there is going to be more vehicles moving, but not in stalls in this parking lot than there might be another parking -- in other parking lots. That's my concern about pedestrian safety. If it were me I probably would -- up to the north is good or potentially some kind of walkway in between where your cursor is on that dotted line -- a walkway in between like a lot of the grocery stores do -- in between that set of -- but, you know, my main concern is individuals walking past where cars are turning left to go into the -- into the drive through. Wecker: Sure. We can -- we can definitely look at -- look at that, too, either -- in either situation on the north or in between the stalls. I think -- you know, another consideration, too, as well -- most vehicles exiting are going to go around this way. So, if someone's parked here, this drive aisle here is not going to be nearly -- as nearly congested as -- as -- as here where vehicles are -- are likely exiting. So, if someone was parked in these stalls here, this drive aisle is not going to be the most, you know, congested aisle operationally. If you are following me with that. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. I am following you. But at some point they will need to cross over where vehicles are stacked up, which is where the vehicles are turning left into the drive aisle they are going to have to walk through that area to get to Building A. Wecker: Sure. I understand. So, we can look either on the north side or -- or splitting for -- for additional pedestrian crossings. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did and I'm not sure it's on the correct list. Tony Brownlee. Were you here for this? Okay. Thank you. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody that would like to provide testimony on this item, either in person or online you can use the raise your hand feature. We do have someone on line -- you can sit down. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 17 of 86 Wecker: All right. Thank you. Simison: Yep. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, Lincoln is available to talk. Simison: You're not on video, but if you can state your name and address for the record. Hagood: Sure. Lincoln Hagood. 5700 East Franklin Road, Nampa, Idaho. 83687. I'm the commercial real estate agent that's representing Dutch Bros. I just -- keep it simple. You know, I -- well, I hear all the traffic concerns and that. I -- I just from a business perspective I just would like to share that the operators of this Dutch Bros are very invested in the community and have gone to great lengths to invest in the kids of our community and I just wanted to share that there have been a lot of really positive experiences from many organizations from their interactions with this organization. So, I just wanted to share that. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thanks. Lincoln, you -- you saw fit to share that, so I guess now -- now I'm -- I'm kind of perplexed. Is that your insinuation that because the owners of this property do a lot for our community that we should not -- we should ignore the -- the traffic concerns? I don't think that's what you are intending, but that's how it came across. I guess I wanted to give you an opportunity to clarify. Haygood: No. No. I apologize if that was the insinuation. And to be clear, the -- the Dutch Bros is a tenant on this building. They are -- they are not the property owner. No, I -- I'm just indicating that they -- they do a lot of investment into the kids of the community. That's all. Simison: Council, any additional questions for this individual? Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this item? Then I would invite the applicant back up to close. Wecker: Yes. I want to thank you for your time and consideration and this is a location that Dutch Bros is really excited about and looking to add one of their -- one of their new prototypes again to the City of Meridian and I just thank you for your time. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 18 of 86 Strader: Don't go too far. I -- I guess a question I would have -- if you could come back up, Mr. Wecker. Sorry. We are done with the question part usually, but, you know, given the feedback you have heard -- and there is a little bit of a concern, but I think there was a really constructive suggestion which was, you know, a lot of our grocery stores, like WinCo, have kind of a small pathway in between parking stalls for people to traverse the parking lot, but it sounds like you have an idea to the north that could work as well. You know, in light of the feedback from a couple of council members, you know, would you like a continuance to sort of tweak your plan and, then, come back, as opposed to having us render a decision tonight or -- just wanted to get some feedback before we close the whole public hearing and -- Wecker: Yeah. I think that -- this is a concept plan that we are -- we are trying to get approved for a modification to a development agreement where there is definitely something that could be conditioned that we work with staff to accomplish either in between this double row of parking or on the north side to be able to -- to adequately address getting customers, if they are parked over here, across the development to -- to proposed Pad A, while minimizing conflict and isolating them from -- from our vehicle traffic. So, I would propose more that it be a condition, since this is a -- a concept plan. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just -- people who know me really well know I'm a control freak, so I usually like to have more certainty around what's going to happen. But, yeah, that's good feedback. We could ask -- we could -- we could debate about that I guess. I think somebody else was trying to talk as well. But, you know, if this is something we want to see, I feel like this is the decision point where we can sort of compel that condition, but I don't know how it would come back before us; right? Like if -- if you decide it's not feasible for some reason to do either of those things, you know, I'm not sure how that -- how that would come back. Mr. Mayor, I'm kind of looking at Legal. I mean it -- you know, if we put in a condition that we would like to see some sort of improvement in the pedestrian connectivity, how would this come back before us if we approve it tonight? Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Strader, so if that's a condition that's part of the CUP, if they can't meet that condition, then, the CUP can't be issued. So, they would have to, then, come back and say we have tried, here is why it won't work, here is the -- here is the engineering, here is the traffic study or whatever that would be to say why it doesn't make sense to put something here when there is this or whatever. But, yeah, you would have to see it again, because staff couldn't approve it. They couldn't issue the CUP and the CZC to get -- to get a building permit without it. So, I think you can condition that there needs to be pedestrian access that goes from the east end of the Dutch Bros property area where the parking is -- that has to have a pedestrian access pathway of some type from that end to connect to D -- or, yeah, to Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 19 of 86 the other building. The only thing -- I mean there is no way to avoid it crossing the drive through. But that's -- you know, again, it could be marked, it could be signed. I mean it certainly -- we -- we have them. So, it's not like this isn't done. Strader: Thanks, Bill. Simison: And maybe I will -- I don't want to -- I'm going to throw a -- I don't know what it is. But the -- but to -- if the building was flopped and you had all these seating on the interior, so you had the drive lane going on the outside with the building on the inside, that would seem to comment -- at least address some of the issues that we are hearing about crossing, because you can -- you could design this so you did not have to cross traffic to get to the building, just access from the parking lot and you -- you have space. Food for thought. I don't know if there is something in our code that would prevent the stacking lanes to be on the roadside of the facility and, then, I don't disagree it's a drive aisle to nowhere, unless it needs to be there for access to the trash chutes for some reason. There really is wasted space in this, in my opinion. Whether it was more parking or something else that it could be better with that middle section, but -- Wecker: You are speaking of wasted space. Simison: Yes. That -- yeah. I don't -- I don't know who is going to use that for what purpose and if say the Dalton Royale was more popular I would hate to have like space that just sits there empty, because no one is going to drive through there to access anything and where -- where does it go with the four in all reality. But that's -- I just think more parking can't hurt in my opinion, so -- Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: I got three Mr. Mayors. Let's go to Councilman Overton, who hasn't spoken. Overton: If my voice holds out. First off to the applicant. I'm a very big fan of Dutch Bros, but to -- to go a little further on what Councilman Hoaglun said, when I first looked at this plan -- I mean amongst all the other concerns that have been brought up on safety, I assumed that we had a one way in and another outlet to the south. So, now if I'm understanding what I'm looking at is amongst all the traffic that we could end up with and stacking issues that could go back to the main road, even to Ustick, there is only one way out -- one way -- one way out, one way in. Is that correct? Wecker: Correct. So, this would be the -- the entrance and -- and the exit. Overton: Yeah. I don't know that I'm -- I think with that much traffic lining up for a very very popular coffee shop, I'm not sure that I'm a big fan of having the proposed only way in could end up being blocked in case something happens at any one of the other buildings. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 20 of 86 Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Wecker, I -- I'm pretty sure Dutch Bros wants this site because you are at the corner of Ustick and Eagle Road at a very busy intersection and it's a lot of eyeballs that are seeing that brand, which -- which is a good thing. I get that. But as the Mayor talked about that island to nowhere, the drive aisle with the two islands on either side, have you guys looked at making that -- you still come in from Bourbon, take a left, enter in the queuing for the building and you flip out Building A to where the Dutch Bros is now, flip the Dutch Bros over there, they wrap around, come out where you got I think the dumpsters down there in the corner -- pop out there and, then, they got a quick right and right to -- to get out. That eliminates the conflict I think Council sees with Building A and having to cross all that traffic. So, now it's in the far corner away from that island and the drive aisle where people are coming in and, then, you mitigate the traffic leaving to -- to flip to -- to come out from that -- that area. However, I understand, you know, Dutch Bros, you know, wanting that premium space right at the corner, as opposed to down there, because it's -- it's -- it's less seen. But to me that takes care of the conflict of pedestrians down in that northwest corner having to cross that traffic. You put everything -- you put that retail up here and it's beyond that island and there is less -- less conflict. You still have a line of cars coming in to turn left, but you got a line of cars coming out now and it just kind of flips -- flips the concept of the in and out on that, but reducing that to always conflict for Building A. So, something -- something to think about. I don't know if that solves it, but -- Wecker: Yes, that would require -- if I'm following it correctly, that would follow -- that would require the drive through lanes to be between the building and Ustick; correct? To be on the -- Hoaglun: For the driver's side, yeah, it -- Wecker: Yeah. Hoaglun: -- would come out on that other side. Wecker: Have to defer to Planning if there was an issue with having drive through lanes between the building and the street, but I think that's kind of what initially set the building location was having -- was that issue where we couldn't have drive through lanes or parking between the building and the street and so, therefore, it set this as the -- the building location to -- to frame that intersection and that edge. Otherwise, the cars would be picking up on the wrong -- wrong side. Hoaglun: Yeah. I wonder if it -- Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 21 of 86 Hoaglun: It's a setback issue or if it truly is -- because I know there is other locations. I'm thinking of your one on -- on Linder I know you have a drive aisle that you see from the street. You got the landscape, sidewalk, drive aisle, building and, then, your other one -- other lane comes on the other side, so -- Wecker: Yeah. It's a different zone. It's a -- you are talking about the one on Linder; right? That -- Hoaglun: Yeah. Wecker: And that one's been there for a while. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman. Perreault: Have you had any conversations with the owners of the building for the care center to the south that they would, then, have multiple vehicles passing by the front of their facility as they are exiting that will potentially cause issues for their customers to back out of those parking spots? Wecker: Yeah. And maybe the -- Leo, do you want to speak to that, conversations with other tenants for approval of the -- Perreault: I was under the assumption that -- that the northern drive aisle would be what all the vehicles would be using and it would be two lane and that they wouldn't be coming in using this southern drive aisle, because that would be really for the benefit of the southern tenants. Simison: If you could state your name and address for the record. Betz: Hello my name is Leo Betz with Wadsworth Development Group and my address is 1247 East Stringham Avenue, Salt Lake City, Utah. And to answer your question, the concept plan has always had two drive aisles and several drive-throughs in the front portion of the site. So, when AFC did the deal with us there was always an idea of there is going to be some traffic coming from what's approved out front. Hersh: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Stacy. Hersh: Council Members. There isn't anything in code that prevents the drive aisle for fronting Ustick. So, we have that on Costco as well. It's the same -- I believe almost the same elevations on that. We could mitigate it with landscaping. I would just need to double check this development agreement to make sure there wasn't anything about Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 22 of 86 hugging the corner -- for that building to hug that corner or, again, switching, like Mr. -- Councilman Hoaglun had suggested -- the buildings as another option. Wecker: Having multiple pre-app meetings with -- with planning staff it was understanding that the building needed to be in that -- in that location, but -- Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, I'm -- yeah. And, I'm sorry, I was on part of those pre-app meetings. I'm -- kind of took over the project for another planner that left. So, just trying to come up with ideas for you. Wecker: But, again, I am -- I am confident we can address it through pedestrian, isolated sidewalks that are -- that are raised from -- from the drive aisles that either split that double parking row, which sounds like that would be more favorable to Council or even along the -- on the north side here connecting kind of the sidewalks that you see -- my cursor is not moving. There it is. Here and here where it would just come, you know, across here. You would have a striped crossing kind of similar to what we have here. We could delineate with different paving material. We could just stripe it. We could do both. But having a walkway here that connects directly to Pad A. So, those are two options I see to be able to minimize the interaction between pedestrians and -- and vehicles within the drive aisles. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I -- I had -- had thought about the same solution as -- as Council President Hoaglun had mentioned about flipping the buildings and just was under the assumption that that wasn't what your -- what Dutch Bros was wanting to -- going to be willing to do because of the visibility. So, the second thought was to create the pedestrian safety. If you run it along the north side there, just a lot of concerns about crossing across that -- you know, across those stacking lanes, but at least the vehicles will be going slowly and that might be a safer spot. I would rather have it be on the south side of where that purple dotted line is, but, then, the issue, of course, becomes when they go to head north on the very west side they are still going to have to go across the drive aisle again. So, if you go over -- yeah. When you are over there I don't know where there would be a safe place to cross, because that is going to -- you know, that section -- and I feel for whatever tenant you have in there, because if you are going to have vehicles turning into that area of the driveway constantly to get into the drive through, there is just going to be struggles with parking, people pulling in and out there for whoever that tenant is going to be and, then, if you are bringing pedestrians through there, then, you have another conflict. So, I will let you redesign that and figure out the safest way. But I -- I think there is just going to be a whole possible slough of challenges in that -- in that whole section. Wecker: I understand that concern. I think we could have a crossing here as well, because we wouldn't have it, you know, here anymore, because we wouldn't have the Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 23 of 86 walkway here. That would be the other option. So, we could connect potentially here to the -- to the walkway running between both bays. So, there is a potential solution there, too. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: There he is. Councilman Borton. Borton: Just taking it all in. The -- the comment about the -- the little drive aisle in the center of this entire parking lot that you would -- if you could put your pointer on that -- that kind of -- or not the drive aisle. Excuse me. The little center -- two islands where you could drive in between them. Right there. Bingo. Why wouldn't that feature move to the west and be the feature that channels traffic into the two drive aisles in the Dutch Bros? Wecker: Yeah. And the concern with that was -- was vehicles starting their queue here in front of this multi-tenant Building E that already has tenants and has been approved and that was a noted concern from them as well. Also operationally it starts the queue closer to the driveway than -- than Dutch Bros would ordinarily like and so having it not be such a direct way into the entrance from here was -- was, you know, favorable to Dutch Bros and -- and these multi-tenants down here for -- for Building E. So, that's my understanding is to why it wasn't, you know, shifted over into this area. Borton: So Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Just based on that, you -- you got 500 feet of queuing. If you are -- you are -- you are going to have both of those drive aisles full rarely, if ever I would think, based on the statistics of how your others are designed. That's what I would have assumed the reason for this design. So, that kind of surprises me that -- and if -- and if the drive aisle encourages queuing back into -- or whatever we are calling that -- that small feature, if it moves left and, then, queuing goes into it, if queuing -- if there is that many cars that are going to queue backwards, they are going to be there one way or the other and it just seemed like a -- even if it's rare say for feature than having them snake around parked cars -- I'm just surprised to hear you say that you anticipate 500 feet of occupied queuing in a Dutch Bros, but I have been to -- been to everyone you pointed out and I have seen five, six, seven, which is a lot. Wecker: Yeah. There has been so much sensitivity with Dutch Bros around how they handle their queues that we tend to be really conservative now with our designs. But, for instance, the -- the -- the Dutch Bros in the Costco shopping center has been open for a little while. Hasn't really had -- they have around 500 feet of queuing as well. They haven't really had this same spillover incidents as like the Linder location, obviously, because just the queuing -- the difference in the queuing capacity. But it's been such a sensitive topic with the City of Meridian and other communities as well Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 24 of 86 because of how popular Dutch Bros is that we -- we tend to be conservative to -- to make sure that we are maximizing our queuing potential and minimizing the potential for -- for queuing onto public right of ways. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: So, my thoughts on this -- you know, it's -- it's entitled, it's got a DA, it allows for a second drive through on this project and the CUP tries to address how in the world can you get any type of drive through establishment here that -- that checks all the boxes? This is probably as close as you can get. We could add conditions to the CUP tonight that talk about pedestrian connectivity and -- and some of the additional features we want to acquire if something like this got approved, but if -- if Council isn't looking to see a drive through on this portion -- the northeast portion of this project, if this one doesn't do it I don't think anything will do, quite frankly, and -- and we should give direction that says a second drive through, if it's going to exist, has to be on the west side, somehow, someway and it can never be over in this northeast corner. You can't get anymore queuing than this. I mean I think you have done a really good job trying to make this drive through right, attractive, and facilitate as much traffic as possible. There is no more space and if this doesn't do it, you -- I don't see how you -- anybody ever has a drive through on this portion. The only way would be on that northwest side. That's my take on it. So, I thought -- I thought you had done a really good job with -- some conditions could be added certainly to -- to enhance some of the pedestrian safety and connectivity, but beyond that -- Wecker: Appreciate it. Thank you. And -- and we do feel that northeast side is -- is really actually more accommodating of a drive through, just because of the distance to -- to the right of way, where if you put -- even if it's not a -- a Dutch Bros, you put any drive through at the northwest corner, it's -- it's also close to -- to Bourbon Street and -- and to Ustick as well. So, that was a consideration of the -- of the owner I know as well. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I know you're an engineer, so I don't know if you know about the operational hours, but do you know -- it would seem to me that the peak would be mornings for this sort of thing. Do you know the peak hours for usage for Dutch Bros? Wecker: Yeah. It's -- it's -- it is morning. It's 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. is where we see the most -- most -- have the highest volume. But also 3.00 to 5:00 p.m. kind of comes in second, but it's not quite as high as -- as the a.m. Hoaglun: So, Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 25 of 86 Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. I figured the morning would be the biggest and by 9:00 where it's dissipated a bit -- and if it's retail that are nearby, they usually typically open 10:00, maybe 9:00, but oftentimes 10:00 a.m. So, that kind of takes care of that major problem for that. Wecker: That's true at this point. Yeah. And it's -- mainly it's a pass-by type use, rather than a destination use. So, when people are on their way to work that's when they are -- they are stopping by. Hoaglun: And -- and Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: It was two weekends ago, though, we used the Linder -- not Linder. I'm sorry. The one -- new one at Costco. Saturday afternoon. And we were one of two cars for our afternoon pick me up, you know, to do our errands. So -- and the runners were right there and we were on our way real quick. So, you know, if people are doing a Saturday type of thing I think it's a little more sporadic and with the system that you employ that certainly helps cars move and not get queued up. So -- Wecker: Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate it. Yep. I was there Saturday afternoon as well. But, yeah, the runner system really helps having -- having two drive through lanes on one side. It --just things move a lot more efficiently. Hoaglun: Yeah. And one last comment, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. The one on Linder Road, being right next to Rocky Mountain High School, there is a reason why there is lots of cars there. Wecker: Yeah. Yeah. And not much distance from -- from driveways or the right of way. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, in regard to what Council Woman Strader shared, I like to have as close to what's actually going to be done as possible in concept form with our DAs, so that our public really understand what's going to happen. So, when we add a condition in, but we don't modify the concept plan to reflect that condition, a lot of times folks aren't reading through a DA contract to find one small condition, they are just looking at the concept plan, because that's what they are familiar with doing. So, my request would be if we are not -- my preference would be that we -- we continue this, have it -- have the plan modified and, then, approve it again. But if that's not what other council Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 26 of 86 members are preferring to do, my request would be at minimum that the applicant update the concept plan before it's recorded with the DA to reflect where that pedestrian activity was going, so there is a visual of it. I -- I would love to see it before we approve it. That's always my preference, as Council Woman Strader mentioned. But at minimum if we go that direction I would like to at least have it done, so that it's something that's a public record. Wecker: I agree with you in that concern for the DA. I think my potential possible solution to that would be conditioning on the CUP as well, because, then, that doesn't allow Dutch Bros to obtain a building permit until those conditions are met and so it's a lot more visible than a DA, like you mentioned. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I think I have come around on that -- that thought as well. It feels like we have plenty of teeth after Bill gave that input. I would be okay with having that as a condition. They work with staff and, then, I think it will come together. Simison: Council, what's your direction? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: If there is no other testimony, I move that we close the public hearing for H- 2022-0077. Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signified by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wecker: All right. Thank you very much. Have a good evening. Perreault: Mr. Mayor, if there is no more discussion I'm going to make a motion. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve the development agreement modification and conditional use permit request for H-2022-0077 with the following requirements: That a pedestrian safety plan be put together and reviewed by staff and that that's a condition Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 27 of 86 of both the DA mod and the conditional use permit and that there is a forthcoming -- a concept plan update to reflect that condition that will be recorded with both documents. Simison: Do I have a second? Strader: Second for discussion. Simison: I have a second for discussion. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm just wondering if Council Woman Perreault wanted to specify -- that would include working with staff on adding pedestrian access from the east end of the parking lot to connect to Building A. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Yes. That -- that is great clarification. The first agrees. Strader: Second agrees, too. Simison: First and second agree. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Discussion? Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Question. For -- for that connection where you are looking on the north side or -- we will call it the pink dotted line access. Was their preference there? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: My preference is on the dotted line and, then, heading north. However, suppose that could significantly affect the entire design and so I think I will leave that to the experts. But my preference is to have it run on that purple dotted line. To me that seems like it will keep the pedestrians out of the drive aisle the most. But, again, I don't know how much that will end up really modifying the number of parking spaces that they have included. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 28 of 86 Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: To comment. Yeah, I agree with you on that. But, yet, if you are willing to look at options, I'm -- I will be willing to look at options, too, so -- Hersh: Mr. Mayor -- Simison: Yes, Stacy. Hersh: -- and Council. I have a clarification question. So, the facts and findings come prior to a DA being recorded. Would we like them to update the concept plans with the facts and findings that come to -- over to you to sign or with the DA? Because typically we do the facts and findings with those types and the plan should match. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Sonya is shaking her head yes. Given she's been with the city many years I think the answer is probably yes. Does that mean, then, that I need to update my motion? Nary: Yes. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Would you like me to restate the whole motion or just modify it to say that the concept plan needs to be updated prior to the recording of finding -- findings and facts? Simison: That works for me if the second agrees. Strader: Yes. Second agrees. Simison: Okay. Is there further discussion? Then I will ask the Clerk to call roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 29 of 86 4. Public Hearing for U-Haul Franklin (CR-2022-0008) by Hillside Architecture, PLLC., located at 1030 W. Franklin Rd., on the north side of W. Franklin Rd. halfway between N. Linder Rd. and N. Meridian Rd. A. Request: Council Review of the Director's decision on the Administrative Application (A-2022-0232) to restrict Franklin Rd. access to emergency access only. Simison: Council Woman Strader, would you like to break now or would you like to -- okay. With that we will move on to the next item. Item 4, which is a public hearing for U-Haul Franklin, CR-2022-0008. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Hersh: So, the applicant is here to discuss the U-Haul Franklin Council review application that was submitted. The site consists of 4.044 acres of land, zoned I-L, located at 1:30 West Franklin Road. History on the project is there a certificate of zoning compliance and design review was approved for an 11 ,204 foot -- or 2,004 square foot U-Haul U-Box storage building. The Comprehensive Plan FLUM designation is commercial and a summary of the request is the applicant has submitted a request for City Council review of the director's decision to allow full -- allow full access in lieu of the emergency access only via West Franklin Avenue as shown on the site plan, which is in the center. Per UDC, where access to a local street is not available, the property owner shall be required to grant cross-access ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties unless otherwise waived by City Council. Access is available via a shared driveway along the site's western boundary from Franklin Road. Access to Northwest 10th Street, which is on the east, cannot be obtained, because there isn't adequate distance from the intersection to allow local street access due to ACHD policy and, therefore, a viable local street access is not available and there is not written testimony on this and that concludes the presentation and I stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record, please. Gulash: Absolutely. And I believe I have a presentation I think she can pull up for me in a second. My name is Brett Gulash. I'm with Hillside Architecture. We are at 345 Bobwhite Court. That is in Boise, Idaho. 83706. 1 will wait for just a second. Thank you all for being here this evening on Valentine's Day. Awesome. I will keep it pretty short. I think Stacy kind of addressed the items really quickly. There is kind of an opening statement -- opening kind of place. This is proximity. So, this is City Hall. This is the location on Franklin. I think this is really kind of the meat and potatoes of the presentation. I would say the -- you know, the -- the two items are really kind of -- you know, this is kind of reasons for appeal -- kind of health -- health and safety. Fire Marshal recommendation. You know, the site has to have two separate access points and unobstructed access is preferred, but, you know, an -- an emergency access only is acceptable as well. But I -- I do want to point that one out. The other is ACHD provided Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 30 of 86 their recommendation. You know, staff recognizes the need for additional access to the site for circulation and secondary emergency access and, then, you know -- and I think what they -- kind of I think where they have worded it really well is they didn't give a blank check to this. What they said at the end is kind of this driveway is approved as a temporary full access driveway and may be restricted in the future as traffic conditions warrant as determined by ACHD. So -- so, they have given us kind of full access, but they have also recognized that it's not a guarantee and that's something that they want to have that -- the teeth to be able to reevaluate later if there are concerns or if, you know, as the city develops and as things develop on -- on Franklin. So, kind of -- this is kind of just --just the -- the -- the kind of pieces and parts of kind of the rationale of why we did the appeal. You know, undue burden, financial hardship and kind of investment backed expectations. You know, U-Haul purchased this property and as you can see in the plan, you know, they had the expectation that there were -- there are two existing access points. One -- let me see if I can -- one kind of where the orange circle is and, then, one kind of to the right, kind of where the Building B is, kind of midway between the orange circle and 10th Street, as well as these shared access agreement. So, you know, U-Haul kind of purchased the site looking at it logistically, kind of how their circulation would move and flow and -- and they kind of had the expectation that they would abandon one entry access off Franklin, but, then keep one of those entries. So, you know, that -- that does negatively impact the property, the vitality of the site and the internal circulation, so -- oh. More. You know, again -- and just wanted to circle back on the ACHD recommendation. There was a clerical error on our part where we located the access at the -- kind of existing curb cut where one of those was. As you see in kind of that little orange arrow, which points over to the right, we have been working with ACHD to kind of fix this. We have now since located it at 370 feet from 10th Street and kind of to the west of 10th Street. That places it more or less in the center of those areas. So, if you are -- you know, 10th Street equal distant to about our access drive and, then, equal distant to the shared access on the west side. So -- oh. The requested outcome, you know, we look forward to working with the City Council and city staff to kind of remedy the situation with a solution that provides kind of a win-win for the city and the applicant. So, with that I kind of stand for questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions for the applicant? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just so I understand. So, ACHD is now on board you are saying. You have correspondence with ACHD approve -- approving the location of the direct access to Franklin 370 feet from 10th? Gulash: So, Mayor, City Council, Council Member, City -- ACHD has always been in favor of the access off of Franklin. So, that's kind of always been a guarantee. Their location was different than the existing curb cut, but they have always been in compliance -- you know, kind of in agreement and that's kind of where I quoted their Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 31 of 86 original report from that and I guess where it really comes down to is ACHD has the -- made the allowance and I think -- and staff I think can clarify -- I believe it's in the -- it's -- you know, it's part of the city -- well, I will let Stacy speak to it. Hersh: Mr. Mayor, City Council, so ACHD staff report was actually submitted with the CZC and design review of this product and not part of the City Council review. They did say that they were okay with a temporary access that may need to go away in the future, warranting what type of traffic is on Franklin Road, but they did say to get rid of the curb cut off of 10th Street and the two that were existing and to put that one in the center. But it does conflict with our UDC code to have multiple accesses off of arterial roads. That's why we suggested or -- or conditioned the CZC and design review report to only allow it for emergency access only with a gate. Fire was okay with that, although they would prefer it to be open, because it is a three story building and they want multiple accesses to be able to get in faster. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I was just trying to rectify -- or make sure I understood ACHD's approval, because in their district policy 7205.4.7, driveway spacing on principal arterials policy, because we have had this come up before and they say, no, if you have access to a collector that's what you have to use, as opposed to an arterial. So, I'm -- I'm kind of -- if you can clarify that -- that would be helpful if -- if there is a reason for that. Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Mr. -- Councilman Hoaglun, their report -- so, it did have that language on it, but they understood that they couldn't have a secondary access off of Northwest 10th Street, so it was provided in the center of -- of -- on -- off of Franklin. They were okay with that access until such time that they deemed that it's warranted to remove or not. But that language is actually in the staff report and I know it's not part of this staff report for you to read, but it is -- is part of the -- the administrative level application. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Follow up, Stacy. Then do they define what -- what that traffic level is or it's just at their discretion deeming it that needs to go away? Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, so, yes, it's deemed at their discretion if it warrants that there is so much traffic on Franklin and that business has a lot of traffic as well that they can deem it to go away. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 32 of 86 Simison: Just to follow up on that. Deemed to go away meaning restricted right-in, right-out or deemed to be emergency access? Hersh: Emergency access. I'm sorry. Emergency access only. Simison: Okay. Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Mr. Mayor. Do we -- we don't have anyone from fire here do we? Oh. Okay. Could we get a comment from Fire on what happens if ACHD does require that to be emergency access -- if Fire's preference is that that stay full access and it -- it doesn't end up being that way out of no, you know, control of the city, what does that mean for Fire? Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor and Council, so, you know, like -- like Stacy said, in -- it says in my comment it's preferred to have it open with all the projects that we have got going on that's -- that's the issue is -- is we start doing these emergency access only and what they do is it's -- it's just a time delay for us. So, we either have to stop and open the gate or take down the bollards or drop the chain or whatever and that just takes time and knowing that this is going to be storage and a three story building, unfortunately, I'm sure you have all seen the news that lithium ion batteries are causing more and more fires and so in my 20 years that I have been with Meridian Fire Department we have had more than our fair share of -- of battery fires and as these things get stored and put away, we are -- we are going to see an increase in fires and so my concern is that we have immediate access and so that's why I prefer it to stay open, because we want direct immediate access. If we have to drop chains or whatever it just takes time. Simison: Chief, just from an operational -- would you only drop chains if the other accesses were blocked or would you -- Bongiorno: Most likely, yes. Yeah. If -- if the ladder truck set up there -- sorry. Mr. Mayor and Council, yes, if the driveway is blocked with either a hose line that may be run from a hydrant out on the corner, then, we would have to drop it. If we don't have to drop it, no, we probably wouldn't. That's correct. Simison: Okay. Thank you. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: A quick question for the applicant. The 12th Street to the west of this property that has not been constructed yet, is that part of your project? Would you be constructing part of that or what's the timeline for that portion? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 33 of 86 Gulash: Mayor and City Council Member, I believe it is constructed. I think it is. So, don't quote me. Actually, I can -- let me ask the owner's rep, who is out there on a daily basis. It is constructed. So, that access is currently standing. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Gulash: Thank you for your time. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present that would like to provide testimony on this item, either in person or online? If you are online you can use the raise your hand function -- function. Seeing no one raising their hand and no one coming forward, would the applicant like to make any final comments? Gulash: You know, thank you for your time and consideration and I just want to say, you know, for the record, you know, Stacy Hersh adopted this one from a previous staff members, so -- but she's done a fantastic job and so thank you very much. Simison: Thank you. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: If we are providing comment I will be brief. I -- I thought the planning director's reasoning made sense. I thought it was for a particular purpose. So, I'm -- I'm supportive of the director's original determination and the explanation and reasoning for this request was presented to the director and -- and there is always a balance of consideration. So, stand behind the director's determination. I would say if -- if the Council were to lean a different way I think right-in, right-out access might facilitate safer circulation, prevent these left-ins if we have got U-Haul and storage and trailers, et cetera. If there was to be some access at this location it should be right-in, right-out only, prefer that even over emergency access. But that's only if there is a desire to overturn the director's determination. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. This -- this is kind of a confusing issue, just because in dealing with ACHD in the past where we are -- we are -- they have actually trained us well to move things off the arterial and -- and to the collector with less traffic if it's safer and different Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 34 of 86 things like that and yet they -- they went ahead and -- and -- and approved this. I'm -- I'm kind of like Councilman Borton there, that if we were to leave that open, which would allow Fire Department to have quicker access without having chains in there, whatnot, it would be a right-in, right-out and that the full access point would be through the collector street on 12th might be -- might be the way to go. But -- yeah, this one's kind of -- kind of kind of strange, because usually we are the ones grousing about having to move the -- the deal. So, now it's -- it's -- it's the other way around, so kind of -- kind of different. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I mean I'm kind of with you, Council President Hoaglun, on like this is sort of the opposite philosophy of what we have always heard. I think I'm inclined to grant the request if it was a right-in, right-out, understanding that this is, indeed, temporary and could go away, right, at the ACHD's full discretion at anytime. I guess -- I place my trust in them that they will close it at the appropriate time and this, you know, helps the -- the applicant in the short term. It certainly seems to help the Fire Department from their perspective. It's kind of a tricky one. Simison: Well -- and that was my question, frankly, to the applicant is like if you know this is going away and you say it won't operate -- the site can't function without it, but you know ACHD some day they are going to take it away, how -- how -- how does this -- is it only going to function for a while and, then, you will abandon the site when they abandon the right-in, right -- or did -- yeah. I mean that's -- that's what you essentially said without this access that is this project is not viable. At least the -- the second building is not viable. So if -- if and when this access ever goes away, then, what does that mean? I mean ACHD said it's going to happen. Now I think getting the city on board with the right-in, right-out, maybe we could keep it there forever within -- you know, with ACHD. I don't know. But I don't know if the applicant wants to answer that question. I just want to get clarification from your previous statements. Gulash: Yeah. Absolutely. I mean I think where I look at it is -- and -- and it's kind of a not right or wrong, I think it's a tangent I think your conversation. I think that, you know, it's -- it's traffic conditions as warranted by ACHD. I mean I think ACHD has a vision of how things develop and I think we all have a vision of how things develop, but I think how they develop is -- is totally different, you know, and how things are in our heads versus actual and I think where, you know, ACHD recognizes that this is a large property that is kind of -- you know, that has been kind of tapered and wedge shaped on that 10th Street and what that does is that doesn't allow the kind of typical access from 10th. I think if you saw this as a typical rectangle -- I think if eighth -- you know, the Eight Mile -- the Eight Mile Lateral wasn't there I think it would be real easy, like we would have access -- you know, we would come up 10th Street, you take a left in, or you would come up 12th Street and you take a right. I think because of that it is this kind of interesting -- you know, it's living in a different world because of that, that taper -- you know, 10th Street is actually going to be redeveloped. There is going to be kind of Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 35 of 86 curb -- kind of curb and gutter on that side -- sidewalk, curb and gutter up there per ACHD's requirements. So, they recognize that this is a large site and for it to function, well, it does need that -- that access. You know, when that road comes -- I mean I think that's something we will have to have a conversation with ACHD about, about the vitality of that. Will that come? I mean who knows? I mean I think it could. I think it could, you know, but it may not. I mean I think that, you know, the beautiful part or -- or kind of one thing that is nice about storage and kind of this warehouse is, you know, storage isn't a heavily trafficked place. You know, generally people bring store -- you know, they bring stuff there and they leave it there. They come -- you know, so often. I don't know the statistics of that. I think what you will see on this site -- and, you know, particularly for that Building B, it's a -- you know, it's a warehouse building that stores U-Boxes, so think you will see a large influx of vehicles and -- and trucks getting the U-Boxes there. I think once they are there they will be there for a while. So, I think, you know, you will have this kind of -- you know, when the doors first open you will see a peak of -- of traffic and I think it will drop back down to kind of maintain what's kind of the status quo for the site for the longevity. But, yeah, I mean I included that specifically because, you know, there is the risk that ACHD could come back and say, hey, you know, this isn't going to work and that's -- that's something that we will have to address when it comes, if -- if it comes and I think that's the kind of thing that I'm -- I'm not sure. So, does that kind of help answer? Simison: Not really. Because your statement specifically was without the access Building B does not -- you know, can't do what you are going to do on this site. And don't want to ask Dean to play it back, but that was pretty much verbatim what you said and so you have been put on warning from ACHD that you may lose that access. And to your point, don't know when, I just -- even if Council granted -- overrides the director's decision you still may lose that access in the future. Gulash: And I think -- I think -- I mean I -- I would put that on to kind of the ownership -- you know, U-Haul's ownership and, you know, their functions may have to shift. I mean I think -- you know, U-Hall, as you know, I think is -- is in it for the long haul. I mean I think they have been around for the long haul. I think they are, you know, constantly evolving as a company and I think they are capable of evolving as a company with something like this. I think that what it would seem to me -- and this is off the cuff, but that if the Building B -- you know, if access was lost off there and it went to a right-in, right-out, or if it was lost completely to just an emergency access, I think they may end up changing what that building functions as and that building may change and they would maybe offset or displace where those U-Boxes are stored to other facilities, you know, in the Treasure Valley. So -- but -- but that's kind of I think something that they will determine later. So, I -- I don't see -- you know, again, back to, you know, U-Haul's not going anywhere. I think their buildings show that way. I think if you look at how their buildings are built, they are built for the long haul. I mean I think a lot of times they build them so that they are going to last for 30 years fairly maintenance free and I think that that's showing, you know, that they are building to be there and they are not planning on moving, so -- so, I think they will just have to reengineer and revitalize, you know, how -- how that site can be utilized functionally for them and they will, because Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 36 of 86 it's a large site and it's -- you, know that's -- that's money that they own. That's -- that's in their own best interest. So, does that help? Simison: That's an answer. Yep. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: In that answer I heard -- and I want you to clarify that a right-in and right-out would be -- is -- is not -- doesn't sound like it was acceptable, but, yet, if we were to, for example, say, okay, we will let you have it as long as ACHD lets you have it and, then, their next step is right-in, right-out -- I mean they have invested and now it goes away to some degree, it sounded like right-in, right-out wasn't an option that they would like to have. Gulash: I mean, you know, we -- I would say a denial is the least likely -- you know, is -- well, is the last thing we want. I would say we are -- we are -- you know. And per my last kind of closing lines, you know, we want to find a win-win for the city and a win-win for ACHD. So, that is kind of -- if that answers that. You know, I think we are open to options. I mean, of course, we would always like a full access, but, you know, right-in, right-out is -- is acceptable as well. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I don't know if you or the -- or your client are this far down the road, but what's going to be the process or method for making the -- the entrance on 12th the main entrance? I mean if -- if I'm a consumer my assumption is that the main entrance is going to be on Franklin, because that's where most main entrances are is on an arterial. So, what is going to -- what is going to cause traffic to move to the actual main entrance? Is it going to be signage? Is it going to be -- like my encouragement would be to move -- to avoid the public believing that that Franklin entrance is the main entrance by some method of signage or arrows or something, so that that really -- really is used in a limited way. Perhaps the -- you know, it's limited to a certain type of vehicle, size of vehicle, or, you know, something along those lines, so that there is preparation for the possibility that it's taken away. But has that been thought through or is that too early in the process? Gulash: Mayor and City Council Member, I believe -- you know, so one of the items and -- and so there is two things of note I guess on that and, you know, the Building B, which is kind of the one on the -- kind of that closer to the little wedge shape is a warehouse building. That is a private, you know, not for public -- and kind of not for public building. The Building A is kind of where you do all your traditional kind of indoor storage, controlled storage. It's also where they have got kind of the showroom and Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 37 of 86 kind of rental facilities. The rental facilities and the storage is kind of in that -- let's say and on this plan it's kind of that southwest of that building. So, kind of where you have got that kind of node, kind of the landscaping, the accessible parking, kind of pedestrian area. So, I, think, you know -- and, then, there is some signage and there are some things along on the building that do kind of gravitate that towards being the primary. I mean I'm thinking here is kind of the building looking from -- kind of towards the north -- I guess I think that's northwest if you will. So, that is kind of -- you know, I think the building itself has been allocated to kind of indicate that that is the trademark. We can look into signage options. I'm not entirely sure where the current signage is along Franklin. That's something I could potentially ask the owner's representative if you would like. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: No question. Just a comment. I think the door was open to granting the exception, but the more I think about it, my concern is this is just a hope to get a City Council decision to ultimately influence ACHD. I think we should back the director's original decision and just stick with how we think this is going to be permanently in the long run. I -- it's not making sense to me to grant an exception that -- that isn't going to stand the test of time personally. I mean this is the opposite of what we almost always do. I -- I just -- I feel that your rationale for asking for an exception is to ultimately influence the -- the road authority frankly. Gulash: May I add a comment if that's okay? And -- and I -- I recognize that and I -- I think where really what this appeal is is it's the idea that ACHD does allow it, but the city -- city code is in -- and I guess in conflict with ACHD's kind of current ruling and the only way to kind of appease that or -- or kind of chat about that is to go to, then, appeal. So, if that's -- you know, it's the idea that, you know, they -- they do allow it, but it's the City of Meridian's current code does not allow it. I think if that's -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: No, I'm not talking about their current decision, I'm talking about the -- the future decision on whether they are going to actually close this access or not based on the level of traffic off Franklin. I -- that's my -- that's just the opinion that I have reached of the -- you know, you are -- you are kind of in a better negotiating position if you get our -- get us on board with that exception now. I think we should stick with the director's decision and -- and keep it the way it's going to ultimately be, because it's -- it's not going to make sense the level of traffic off Franklin. You are going to have a perfectly fine access otherwise. So, that's just my opinion. There is plenty of others. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 38 of 86 Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I agree with Council Woman Strader and I would stick with the director's decision that the traffic comes in and out off of 12th Street, not off the driveway on Franklin Road. Traffic's not going to get less, it's only going to get more, and, then, you are creating two options for left-hand turns. I would rather just have it be one off the roadway, instead of a driveway. I back the director's decision. Hoaglun: And Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: It -- it would allow us to comply with their district policy about -- that they have that the -- the -- the access be taken from the street with the lower current projected average daily traffic volume. So, that's kind of what we have looked at and they expect in the standard. So, I think we can -- we can hold to that standard, because that is where it's going to be from in -- in the future. That Franklin Road is -- is going to be increasing in traffic and even if we didn't have any growth in Meridian due to our surrounding areas, it will be increasing as Nampa moves east. So, just one of those things that's going to happen. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Just thinking through -- I drive this very frequently and thinking through how traffic moves in this particular section and -- and this is a lot of right turns in a very short amount of space with no right turn lanes on any -- there is no right turn lane on 10th. There is not going to be any into your development. There is not going to be any on 12th. You don't have one until you get to Linder. If there was it may be a different conversation, but you are going to have many opportunities for vehicles to be stopping in this section in the right -- right lane. Of course we have a left lane, but in a very short amount of space and that -- that just creates a lot of -- you know, traffic conflicts, which is why I'm asking about where you will be guiding people into as their main -- their main entrance. You know, I have no idea how often ACHD reevaluates their entrances. don't know if you looked into that or not. I don't know if that's even a part -- you know, for us to consider. My assumption is that our director knew that ACHD was in agreement with granting the access, unlike what they typically do and, then, his decision was still to go with what our code currently states for a reason that makes -- that makes sense. So, if that's not the case staff can share that with us, but I'm under the impression that our director was fully aware and -- and still made that decision to comply with our code. Hersh: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes, Stacy. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 39 of 86 Hersh: Council Woman Perreault, so, yes, it is part of -- so, I actually wrote the staff report for this CZC and design review and it -- the director's name is always in it and it's just stated back to code. But that is what we refer here -- or reference is our code and it does say that they can file a Council appeal if they don't agree with it. So, that would be correct. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I will make a motion, see if we have any additional discussion, but in -- in light of staff and -- and the applicant's comment and the discussion -- Simison: Close the public hearing first. Borton: Excuse me? Simison: Close the public hearing? Borton: Oh. Sorry. Yeah. I move to close the public hearing. I apologize. Cavener: Motion. Simison: Motion and second to close the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? They ayes have it. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Yeah. Mr. Mayor. So, in light of the discussion and the presentation, I move that we affirm the director's decision as part of our Council review, affirming the decision in the administrative application A-2022-0232. Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there a discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the motion is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 40 of 86 Simison: We are going to go ahead and take a break. We will try to reconvene in ten minutes at 8:00 o'clock. (Recess: 7:52 p.m. to 8:01 p.m.) 5. Public Hearing for Sagarra (H-2022-0027) by Accomplice, located at south side of W. Orchard Park Dr., west of N. Fox Run Way and east of N. Linder Rd. A. Request: Planned Unit Development for a residential community containing a mix of single-family detached, single-family attached, townhome and multifamily units with a reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A6; and two private streets. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 114 building lots and 16 common lots (including 3 private street lots) on 17.49 acres in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts. Simison: All right. Council, we will go ahead and come back. It's 8:01 and we will proceed to Item 5, which is a public hearing for Sagarra, H-2022-0027. We will open the public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Let me get the presentation up here. The next item before you tonight is a request for a preliminary plat and a planned unit development. This site consists of 17.49 acres of land. It's zoned R-8 and C-C. It's located on the south side of West Orchard Park Drive, west of North Fox Run Way and east of North Linder Road. This property was annexed in 2019 with the requirement of a development agreement, which was later modified in 2021 . Most of the property is designated on the future land use map as medium density residential, with some mixed-use community on the west end. That brown area here on the -- the left map. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 114 building lots and 16 common lots, including three private street lots on 17.49 acres of land in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts to develop in two phases. A planned unit development is proposed for a 146 unit residential community, containing a mix of single family residential detached homes. There is 32 of them. Single family residential attached homes. There is 38 of those. And 38 townhomes. And multi-family units, 38 of those, at a gross density of 8.35 units per acre, consistent with the medium density residential and mixed-use community designated areas and with the development agreement. A reduction to the setback requirements listed in UDC Table 11-2A6 is requested with the planned unit development. Access is proposed via the extension of two existing local public streets, North Arliss Avenue and West Director Street, and the existing North Bergman Avenue. One local public street access, North Arctic Fox Way, is proposed via West Orchard Park, a collector street. Private streets are planned for internal access off the public streets and will be requested with the final plat application. A revised common open space exhibit was submitted as shown that depicts a total of 3.43 acres of qualified open space, which exceeds the minimum standard by .69 of an acre. Amenities consist Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 41 of 86 of a 12 foot wide multi-use pathway along the south and east boundaries of the site, a swimming pool with changing rooms and restrooms, to a library, community workshop, dog washing stations, outdoor activity complex, fire pits, barbecue area with tables and shade structures. All units are required to provide 80 square feet of private open space. The uses within the planned development are proposed to be interconnected through a system of local and private streets and pedestrian pathways. A revised off-street parking exhibit was submitted as shown that demonstrates compliance with UDC standards and exceeds the minimum standards by 16 spaces. An additional 122 on- street parking spaces are also available. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures as shown. A mix of one, two and three story structures are proposed in a variety of construction materials and styles. Final design of the structures must adhere to the design standards in the architectural standards manual. The Commission recommended approval of this application and I will go through the summary of the Commission public hearing. Michael Slavin and Tony Tseng testified in favor. No one testified in opposition. There were several folks that commented on the application, some of which may have leaned towards the opposition side. Doug Jones, Chris Eastman, Sally Reynolds, Julie Duran, Shane Nye and Jennifer Card, Lisa Metcalf, Kelly Carpenter and Justin Carpenter. Written testimony was received from Michael and Linda Arnold, Leah Balecha, Daniel Briggs, Julie Duran, Matt Mueller, Scott Fuller and Jane and Julia Duty. Key issues of discussion were as follows: Request for denial of the project is currently submitted due to the following reasons: Project isn't consistent with the medium density residential future land use map designation and would be more appropriate in the medium high density residential designation. The proposed parking Isn't sufficient for the proposed development and will result in substantial on-street parking that will contribute to congestion and make traveling through the community difficult. The proposed contemporary modern design of the single family homes are not harmonious with the design of the existing single family homes in the adjacent Paramount Subdivision. On- street parking along Bergman should not be allowed due to the curvature of the street, which will not allow two vehicles traveling in opposite directions to easily pass one another if there are cars parked on either side of the road on the curve. And belief that too many residential units are proposed in this area, which will not complement existing neighborhood and will negatively impact the community's livability. And increased traffic, density and on-street parking on North Bergman Avenue. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were as follows: They wanted the -- the parking plan updated to ensure the project is adequate -- adequately parked per UDC standards, which the applicant has done. They wanted the open space exhibit updated to ensure the project meets the open space standards, which it does and exceeds the minimum standards as noted and code compliant fencing along the south and east boundaries of the proposed development. The Commission made the following changes to the staff recommendation. They required pedestrian lighting to be installed along the pathway along the south and east perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. They directed the applicant to coordinate with ACHD on installing no parking signs on the public streets where the S or the 90 degree curves are located on Bergman, Arctic Fox, and Arliss. And they directed the applicant to continue working with abutting neighbors on repairing the existing fence that was damaged during tiling of the North Slough. There are no Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 42 of 86 outstanding issues for Council tonight. There was some written testimony submitted since the Commission hearing from Lorraine Howe, Jennifer Card, Jennifer Lytle and Sally Reynolds. Staff will stand for any questions. The applicant is here to present tonight. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Apologies, Councilman Borton. Didn't mean to talk over you there. A couple questions. Can you walk us through the density for the R-8 zoning district? And, then, could you also clarify -- I believe there is a different application with a large apartment complex coming in the future -- what the timing and status of that is and that that is separate from this application, because I saw some public testimony that seemed a little confused about that and can you walk us through the setbacks that are allowed under code? Allen. Yes, Mr. Mayor and Council Woman Strader, Council. It's -- they are proposing an overall gross density of 8.35 units per acre, as I mentioned, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The -- I don't have the -- I have the -- excuse me -- the setbacks they are requesting right here. That does not include what the required ones are for the district. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Where is that coming from? Council Woman Strader. Strader: Apologies. And maybe the applicant could do that comparison, but I really wanted to understand, you know, under code what the setback requirements were and, then, really understand the -- the proposal. So, if -- if you can't answer that question right off the top of your head, the applicant would need to address that. Allen: Yeah. I could certainly -- certainly bring it up, but, you know, the -- the applicant is here to speak tonight, so they may answer a lot of your questions, if you guys want to maybe wait until they have spoken and, then, if there isn't -- if there are some items that they haven't addressed we can certainly address those then. Strader: Okay. I have two more, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 43 of 86 Strader: When was the revised open space exhibit posted or provided? You could come back to it. And, then, finally, the timing and status of any other applications for residential development in Orchard Park. Specifically there are several letters of testimony about a very large multi-family building. I just want to establish that that -- the -- the timing and status of that. Allen: I'm looking for that information, Council Woman Strader. Maybe the Clerk could find this quicker than I can on the open space exhibit. She's wanting to know when that was submitted. And I'm looking as well, but -- Simison: So, while they are looking at that, Councilman Borton. Borton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Sonya, this other question highlights this application is very unique in Meridian and it's a PUD, which -- which impacts a lot of the issues that Council Woman Strader is referencing and so will you -- will you give us the -- kind of the -- the one minute snapshot and there is references also -- I think Ms. Reynolds referenced it in her letter, among others, how the PUD application was considered the best fit for what the applicant was trying to do. So, a snapshot of what a PUD is designed to do in this context and why it made sense to encourage that application here. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council, and so back to Council Woman Strader's question. The revised open space exhibit was submitted on December 22nd. There is an application that's in process that is not -- I don't believe it's been -- excuse me just a second. Let me look for that. I don't believe that -- it has not been submitted yet to the city. We have met with the applicant, but it has not been submitted yet. Oh. Excuse me. It has been. The DA modification has been submitted. It has not been accepted yet or scheduled it for hearing. So, the -- Council -- Councilman Borton, -- this -- as -- as you are aware, planned development applications are for unique developments that offer a little more amenities and -- and housing types and -- and opportunities and they do allow for reductions to our -- to our minimum standards. The applicant and -- and staff felt that this fell in those categories for the request for PUD. Is there any other questions that I missed of yours, Council Woman Strader? Simison: Councilman Borton, any follow up? Borton: No. That's -- no. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I think what would be helpful -- and it's okay if it comes later in the hearing, but I think what's important is to establish because it's a PUD specifically what standards have been modified in terms of, you know, both setbacks, establishing if there has been any kind of density bonuses or anything through using the PUD process. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 44 of 86 1 just -- I -- I just want to get really clear, because I -- I think Councilman Borton's point it's I think a point of confusion and I -- I just want to be really clear on exactly what, you know, those exceptions are. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council, all of this information is contained in the staff report. It's -- it's pretty lengthy and all that information is addressed in the staff report if you have read it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Allen: The density is consistent with the densities desired in the comp plan for these designated areas, for the MUC and the medium density residential. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just to be super clear -- so, I have read the staff report, but I think it's important to outline -- and for me what I would prefer to see, I think, is like a side by side comparison of each aspect and how it's different. So, if it's here are the normal setbacks under code, because we have a PUD application, here are the setbacks, for example, I just think for ease of review, for communication with the public, I think it's important to put that in a way that's more clear. Allen: I will note it for future reference. Strader: Okay. Allen: I apologize that was not done, but there are links in the staff report right by the -- the proposed -- the proposed setbacks for reference. But, yes, nothing side by side. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the -- for staff? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you to my fellow Council for asking those questions, because I had the same -- so, just a couple of quick questions for Sonya. One, in the staff report there were numerous statements that the applicant needed to provide certain pieces of updates or information before this hearing. I think there was at least five -- four or five. Did they do that on every one of those counts? Allen- Council Woman Perreault, yes, they have. To my knowledge. I'm going to go back and just double check, but, yes, to my knowledge they did address everything that was outstanding. Perreault: Thank you. And I have one more question, Mr. Mayor. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 45 of 86 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Allen: I believe that was in the staff report as well. But, yes, I will double check here. Perreault: Going on seven years of seeing these applications, it's been a long time since I have done a PUD, so thank you for the refresh on that. I don't know that I have ever seen an application that had a density -- a gross density -- excuse me -- a net density that was almost double the gross density. So, I assume that that is because of the PUD allowances that we wouldn't otherwise see. I mean the -- I understand that the gross density is -- you know, fits fairly closely into medium density, but the net density is really high in comparison to what we typically see. So, I -- I guess I want to get understanding on why in this situation that's the case. Is it because there is more open space? Is it because we have -- you know, because we are allowing additional units in a smaller amount of space than we normally would, because the setbacks are less? All of the above? Allen: All the above. Yes. Simison: All right. Allen: Yeah. And to answer your question, Council Woman Perreault, if you look at Section 8-A in the staff report that -- that listed those outstanding items, that staff response is there they are stricken and the response is included how they comply with those recommendations. So, that has been addressed. Simison: Any further questions for staff? Then I will ask the applicant to, please, come forward. Good evening. Slavin: Good evening, Councilman -- Council. Thank you for hearing us this evening. My name is Michael Slavin. I'm with the Orchard Park development team. I primarily focus on design, as well as financial feasibility for projects. I am accompanied with a handful of associates and design professionals. If the right questions arise or specificity of questions arise that needs their help, I just want to let you know that they are at our disposal. I live in Garden City, Idaho. 424 East Thurman Mill Street. So, I would just stand for any questions you have and then -- there you go. And I guess I have a presentation first; right? And I think Sonya is bringing it up. Cool. Thank you. So, what you see here -- I think first it's fun to just introduce the project and why the name Sagarra. It's a Basque name for Apple. We did go through a rebranding effort a number of years ago -- was then called Linder Village during the development agreement and we wanted to really reshape the development in the spirit of a mixed- use atmosphere. So, you do see, of course, in buildings on the highway they are more of a classic shopping center, but as we are moving to the center, which is mainly the impetus for the development modification that we presented before Council here very soon is we want to create a walkable, mixed-use environment and be more within the spirit of the walk -- a mixed-use walkable environment. And in just a little bit what I would like to do in this presentation, because Sonya's done such a great job of Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 46 of 86 presenting the technical aspects and, of course, we are happy to answer anymore questions you have as they arise. We just want to give you insight into our design process and -- and how we arrived at the design we did. And so what we did is we took an integrated approach of -- of reviewing the development agreement, what standards have been put in place and in really respecting what comments were made through that process, both, you know, from the Council, the hearing process and planning staff and we also looked very closely at zoning and use to make sure that uses are appropriate and we -- we really looked at the Comprehensive Plan. We know that's a large concerted effort the cities go through that seek a lot of public comment and we really respect that process in any city that gives the community a voice to voice any -- any visioning or concerns they have for future use of land in their community. So, looking at the site and, of course, this is the Orchard Park development. It's around 80 acres. What we are addressing this evening is the MDR R-8 zoned area. It's -- it was a pretty interesting project to look at from simple fact that -- that, you know, part of the development agreement we required to actually construct Orchard Park Drive, which is a collector road and the impetus for that at the time was to really create a buffer for any through traffic that might be present from Rocky Mount High School coming from the south through the development and so we were happy to provide that and specifically for this conversation we want to talk about the R-8 project. That having been said is that, you know, some of the requirements within the development agreement where they -- the City Council, as well as the planning staff, wanted us to create a feathering effect. So, I will get into that here in a minute of how we go from single family homes on the periphery, which is part of the development agreement, into higher density and so reviewing the DA Comprehensive Plan signed into law in 2019 -- and we have, of course, a couple items here from the Comprehensive Plan, as well as notes from the staff and one thing we really took to heart was supporting a variety of residential categories and what we wanted to do is, of course, you know, there are a lot of beautiful homes in Meridian, but a lot of those homes are very large. There is a large consumer group that might be a downsizer young professional single that there aren't a lot of options for that category for sale homes. So, that was really important, that was really insightful to, you know, have the community asked for a variety of residential categories. And this is a continuance of the Comprehensive Plan analysis per the development agreement. And another one is this provides housing options close to employment and shopping centers and so what we really love about this project is we are creating this walkable environment and listening so much tonight about cars and human safety and we also believe that where we love the fact that people can actually get up, you know, meet friends, go to a meal and walk home without getting in a car and we think that that's really powerful. You know, I say amenity and lifestyle for humans today, a lot of people get tired of driving in this traffic and incentivizing the valley. Our ultimate goal is to keep more people out of cars more often and the third point of the Comprehensive Plan review that we thought was really interesting is -- is protect residential properties from incompatible land use development of adjacent parcels and as you saw it was presented that 32 of the single family homes on the periphery are honoring that wish and this one I don't know why the size is a little bit off. Can change it. And here is just another view from the Uniform Development Code, but somewhat redundant that the wish, of course, is to provide a variety of residential types within a development. That's Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 47 of 86 what you are seeing in our provided site plan. So, next where I jump into is just, you know, the guidelines we put together from this analysis. R-8 zoning, you know, we wanted to stay within that bound, which we have. Comprehensive Plan. Of course, we want to support a variety of residential categories, which you will see here in a minute. Housing close to employment, which we are providing with the mixed-use zone to the north and provide a buffer and transition to commercial and that's the big design challenge here is that you have single family homes, but this was stipulated in development agreement is to provide this transition and so single family homes right next to a large shopping center isn't very congruous and so that's why you will see a lot of the design that we put together was honoring that wish. And so looking here we start -- we have kind of -- I would say five taxonomies of homes, the first set being the single family homes you see delineated in blue and we have a 40 foot walkway or pathway that also serves a buffer in between us and the Paramount Subdivision to the south. These would be -- is -- is the design examples showed for the application. Hopefully you reviewed. These would be high end homes. Probably a little bit smaller in size. Just going to offer a different product, other than what's available in the current area. Second, moving to the north, creating the transition or feathering, if you want to call it that. You will start to see townhomes. A lot of these will use classic materials, brick and otherwise. These will definitely be, you know, nice, timeless structures that it also speak -- in our mind really provide a transition from the -- the classic single family homes to the south and transition to more of a commercial use to the north as per the stipulation of the development agreement. And moving further to the north you will see these -- these ribbon townhomes and these get to be a little bit more commercial in appearance. We were pretty excited about how the design is turning out. Again these will be high end finishes on the exterior and be in full compliance with the design standards in place. Next you have a series of -- of multi-family homes. These are -- what we wanted to create here is almost like a village green type atmosphere. We have a large park that these homes are surrounded by. This is really stepping into what the PUD was for is it -- you know, we -- we -- we designed -- I think we put a lot of effort in design to satisfy the requirements of a PUD and what that means is -- is what Council Person Perreault said -- or asked was what it allows us to do is provide a lot more open area than typical -- typical. So, a lot of what happens in -- in subdivisions is every home is kind of a standard lot size. There is not a lot of great common area, other than a couple common areas, and this is a more integrated setting and we found there is a consumer base that likes this style. They might lock and leave and go south for the winter. You know, they have a lot more flexible lifestyle and travel more and when they are home they like that a lot of amenities that they are not running a lawnmower or scheduling maintenance et cetera and that we just found that's a great living style for a certain amount of people in the community. And, then, the next -- we do have a couple small condo buildings on the property, again, offering more of that variety. These are one and two -- two-bedroom units. We only have a handful of them on the entire site. Of course, they are overparked on site, so we feel really comfortable with our planning here. We wanted to touch on a point -- which we are happy to get into more detail. One -- one question was brought up about zero lot lines. To be really clear on this topic is that where this was raised that we are in absolute compliance with R-8 provisions. What R-8 calls for is uniform setback separating us from other properties and where you Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 48 of 86 do see zero lot lines, which is allowed, we are only doing it in a couple spots. I mean we could go to the full extent of the code. You see these little red dots. But we didn't push the buildings all the way to the zero lot line. The reason why we did this is we wanted to create a lot of articulation. So, as you are driving up and down Orchard Park Drive you see a lot of movement in the buildings and you don't see buildings along lines. So, when you see that written it's, you know, just in isolated cases, which we put little red dots. And so, in summary, you would say we worked really hard to present what we think is a really thoughtful package to Council, as well as Planning and Zoning, that it complies with zoning, the UDC, and Comprehensive Plan. It fits better the development agreement. That was definitely a high bar to reach, especially creating that feathering aspect. Exceeds open space requirements -- thanks to the PUD -- distribute that to a certain degree to the off-street parking requirements, as well as exceeds the community amenity requirements, which we are pretty excited about. Again, it creates a really livable community for a certain amount of people that like living that way. And so with that I will open it up for any questions. Simison: Thank you. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Let me be the first to start off. Michael, I don't know if this question will be for you or for another member that you brought with you, but in reviewing all of the citizens' concerns and how they were addressed in two different P&Z meetings, I kept noticing that when you were talking about the parking and all of the parking slots that you provided in this development and -- and, Sonya, I don't know if you can pull that up. The major complaint had to do with the narrowness of Bergman Avenue and how there were quite a few parking stalls allowed on the S curves going through there and it was very very narrow and when I look at that and I realize that we are talking about a road that can connect some of our youngest and newest drivers from Rocky Mountain High School to Winco and the library and you are going to have drivers driving through -- not just in the morning, but at noon and after school, I know it was addressed by you and I heard what I thought was very good faith understanding that probably those parking spots -- all the pink parking spots on Bergman, as it goes through the curves all the way into the development, should go away. Every time I would see this slide it was never updated and they are still here and I'm having a heck of a time trying to decide how I would approve something when you say that, you know, you don't need to have those, but they are still here and can you explain to me why the -- the map hasn't been updated and those parking spots on Bergman Avenue have not been taken off of your parking map? Slavin: Councilman Overton, thank you for bringing that up. There was a lot of discussion about this in two hearings and -- and so this is where the dissonance exists in between Meridian and ACHD. ACHD controls the roadways. So, you know, you as the city don't have any say over -- unfortunately. And we as a developer don't. And it's Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 49 of 86 a separate process to go through ACHD. We actually in the discussion with Planning and Zoning were -- I think we addressed the Council and -- and it's tough to make any conditions of approval in an area that's not in -- in Meridian's purview -- a limitation of -- of our development. All that having been said, that's kind of the technical answer, but behind the scenes is -- is -- you know, we stand with the community, like we are happy to get rid of these parking spaces and go the hard yards it takes and that could take quite a bit of time. I believe that there is an instance within the Paramount Development that maybe took three years of concerted effort with the community to get rid of some parking that they didn't want with ACHD. So, we are happy to stand there in solidarity. But it's just one of those things that ACHD moves at their own pace. We all know that. That's a frustration definitely of ours and I'm sure of the planning staff as well as we are trying to get projects through. But there is -- it's absolutely out of our locus of control. Overton: Mr. Mayor, follow up. Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I understand, Michael. But do you not agree that a form of showing solidarity with the homeowners from Paramount would be to just simply eliminate those from the map, so it doesn't look like us as sitting City Council members are patently agreeing that those are good parking places, when I'm telling you right now I disagree with those. I think that's a really good turning area for even traffic calming, but a terrible location for parking. That's a -- I think they said it was a 33 feet wide section of street that you could not get two cars in between two other cars parked, but your solidarity is falling hollow with me when it's still on that map. I'm simply asking if you have the solidarity when you agree with the homeowners in Paramount that are bringing this forward, at least make the good faith effort to take it off the map, even if it takes a long time to make it official with signage. Slavin: Mr. Overton, we would love to do that. Sadly enough I don't think we have that visual exhibit. We did that analysis just to make sure, you know, how many spaces would be left if we not only removed the curves here, but we would love to remove the curves -- what is off of our list? So, this is west most corner. We feel the same problems going to exist there. That -- that road hasn't connected yet, but that's going to be the same exact condition and so we would love to go further and remove that parking as well. Again, our project from a code requirement perspective for parking off- street wouldn't be affected, we would be happy to do it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean as an -- in addition, if the Council is in agreement with that, as Council Member was saying, that can be a condition of approval as well. So, that ACHD is well aware that this Council also would not like to have those parking spaces there. So, even though they may not have the ultimate Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 50 of 86 authority to eliminate them, definitely will send the message to the highway district that the Council doesn't want to see those there, you don't want to see them there, your neighbors don't want to see them there. They may move at their own pace, but at least they are getting the same message from everyone. Slavin: Sure. I think that's a great suggestion. One -- is it okay if I ask you a question for clarification? Nary: Sure. Slavin: So, if that's a condition of approval is that a requirement we need to satisfy with ACHD before we can record a plat map or how would that work technically? Nary: Well, it's going to be part of -- it would be part of the findings. Ultimately, then, that would be part of the development agreement. So, that is a condition that's going to have to be finalized probably before final plat, so -- Slavin: Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Along those same lines, these internal streets are private; correct? Slavin: May I respond? A couple of them are, yes. So, not the -- the primary access road that moves east to west. That would be an ACHD road. But the interior circulation streets will be private, yes. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, the primary streets that have the on-street parking, all of those are going to be a width of 33 feet with parking on either side. So, essentially, they are going to be how wide for the -- the drive lanes. Is it to ACHD standard or is it going to be more narrow? Slavin: It -- it will be to ACHD standard. And, fortunately, we have had this on other sites around the valley where they see it as a form of a traffic calming and not justifying it and I think the best place to go is somewhere like the North End where it's really frustrating -- like one car can only get through at a time and it doesn't work very well and that's the standard they impose on us for this particular type of street. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 51 of 86 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I have some questions about the parking with the setbacks. We -- we regularly see issues when there is a ten foot driveway or a five foot driveway. Mostly see them in alley loads. But this is not -- you know. But this is going to create the same -- same situation we see, which is that those spaces are often used by residents to park in or they want to use them to park in, because they have storage in their garages. So, whether we like it or whether we don't, that's the reality of it. I'm curious as to how this actually meets parking standards for -- so, for the townhomes, for example, I think the three bedroom townhomes have a parking requirement of four spots. So, if -- if you have two spots inside the building and you don't have a 20 foot driveway, where are the other vehicles parking? Off street? On-street parking? Slavin: That -- that's a great question and maybe I have the luxury that the numbers are really small on this table and you will see that we have broken it down by actual townhome and how many bed counts are inside of the townhomes. So -- so, we have analyzed this very very closely and, essentially, satisfy on-site parking requirement standards for -- for both what the residence requires, as well as guest parking on -- on site or off-street, however you want to look at it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: If other Council Members have other questions -- I have a series of questions. So, if you guys are okay -- unless somebody has a quick question, I'm going to -- if it's okay with you, Mr. Mayor. Simison: I think it's -- all questions will be answered and move on, no matter how we do it. Strader: I appreciate that. Thanks for being patient. Okay. So, I have the R-8 standards in our code opened up in front of me. So, the minimum property size in square feet is 4,000 square feet. So, I -- I want to go through each one of these standards -- or if you can just tell me which standards do you deviate from? Slavin: Sure. I wouldn't have -- I don't have the code in front of me. Strader: I know. Strader: We sat down with our design professionals and we made sure that we complied with all the requirements. In summation -- excuse me. That's why we -- it wasn't the reason why we employed a PUD, but certainly we could go back and, you know, do these lots in a singular fashion. Take away a lot more open space. Reduce the parking that we are exceeding and end up with a different site plan. But in light of the fact of the development agreement and the standards that were put in place to Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 52 of 86 create a natural transition and a variety of housing types, we felt that this was the most appropriate application and so we need those standards that -- you know, the PUD addresses those standards. Strader: I'm not sure you do. That -- that -- that's what I'm confused about and so -- like what I really wanted to understand were the setbacks, because I think -- and frankly -- and the other thing I should warn you what I want to do is I want to go through all the elevations that you guys submitted. I have them on my computer -- Slavin: Uh-huh. Strader: -- some of them, if that's helpful, but, you know, I'm looking at a couple of these elevations -- one of them I think may have been in your presentation, if you can find it. It almost looks like warehouses. Do you know what I'm talking about? If you could find that slide. If you have your presentation open. Slavin: I think Sonya had the elevations. I just had the bubble diagram. Strader: Yeah. Here. So, this is where I'm really wanting to -- to get clear a couple things. So, just some feedback. I mean this is incredibly inconsistent with the Paramount neighborhood as it exists today. It's completely different. What are -- like, for example, if I'm looking at these -- if I'm -- the picture here in front of us on the left, if I'm -- if I'm looking at this picture, what is this setback -- does this meet the setback for the R-8 zone? Because it's really close. Slavin: These are conceptual renderings with -- with all due respect. So, you are not going to get down to actual dimensions. These are -- these are ideas; right. Strader: Yeah. Slavin: And that's -- that's what's required for this particular portion of the application and to the design -- I don't want to be condescending, but through the design process, you know, design review that's when we address those issues. These are -- these are purely conceptual. Strader: Yeah. So, I just want to give you some feedback. So, like an example I would point to -- you know, we recently approved a development off of Ustick and McDermott, I believe, that had some deviations from our standard dimensions and even from our setbacks and there were good reasons at that site that were geographic in nature that had to do with a lateral, with like some serious site constraints and that was kind of the bar we set for deviating from some of our standards. But I would point to like that -- that particular development is a good example of like attached townhomes in terms of style and -- and kind of how -- how things would blend with the neighborhood. You know, I'm looking at -- and I'm -- I normally don't get into design stuff. That's not something that I normally care that much about. But I'm looking at something like this -- this is totally inconsistent. I mean even the library, you know, is kind of like a modern farmhouse Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 53 of 86 vibe. But I'm -- I'm like looking at these renderings and there are even hardly any windows facing the street. I mean it's -- it's just -- it's just a totally different type of design and I'm -- I'm just trying to understand like were these design choices driven by trying to get an exception to our setbacks and that's kind of what's going on or help me understand why stylistically like this was the choice. Slavin: Yeah. That -- that's a great question and thank you for your comments. And to assure you, we won't build exactly what you see here. These are just examples of what we are looking at for design inspiration and I'm happy you are raising the points you are. Is it -- we will be building something different I assure you. I mean it will be similar in nature; right? And one of the challenges we had, again, is that, you know, in the development agreement, you know, it was somewhat of a staff comment to provide a natural transition. So, what we are working really hard to do is have these single family homes that transition into more of a commercial look and so on and so forth until we get into the mixed-use development and so we are trying to strike that balance to make everybody happy. But at the end of the day, you know, for us it's interesting to present a different product, because different humans have different tastes and we get excited to offer something different. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Time is yours. Strader: Yeah. So, I understand that, but part of our Comprehensive Plan really speaks to, you know, trying to make sure there is adequate transition, but trying to have kind of consistency with surrounding neighborhoods and I agree with the principle that you are trying to follow, which is you are starting with single family, then you are getting denser as you get closer to the commercial. That's beautiful. I don't have any issue with that. But I think where I'm -- I'm getting like a lot of heartburn personally, besides thought Councilman Overton's excellent points about safety and Bergman and all that stuff, is I'm looking at some of these elevations and -- I mean I -- I'm just -- I'm not on board with them, frankly. This wasn't the only example. I mean I went through every single one and there were just -- it -- it just was completely a departure from the existing neighborhood and it's kind of hard to hear -- trust me this isn't what we are going to do. I'm just -- I'm a little worried. I feel like there are some concerns and it's better to, you know, come back with something that's flushed out, that's going to mesh with the neighborhood, and you have worked with the neighborhood really well -- since you have had a couple meetings. I just think it's important to flush out that harm -- something more harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood. So, that's one point I would make. The townhome elevations, same issue. And, then, as well, you know, I'm concerned I'm -- I'm -- I have got -- maybe you could go back to the slide where you had the little plus signs of where you are at a net zero lot line. Yeah. Slavin: Is that -- I know it's on my presentation. I think there is one on yours is there? Yours is much bigger, but I think it might be there. But while Sonya is looking for that, we are definitely open to design and if there is a way to, you know, implement that we Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 54 of 86 are more than open. And I caveat that with we definitely want to -- we take the financial risk on building something that's sellable and so, you know, at the end of the day we would like -- we would love to strike a balance. Strader: Sure. Mr. Mayor. Yeah. I -- I think that, you know -- sure, that makes sense. I -- all I can tell you are examples of projects where I have seen townhomes and density that looked like it would be very successful with this type of a surrounding neighborhood. Like that's one example I can think of off the top of my head, but I'm not going to design it for you, you know. So -- yeah. If we could -- we are in the right presentation. I think we are getting there. Go ahead. Slavin: Thank you, Sonya, very much. My apologies. At least I think I drive -- am I able to drive on the -- there we go. Thank you so much. At least the mouse was working for a second. And -- thank you. So, let me grab that again. Bear with me for a moment, please. I will just flip -- I believe it's the last in this series. Yeah. Here we go. Strader: Yeah. Okay. So, here clearly -- this is a deviation from our setbacks; right? From our standards. Slavin: Yeah. Strader: And so explain to me why it's not. Slavin: Yeah. What -- what you will see here -- great -- great question. Is that you are -- we have a periphery buffer that's required under a PUD zoning. So, we can only be within so many feet of -- of neighboring properties and what you are seeing here -- we just wanted to point out the fact is that, you know, it's allowed to do zero lot line, but on the -- Strader: Ina PUD. Slavin: Yes. Strader: Right. That -- that's where the disconnect is -- is -- is I'm really trying to establish -- if you didn't do a PUD what would the standard be and -- and what exceptions are we making to traditional R-8 standards, because we are giving you an opportunity to use a PUD process. So, I'm going to keep asking that question. Slavin: Yeah. Strader: You and -- and Sonya, unfortunately for everyone -- but that -- that's what I need to understand, because it -- to me it feels like -- okay. I understand granting exceptions for an urban feel, but I need to understand what the exact rationale is and what those exceptions are. Like what specifically do you need an exception from traditional R-8 zoning that you couldn't do here if you didn't use a PUD? That's what I'm trying to understand. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 55 of 86 Slavin: Sure. They -- they would all be very traditional homes, which we don't feel is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan to provide -- to provide a variety of homes. And I think you made an excellent point about another project, about a challenging site, and so what happened was when the collector road was imposed upon us, which we agree with and we were happily built, was that it created a pretty awkward lot, especially when you deal with triangles. You know, it's really tough to deal with those and one option to us -- which -- which I don't think was appropriate was hardship and I think in the case you mentioned, when you have a precarious site -- it's pretty narrow on one side as you can see and, then, it has a triangle on the other side -- is that a PUD seemed like the best application. So, we looked closely at PUD requirements and satisfied those requirements. Strader: Yeah. I mean just to give you some context for the example that I gave you, in that example, after purchasing their property there was a state highway that separated their property, in addition to a lateral. So, the -- the kind of conditions I'm talking about were really dramatic. Okay. Well, maybe this is as far as we can push this, but, anyway, it's a little bit of a point of frustration for me that I can't see somewhere on one piece of paper here is what -- even, for example, the -- you know, the setbacks, the total square footage, all those things. I -- I would love it if I had every, you know, dimension of those things and why you exactly needed, because I -- I think I have seen others pretty successfully be able to work within it and we can give exceptions, but there needs to be I think more rationale. So, my comments are -- just to summarize and I think where I'm having some frustration -- for me personally I think more justification behind the PUD and why that's a justified approach. The elevations need work, in my opinion, to blend with the surrounding neighborhood and a lot more granularity I think on -- on why not traditional R-8 zoning and what -- you know. And part of it -- by the way I think when you have those elevations I think it explains itself; right? That -- that's what I saw with that other example. So, anyway, I will stop hogging the mic and pass it to others. Simison: Thank you. Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with Council Woman Strader and I see exactly where she's going with this and I think what would help with clarification is that PUD is a tool that we permit applicants to use to try to work with a site that has much more significant constraints than this. We -- we see -- we see sites that are far more constrained than this site in -- with -- with -- with geographic problems, with lack of access, with -- so -- so, I don't -- I'm not a developer, but I have been looking at these land use applications for many years now and this doesn't strike me as a -- as a -- a site that is -- that has hardship. What it -- what I see the use of the PUD is -- in this situation is that there is a desire for greater density and that's what the PUD is being used for and -- and I don't -- I don't see that hardship. So, one thing I wanted to clarify, you -- you -- you keep going back to the Comprehensive Plan. We -- I appreciate that you, as the developer, have spent time looking at the Comprehensive Plan and trying to determine what the city desires. It's always -- always tough to kind of guess what it is that we desire. But the Comprehensive Plan and the sections that you are quoting are guides. They are not -- they are not requirements. They are what our city has said we desire. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 56 of 86 But they don't have to happen -- all of them don't have to happen on one property, especially not a property this small and -- and doing that doesn't necessarily make it more desirable to us as -- as a city, although we greatly appreciate when developers spend that time to try to figure out what it is that we need as a community. You don't have to have a PUD to meet all of those desires that are in the Comprehensive Plan. That's not what we necessarily have to have happen. The PUD also allows us to have more decision making ability when it comes to the entire development. So, if this wasn't in a PUD and -- because it's already annexed, then, this might be a different conversation. Because it's designed as a PUD, Council Woman Strader is correct, we have to justify why we are going to -- we are going to alter what our normal standards are in the R-8 to comply with your -- or to approve what it is that you are requesting. So, I think her requests for justification for what you are asking for is very fair. For us to go to our public and say, hey, we think this PUD is necessary here, because X, Y and Z. I don't yet see what that X Y and Z is. I don't -- I don't see what -- other than creating additional density, I don't see a necessity to have a PUD on this property with its specific given limitations. You could have all -- all of these buildings that -- all the elevations I have seen so far are all at least three stories. The townhomes, the -- maybe some of the single family are single -- are single level, but most of them probably two level -- two stories. Your ribbon townhomes are three stories. All of those could be one story. It's not -- the -- the variety of housing doesn't have to pack in three story buildings everywhere. It could be single story townhomes. It could be single story ribbon townhomes. It could be single -- you know. So, I -- I don't see that that -- that there is any requirement that there has to be such -- you know. I -- so -- so, help us understand -- my question for you is help us understand are you creating this height and this density because it economically has to be -- you know, for you as the developer you have to do that to make a project work or are you doing this because you have done some sort of study that shows that there is a definite need for these. Because, you know, we -- we hear from our community and we hear from our applicants week in and week out about what the community needs -- Stavin: Yeah. Perreault: -- and I have yet to have any group come and say we unequivocally need this -- you know, an 18 plus percent net density in a -- in a -- in what -- a medium density residential designation. Slavin: And appreciate your comments and there is a couple -- hopefully I address all your questions. The nature of the PUD isn't -- isn't so much it's necessary -- it's satisfying the requirements in my understanding and what we wanted to do in -- in earnest -- it wasn't so much about density, it is about creating open spaces, walkability, fire pits, pools, dog wash stations, things that a certain amount of customers really like and they want that walkable environment and it's very different than a lot of what exists in Meridian. So, we are excited to offer a different living style and -- and especially given the fact it's right next to our mixed-use project. So, you know, for a certain amount of people -- not saying everybody -- it's really cool to get up and put your slippers on and take your dog and go get a coffee and, then, walk home, you know, and Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 57 of 86 read the paper and we just -- we are really building to that lifestyle that gets us excited. From -- from an economic perspective I'm sure there is several ways to make it work, but, you know, this is -- I would say a preferred mode, because we wanted to offer a differentiated product and especially in the market where the median home price is so high and it's become less affordable for so many people that we did want to offer a variety of housing types and that doesn't mean, you know, I would say, you know, Section 8 homes, it means, you know, affordable for a lot of different people, from the aspiring, you know, young college person that just graduated getting their first place and a lot of other folks to open it up for more people to enjoy. As far as three stories, it's -- you know, we are definitely staying within the building envelopes. We are not trying to be cute. There are very large homes in Paramount that are very high. So, I don't think that that's, you know, out of character with the neighborhood. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Slavin: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, I will turn this over to you. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, first is Sally Reynolds. Sally, Sonya is bringing up your presentation. Reynolds: Thank you. Will I see it on the screen here? Oh, there we go. Okay. And can move it through -- right here with the arrows? Okay. Great. Can you go into presentation mode? My cursor seems to be -- oh, it's your cursor. Thank you. All right. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of City Council. My name is Sally Reynolds. I reside at 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian. I'm going to kind of do away with the remarks that I had and I'm just going to go through some bullet points. So, first of all, I would like to thank the developer. He's been very good at communicating with the public and getting input from the public. I do like the feathering of density. I think that's very thoughtful planning. They have agreed to put lighting -- I'm sorry -- along that easement and that's by P&Z, so I would encourage that that stays as a condition and they have happily agreed to do that. This is the Bergman parking that Council Member Overton was addressing and there is an ACHD meeting tomorrow at 12:00 noon and I have already contacted a commissioner concerning this parking and I will be at that meeting to address that then and we can see where that goes from there. But this is how narrow the street is, just for reference. Finally, this is the fence. They have agreed to repair or replace it. How that's going to work I'm not really sure, but it was damaged when the canal was done and so that would be appreciated to be done. You can see the side yards are not compromised. It is an old fence, but the side yards are fine. It was the backside that was sliding down in. So, I agree with Council Member Strader, a comparison of the R-8 dimensional standard versus what the city code would be asking for in a PUD would be great to see. I'm not sure where in -- besides just those 0.6 setbacks where the other setbacks are and -- and so are being requested and how are they being used and I think that should be highlighted. One other point. In R-8 there is a variety of homes that are allowed, single family detached, single family attached, townhomes and duplexes, all of which we already have in this square mile with Linder -- Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 58 of 86 Linder Springs townhome, the apartments at Prelude, more dense housing at Cadence at 55 and older. So, those can be done. And, you know, to their comment of why they are clustering them so close together is for open space -- well, the open space wasn't met until the irrigation company said that they could build -- or put plants along that easement. So, there isn't actually -- and I was on the open space committee for a year and a half and I understand that is great usable space and I would much rather have that easy be open space and count, but my point is throughout the rest of the neighborhood it's very very cramped. There is not enough open space there just for people to breathe due to the setbacks. And so the setbacks request -- this is in the staff report. It's really really hard to read even when I blew it up and I haven't gotten a chance to compare it, like Council Member Strader said. Finally, this is what I see a planned unit development as being and I don't see that it fits under any of those points. The -- it's for residential developments greater than eight units per acre. So, is this eight units per acre and is it MDR or is it actually greater and so you can't really have it both ways. Last, I would just say it's not the intent that the PUD process is used solely for the purposes of changing dimensional standards and that's exactly what this is. I will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sally. Council, questions? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Sally, thank you for presentation. Always appreciate your -- your involvement. Regarding Bergman and the other streets for parking, what are your thoughts if one side of the street is no parking and allowing parking on the other side? Does that give enough room for that or not? Reynolds: It -- it would probably be enough for two cars to pass. I mean -- I mean looking at it really where Arliss comes around, where Bergman goes through and where Director comes in, those are going to be the major feeding roads and those are the ones that I don't think should have parking on either side. Now, the ones where -- if they need parking for guests and such, yeah, having all it on one side of the road that would probably be great and, really, unless high school students are going to take Arliss and, then, go down that road, it wouldn't be heavily trafficked and maybe having parking on one side of the road would have them come through Bergman and a safer road where there is not parking on either side. So, I'm only going to talk to ACHD concerning the curve on Arliss and Bergman and Director and I really think it's up to the future residents who live in those houses on if they want parking there or not. Hoaglun: Yeah. Reynolds: To me that's their choice. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 59 of 86 Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Sally, was there any part of your letter that you submitted to us that you wanted to provide comment on that you hadn't touched on yet? Reynolds: The one -- I mean to Council Member Perreault's point, I have yet to see why the PUD is warranted, besides fitting in more units. So, residential rooftops in the square mile is not needed and the development could still have those unique amenities and innovative living spaces without violating that R-8 zoning. So, I can appreciate, after being on that committee, trying to balance regulating development, while encouraging for innovation and allowing flexibility and that's where PUDs should come in, to allow something truly unique when underlying zoning and circumstances or outside factors prohibit it and I don't think that those apply in this case. Borton: Okay. Thank you. Reynolds: Sure. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Sally, thank you for the relationship that you have built with us and we value your thoughts. You share them so well. If -- if -- looking at their application, what -- is the biggest concern the parking or is it -- is it density? Trying to think how I want to ask this. If there was one -- there is four types of housing in here. If there is one type of housing that you felt was the least beneficial to that area, given that there hardly is any multi-family in this area and there is a lot of service jobs in this area. So, we do need some housing that is going to accommodate those service jobs. Is there one particular type of housing that they have proposed that you don't think would be beneficial to the development for what you see on a daily basis -- Reynolds: Sure. Sure. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Perreault, I would say the condominiums, just because that is the one type of multi-family unit that is not allowed in R-8 and we have over 300 prelude apartments in the southeast corner -- in that same square mile that people could get here walking without crossing a major road. So, we have 300 apartments there that can serve it. Linder Spring townhomes is probably another 150. And, then, if that application that was referred to later on comes through there will be 540 apartments, which is huge multi-family in the upper right-hand corner. So, where it's right up abutting single family homes, I don't think there is a huge need for multi-family and I think it could be eliminated. Simison: So, yeah, I was just sitting here saying don't say the condos. Don't say the condos. It's the first project I have ever -- I have seen that I can recall that we actually Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 60 of 86 have condos and that -- that was my one redeeming quality that I could really point to in this is condos I think are a needed product in Meridian. Reynolds: Let the apartment people know that, maybe they will change up there and put in some condos instead of apartments. That would be -- they would fit great up there. Mr. Mayor. Excuse me. Simison: You are fine. Council, any additional questions? Okay. Thank you. Reynolds: Thank you. And happy Valentine's Day. Simison: Same to you. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next is Kelly Carpenter. Carpenter: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council People. Forgive me. A little nervous. My name is Kelly Carpenter. My address is 5991 North Arliss Avenue in Meridian. Thank you so much for your time this evening and thank you so much for all of your comments and questions on this development, because those are all the things that I am personally feeling. Two main things I would like to ask for or bring to your attention is that I believe that the density of this development does need to be reduced and, then, also the height of the units in the building should also be reduced as well. As the developer Michael did state, it is a very narrow piece of land. I live directly up against the fence where the park will be and it's literally a stone's throw before the condo buildings begin. I just don't think that it is cohesive to the neighborhood. believe the heights -- they are just way too tall. The developer keeps talking about a two-story building when, in actuality, it's a three story building, because it's a two-story with a garage on the bottom. But I do agree with the feathering. I do agree that the work-live balance is a really cool concept. I just think that we need less of them. You know if they could eliminate one row of the condos and have the townhomes, I think that's fantastic. Single family homes. Absolutely. But with that many people it's going to put a strain on our schools, a strain on our roads. I can't tell you how many times a day I hear tires screeching and sirens going, because there is not many people on Linder and Chinden. Let's see. I think that's pretty much everything that I wanted to say. And, then, again, just thanks, Council Woman Strader, for all of your comments and concerns, because, again, those were all mine, as well as Council Woman Perreault. So, thank you. And if you have any questions -- Simison: Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you. Carpenter: Thank you so much. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next is Justin Carpenter. J.Carpenter: Hello, Mayor, City Council Members. Justin Carpenter. 5991 North Arliss, Meridian. Thank you for your time today. You know, I'm -- I'm glad we are on this slide Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 61 of 86 right here. You know, it's just -- I -- I think it was Council Woman Strader talked about this transition of elevation. It's just too -- too extreme and they are -- they are trying to pack too much into this -- this property. It sounds like you guys see it, too, which, you know, reassures me that you guys are seeing what we are seeing. It's just -- it's just too much density, especially with the five story apartment building that's on deck to come after this. You know, we just -- we just have concerns. I think the developer kind of spoke volumes there, because when he was -- talked about the density, he talked about pulling out the green space to maintain his -- all his units. You know, if this is truly that walkable, livable environment, why would you give up one of your greatest assets? The second thing I want to point out is I think it's being underestimated, the walkability that's coming from Paramount. We -- all of us in Paramount are -- are anxious for this development to come through. We want the restaurants. We want the pubs. We want the surf machine. You know, the library. You know, we are very anxious. We are a very walkable community and there is going to be a lot of that that's going to -- that's going to come to this development as it gets built out. So, it's not like we need to rely on these consumers of these residential units to support those businesses. And that's all have. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I'm kind of chuckling, because I was in the hearings when this came through and Paramount was not in favor of the Linder -- the Linder Park development. So, I'm glad to hear that they are -- J.Carpenter: We have also seen it come a long way from the original design. Perreault: Yeah. I'm -- I'm glad to hear that. I -- yeah. I'm -- I'm happy to hear that. Simison: Okay. All right. Thank you. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next is Chris Eastman. Eastman: Is it this mic? Mr. Mayor and Council Members, Happy Valentine's Day. actually would rather be home eating my Sa-Wa-Dee Thai, one of our favorite Meridian restaurants -- is waiting for me at home when I get done. The original -- I have been a -- I live on 1192 West Bacall Street. I have been there since 2007 and so I have been through many hearings on this development and I can't wait to have something behind our homes that we love and will continue to -- to go and visit. The original concept after lots of work showed a map with 120 units with one main road and single family homes on both sides and, then, it was to go and get more dense, different type of housing out from that. The property is zoned for R-8 residential. That's the eight residential units per acre and he is -- the submitting is 8.35 units per acre. At the Planning and Zoning meeting the Commissioner brought this up and said, you know, you are parsing it, because you are rounding down; right? So, he said to them to come back, you -- you Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 62 of 86 know you are doing that, you are -- you are using the number, it's higher, round down. Unfortunately, nothing changed. The -- the developers have worked with us and talked with us, but nothing has changed from the original design. So, even with that comment from the Commissioner nothing has changed what was presented to you guys tonight. So, that was one request is to stick with the original zoning. They shouldn't have to be able to round down. Like really stick with what was meant to be behind our homes. They are also asking for the setbacks, which is a violation of city code, if you follow the R-8. So, I would ask for you guys to stick with the correct zoning behind our house and not allow a lot -- give them allowances. Paramount is a wonderful place to live. That is where I have raised my kids. It's where I plan on staying and I want it to continue to be a very walkable place. Unfortunately, that road that you guys keep talking about, I keep forgetting the name now, Bergman, when the -- when it was snowy I was going to work and I saw a teenager crash on the side, hit the fire hydrant. I saw multiple teenagers coming right after them about to hit that -- me and -- and the teenager pulled over. They come through our neighborhood, they also come through on to Linder Road to get to Rocky. This is a very dense -- it doesn't look as dense on paper. I'm glad you guys are seeing that. But it is going to be driven through by the teenagers, by us that live in Paramount, and I really would -- would hope that you would respect keeping it safe and making sure that the parking is not allowed on main roads and that they have enough parking for each unit to be safe. Thank you for your time. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, Shane Nye. Nye: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council Members. Appreciate you letting me come up here. My name is Shane Nye. I live at 858 West Bacall Street. I do appreciate the concept of this design. Again, the -- the feathering that's mentioned. But it seems like a lot of the concerns -- and I'm just kind of echoing some of these same things over again -- come from the stretching of some of these limits. At the last meeting I was at the Council Members noted that there was not much say they had with the roads and the parking, but sometimes the stretching of -- of these limits, the density, the setbacks, things like that to allow more housing, is what's creating the problem or worsening the problem and we do have a -- you do have a say over that. So, I would appreciate those being addressed as was previously said. It's also interesting to me that the developers -- this -- make this property so diverse they can kind of answer any question depending on which part they are talking about. For example, at the last meeting they were talking about million dollar homes, but at this meeting they are talking about affordability for any type of person, you know, and I -- I agree there is some lower income level homes that feather out, but they kind of play both sides of the coins very often on this issue. Again, I agree with the concept, I agree with the -- some of the ideas behind it, but just stretching the limits, forcing the density I think is what's creating some of the problems and the heartburns and so I would appreciate those being addressed as was previously spoken of. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 63 of 86 Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there are several other names. They didn't mark they wanted to speak, but, of course, they may wish to. Simison: Is there anybody else that would like to come forward and provide testimony on this item? Go ahead and come on up. And if you are online and wish to testify, please, use the raise your hand feature. Brownlee: Hi. I'm Tony Brownlee. I was on the -- the first list. I live at 797 Barrymore. Built my house there in 2005 and have been through several changes to that property behind there. One -- one thing that the developer said that it's neither -- it's not in your control and it's not in his control to change the width of that street. It's absolutely in your control. You can deny their project or they can change it. So, I think it was being disingenuous. One thing that -- that my neighbors didn't bring up was that there are no three story houses anywhere in Paramount. Not one. He said that there were. There is not. There is only two stories with a -- a garage underneath it either. However way you -- you look at that. They are not there. I think that the -- that the density there is way too high. I think that the street is too narrow. Councilman Hoaglun, you said do you -- do you think that if -- if they could park on one side. If it was my daughter, those along that street, no. Absolutely not. Not with -- not on days like today with adults driving, much less kids driving. 1, you know, got a call from my better half to say, well, made it. I saw a whole bunch of accidents on the way and that was after she got out of our -- of our subdivision. I can't imagine on a road like that. And, again, I just think that the density is -- is much too high, that the buildings don't fit the character of Paramount. The -- the buildings that we have there, you know, what -- I built in 2005 what all my other neighbors built. I appreciate their -- their designs. But I think that the sole reason that they are asking for the PUD designation is to pump up the density. I think you all are calling it as it is and until they can show something different, I think that's what it is. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions? Brownlee: Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this item? Okay. Then I would invite the developer to come up and close. Or the applicant. I should say the applicant. I apologize. Tseng: Mayor Simison, Members of the Council, my name is Tony Tseng. 6518 North Fairborn Avenue, part of the development team for Sagarra. Sonya, if you want to -- Sonya, if you can please bring up Michael's presentation. I'm going to use some slides from there. A lot of things to unpack here. Obviously there is a lot of issues, a lot of questions and, hopefully, I had the -- I had Ross over there, our engineer, to be able to ask some questions. So, I can hopefully ask -- answer some of your open questions. think Council -- Council Person Strader -- great questions and that's really what I was trying to work hard on and you are -- you are right, you know, because the PUD allows for so many different things and what are we slipping in because we are using this designation. Totally understand that concept and so kind of did a download with our Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 64 of 86 landscape architect, our engineer, wanted to make sure we tried to capture everything there is and I'm going to step right into them. So, I want to address those first, because I think that's a big issue and it's a big question, you know, what's going on and hopefully, Sonya and I can address all of them, but I'm pretty sure this is all of them. The zero lot line thing is number one and I want to make sure that when we talk about zero lot lines it's articulated to exactly what we are trying to do and we -- I addressed this at P&Z. The zero lot line issue isn't -- we are not using that so we can have zero lot lines and push all the buildings to -- to the -- to the edge of the street. If you look at where we are really using this it's on this Orchard Park Drive. We have a 20 foot buffer along Orchard Park Drive to -- to the north and if you see the points, it's so we can articulate the buildings and when I was talking to P&Z I literally said, look, if we have to, we will straighten those buildings out and not violate -- violate those zero lot lines. But they came back and said, no, we actually like it -- to see the articulation, so when you are driving down Orchard Park Drive it doesn't look like a big apartment building or big mass, it gives it some -- some -- like it gives them more feel -- architectural feel. It's -- it's not this big massing. If you -- I know that the graphic or exhibit is really small, but it's on those points and if that's an issue and you say, guys, the zero lot line thing, we just can't handle, we can probably go back and just straighten the buildings out and, then, we will have the same -- again, we will talk about density later, but it will -- if we can we could easily address the zero lot line issue just by straightening them out. We felt and maybe Council does or doesn't -- it just makes it look better. Again, we can straighten them out and solve issues. Second issue we have -- the reason why the PUD is in -- in place is smaller lot sizes. And that was addressed earlier I think by Sally and she's awesome and she knows all her code and it is because that the minimum lot size is 4,000 square feet. Now, one thing I want to point out that is kind of unique to this and we will look at this calculation. Now, if this was a normal application for a plat and for a subdivision, you buy a piece of land and you have so many acres to work with. The reason why this piece of land and -- and its development is so unique is because this thing -- this entire development probably started in 2004. A lot of things were happening 2007, but a lot of stuff with Winco. Obviously, the neighbors -- I wasn't around for that -- that version of the development -- it was pre -- before I joined the development team. But I know that the neighborhood didn't like Winco and rightfully so at the time. I think it's turned out to be an okay addition to the park and there is a lot of neighbors that use it. But because of that there is a two acre -- two plus acre park that is adjacent to the Sagarra Subdivision that we have not used as part of our open space calculations or our density. If you look at the -- let's see. I can give you a graphic. But adjacent to -- directly east of the Sagarra community, right behind the couple on Arliss house. So, that two acres -- which, again, if you look here we did not use for any reason and, yes, technically can't be used -- is part of that community. It's going to be -- we have a survey that we sent to the community. We had 78 respondents. Because we -- you know, originally, Sally and I talked about what the park should be. Her and I thought a dog park. Yea. I have a dog. She has a dog. We did a survey. We had 78 respondents. We were very wrong. Really nobody wants a dog park. It came in last. Number one represents -- I really don't want it. Number five represents I really do want it. So, we had 78 respondents and this is the breakdown. We offered a dog park, a fitness park, just plain open space, a normal neighborhood park and my favorite was a Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 65 of 86 pickleball court. But that -- that technically won, if you want to look at the data, but it -- it's average score was similar to the neighborhood park, but it had more people that didn't like it as much. If you see there is 16 people that said one to a neighborhood park -- I mean a pickleball court and 34 people loved the pickleball court, number five. But if you go to the neighborhood park there are less people in opposition to a neighborhood park. So, I guess my point is part of the discussion is the -- the space; right? Not only are we not using that two acres, which, by the way, we can get a -- we can get an agreement with the owner of those two acres, which is part of the Orchard Park, to do a cross -- cross-use agreement -- whatever agreement we want it's going to be part of it. We are going to treat it as part of Sagarra. You know, we are going to put some sign -- we are going to use whatever the code allows us to use, whether it's signage, develop a great park, because it's an entrance to our community. The second piece is the road. So, if you look here -- and I'm sure you can't see it, but the collector road represents another -- give or take one acre. So, again, brand new subdivision. If we went out and purchased 17 acres, we would have 17 acres to do our calculations against. However, because of the development that we -- we -- the -- the Orchard Park built that road earlier than you would do in a normal subdivision. So, that acre got sucked away from us. Now, again, we are not using it -- we are not using it towards our calculations for density or anything, but that's another acre of land that in a normal situation we get to add that back into our calculations and the last piece that's here, we call it the remnant parcel. Part of the development we were -- I wouldn't say forced, but Brighton had us buy another piece that's about 3.7 acres that we wanted to include our open space, but we are told -- and rightfully so he said -- they said, look, it's really not part of your open space, it's -- it's -- it's attached. We wanted to put a fitness track that went through it, but after discussion with Sonya, we agreed with her, it's really not part of it, but that is part of the development that is land owned by us that is part of Sagarra -- again these red numbers are just not being used. So, I get on paper the density looks tight, because it is pretty tight and I -- I -- I -- I agree with Mayor Simison that we need some multi-family. Now, that's another reason that the PUD is being used. Regular R-8 does not allow multi-family. We really did want to offer every product type and I'm kind of afraid to admit it, but I have moved here from California, but ten years ago, so I'm not the local -- the recent, you know, migration. So -- but ten years ago I moved here. A lot of home -- and, by the way, I love Meridian. Beautiful. Have moved ten families here from California because they come visit and they love it. But the product type is pretty homogeneous, which is beautiful, too, but there is a lot of new people coming to town, younger people -- in fact, we have a family friend who is 30, who is living with us, looking for employment, looking to live here and I just don't feel like there is enough product mix. Now, I know this is not California, I'm not trying to make it California. Trust me. I moved here for a reason. But having multi-family. Having a little more dense area. Having attached to this -- really proud of Orchard, what we are trying to do there. A lot of walkable food -- a lot of walkable spaces. I personally feel the library is beautiful, but if you are not as modern I get it. You might think it's ugly. But I think that product mix is really really important to Meridian. You know, there is a lot of big houses -- I mean big -- I'm from California. Like a 3,000 square foot house would have been -- where I came from, used to feel pretty big. But it seems like every house here is like two to four thousand square feet. But to address your question about the PUD, zero lot Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 66 of 86 lines, we talked about smaller lot sizes, the multi-family component, and the final component is the -- so, if you look at this map right here -- and I'm going to highlight -- if I can get the mouse to work. Where is the mouse? Oh, here we go. This townhome coming right here -- this private driveway here is 30 feet from home to home. So, it's a 20 foot street with two five foot -- five -- there is five feet between the street and the from the garage. The reason we needed the PUD is because in speaking to the city the planners. Not -- I don't think it's planners. I take it back. I think it was -- I think it was the fire department. Regardless. But we don't want people to park in that street and part of the PUD is allowing for -- what we are asking for is that this is made to be a townhome with a 20 -- a five foot setback -- five foot buffer, 20 foot street, another five foot buffer -- if you live here you park your cars in your garage and, then, no -- it's no parking on the street. So, that's the idea for -- and -- and, then, there will be no parking allowed, by the way. Signed no parking. Unlike Bergman. And that's the next thing I want to address is Bergman. I have reached out to -- I was able to get through -- contact -- reach out to Steve Price, head of ACHD, had an appointment set that had to get broken. But I know it's a big issue. If we could change it we would. We don't need the parking. I don't -- there is no reason we want those parking spaces there and I think one of the Council Members said, well, show -- in solidarity show it off the graphic. I will delete it right now. I have my computer. Oh, sorry. Oh, wow, I talk way too much. So, we don't want that street -- to have parking on the street or less -- we -- we agree with them. I don't -- I -- I agree -- I -- I get the fact that people don't like the design and feel again. We want to build something that's sellable and the last thing is Sa-Wa-Dee is probably coming. I'm meeting with her on Wednesday. So, for the neighbor toffee and fawn. They are looking becomes Orchard Park. So, I stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Tony. And just for the record, I didn't say we need multi-family, said we need vertically integrated home ownership opportunities and condominiums. Tseng: I'm sorry. Simison: Just so we are clear on what I am referring to. Tseng: Pretend like I said that. Simison: Okay. Council, questions? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you for clarifying that, because you can have multi-family that don't have the structures this close together and still accomplish the same amount of housing. So, what we regularly see is not just parking issues when you have five foot -- five foot setback, a 20 foot street, and a five foot setback. We see moving trucks. We see HVAC trucks. We see garbage cans. We see all kinds of problems with this that is not just about parking their vehicle and whether you like it or not, people are not going Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 67 of 86 to always park in their garage -- that we have fought this forever; right? And -- and I'm not -- again, it's -- I'm not saying that it should be done that way. That's just what's going to happen and so our job is to make sure that it's safe for folks; right? And that people can get from their home on this 20 foot drive to -- you know, to work or wherever they are going. I do appreciate that there is two accesses on either side. So, if somebody has a vehicle that comes through that's blocking their access to their drive -- to their garage, they -- they can back out and get on to the street. But this isn't just a parking problem. This -- this is -- I mean I live in a neighborhood with a regular street width and I -- every single day there are Amazon drivers, HVAC, moving trucks, tile trucks, contractors and I have -- and -- on either side of the road and I live in -- and I have a regular street width. So, that's -- that's really the concern and -- and I get it -- get it from a developer standpoint, it's like, okay, well, then, why don't you change code. I understand that. I understand where you are coming from. A lot has changed with that, though, because once upon a time there weren't four vehicles per home that had two teenagers, but that's just kind of how it is now; right? So, that -- that in and of itself is not its own challenge, it's that combined with the other setbacks, combined with the building closeness, combined with -- it's just kind of like stacked on top of one another that it will cause folks to not have places to go or -- you know, it's just going to create a cluster of challenges. Tseng: And -- and all great points. Honestly. To address some of them, you know, some of them are just facts, but to address a lot of them is -- I know we are saying no parking and we are going to have it posted no parking and that the kind of luxury we have -- and I have talked to Sally and the neighbors -- is that we are -- we are associated in helping develop Orchard Park also and the one thing that has -- this is a kind of a different subject, but we talked about security and part of our plans at Orchard Park -- and it's going to be in our cams -- is 24 hour security. Some of the shops that we have in the middle of Orchard Park is away from the street and we want to protect some of the unique design and the higher end design, so we have 24 security, which is going to encompass -- you know -- Sally and I talked about this -- encompassing not only Sagarra, but making sure that there is less crime. I know -- I know there is a concern regarding the 40 foot walkway. So, we addressed it with, hey, what do you want to see? Lighting? Great. Let's -- because we want lighting. But, then, we have to get the neighbors to agree whether it's uplighting or downlighting. You know, we just want lighting. And making sure that that doesn't become something that's not a positive; right? Making -- we -- it's our responsibility as part of Orchard Park. I know that once the homes are built and sold a lot of developers are, hey, it's not my problem anymore. You know, if that turns into a crack alley -- I sold the houses. We care, because that alley is part of our park and to address the parking with the townhomes -- most of those townhomes are two bedrooms. If -- the product I know is not normal to Meridian. I get it. It's different. Design looks funky. You know, it's too modern. I have heard it -- and I -- I -- I get a taste, you know. At first I looked at like them and I'm like -- I'm a little -- my wife is a modern farmhouse lady and I guess I have to agree with her, that that's what I like, but we -- we want to build these for a slightly different demographic. You know, a demographic we think is there. We hope it's there. You know, there is -- how many people want a two-bedroom townhome? We think there is a Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 68 of 86 lot of people. How many people want to live in a condo or a multi-family or a condo community in a residential community? I know a lot of my friends do that are moving here. Unfortunately, because of a divorce or situations where they are really downsizing or a single -- single father, single mother. We believe there is a need. We believe in it so much that we are going to spend quite a bit of money to develop something and build it and we hope they will come. We think they will; right? And so a lot of these issues I totally agree with you. You know, we don't want -- but it's going to be no parking. We are going to enforce it. The neighbors are going to enforce it. There is so much extra street parking is what I really want to emphasize and we keep talking about parking. Trust me, if we needed Arliss, if we needed Bergman, we would be -- we will be self-serving. We say, nope, ACHD says we can have it. So, therefore, that counts for our parking count. It's easy -- I know it's easy for us to say we stand with neighbors, because we don't need them and -- and -- and, I agree, they shouldn't be there. But we -- if you look at the exhibit for parking, we are overparked by -- I think we have it -- it's in Sonya's display. But, Sonya, can you pull up yours? Because I don't remember. It's a large number with the on-street parking. Sorry. I won't touch it. No. I'm sorry. Okay. Yeah. So, it looks like -- can't read this, so -- we have 132 on-street parking and I can't -- we have extra parking. Even if we take it all out. I can't -- I can't read it. But, again, I get parking is a big issue, because we are dealing with that at the center, too; right? Dealing with how much parking we have, making sure we can park it, et cetera, et cetera. So, hopefully, that answers most of your questions. I know that probably not satisfactory all your questions, but it is a concern. It's not something we brushed over, you know, it -- and I get that we are doing something pretty different that's not normal -- I mean the library is not normal. Compare the library to any other libraries in Idaho. Some people like it. And I have told -- I have been told some people don't like it. I get it. I personally like it, but I don't -- I don't expect everyone to like it. And the collective is going to be very unique and the barn is going to be very unique and we want that neighborhood to reflect that. As the property owner, which I'm not, represent him, he could sell that land -- land off to a Corey or to a home builder and they can build whatever they want. R-8. Here is your lot size. They build homes. A mishmash of types and elevations, which usually are nice, but for us the reason we want to do it is because we want to make it cohesive. We want to make that entire neighborhood look like it was master planned. It matches -- good or bad, but matches. It plays into how Orchard Park is going to be seen and that's -- that's our motivation. Now, if this is going through I get it. The plan might be okay, just sell off to a master home builder, let them figure it out, they will build what they want. But that's not -- we don't want that. You know, we want to do what the neighbors want also and, by the way, working neighbors they have all -- they have all been really cool to me. They have been really nice. And -- and we want to work with them. I get the density thing and I remember asking Sally -- I said, well, how many less do you want? What if I told you we are going to do 180, if you -- then I said 140, would you get happy? And -- no, I'm not trying to say anything negative, Sally. But that was a conversation we had. I said if I said 140 -- if I said 120, would you be happy. At what point -- I mean how much are you just trying to extract from us just to get a win; right? I -- I guess there is a number, but because of the open space and the extra space we have, I feel like the community, the way we designed it, it's nice. But that's up to interpretation. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 69 of 86 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Cancel Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I didn't ask any questions about parking numbers. Tseng: Sorry. Perreault: I was asking about functionality of the spaces. The streets. Access. Not parking numbers. Not parking spaces. It's access issues that I was referring to. And we -- we love new concepts and ideas. That's not -- we are not -- we are not saying go do what is just like Meridian everywhere else. None -- none of us have said that this evening. What we have said is we need to understand how what you are doing justifies a PUD within our code that would require you to go to higher than eight and, obviously, a huge difference up to net density that is necessary in this area. We are trying to understand the necessity of the PUD in this area. We -- we understand -- and what I have heard from you is that it's not a necessity, it is something that we think is really cool to bring to the city that's -- that's design elements. That's what we think is the -- the lifestyle that folks want. Those are subjective, intangible things; right? We are not talking about the subjective, intangible, we are talking about the -- how this will physically be built within dimensions and within access and within functionality. So, think that's where there is this disconnect between what questions we are asking and the responses we are getting. Tseng: I'm sorry. Perreault: Let me -- let me finish. So, at least that's for me the disconnect I'm seeing and the questions I'm asking and -- and what we are seeing -- or what -- the responses that we are getting. When I look at this type of community, when we talk about walkability and open space and creating more open space by having denser units, I don't look at this and go, yeah, I'm going to go take my dog for a walk and get a coffee by Winco. Like I -- I see doing that if you are in a Bown Crossing, I see doing that if you are in, you know, a Harris Ranch. I see doing that if you are in somewhere where you have this little shopping community feel, because you are the closest store is two miles away. But I don't see that lifestyle in what you have portrayed and what Orchard Park is being -- is -- is building currently. I -- I don't -- I'm not connecting the dots. I'm a professional single in this city, there are areas that I would live in a two bedroom like this, but not in this location, because I don't -- I don't look at what's being built in Orchard Park and go, oh, yeah, I totally want to walk around that. I go to that Winco frequently. I want to get in my car as fast as I can, because I'm uncomfortable walking in that area and you can show me all of the pedestrian mapping that you have, it still doesn't give me a feeling that that's where I want to go walk as a leisurely casual part of my afternoon. I'm just being really honest with you. So, if you are -- if you are attempting to convince us that this is a PUD for lifestyle purposes, I haven't caught the vision yet. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 70 of 86 Tseng: Sure. And that's part of the -- so, we have submitted a lot of this stuff to the city and we have a thousand page plan that we have -- are going through the city for what's being built. So, I get it. Right now, if you look at Orchard Park, you have quick retailing outside, a lot of national chains. The Olive Gardens of the world and Jacksons of the world and we have Winco, which is as big of a big box as it gets. What's not being addressed -- and maybe you -- you haven't had an opportunity to see it, because 80,000 it is an 80,000 square foot glass bar and that is -- finalizing our construction drawings is another walkable village that leads up to a library, with another 40,000 square foot retail that are bringing a lot of really different restaurants, some from downtown, but out-of-state restaurants and the Wilder is coming. I don't know if you guys like the Wilder, but they are -- I think they are great. So, my point is I get what -- how you feel. It's not walkable right now, because I -- I drive by it and I go, man, I'm associates of Winco development and we want to make it so it's not the Winco development, it's the collective and the barn. And, granted, that -- that library is 15,000 square feet. It's a pretty big structure. The barn is going to be 80,000 square feet. So, I -- I wish it was built so you can see it. I would be happy to share with you the thousands -- literally thousand page plan of how that's going to get built. We have spent a year and a half designing it. It's going out on a limb to do something really different, even more innovative than The Village. Simison: Council, any additional questions or other restaurants you want to find out that are coming to the area, because we are getting a really good preview on the public record. So, hopefully -- Tseng: I can get more. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: The last time that -- that you -- your team was before us I asked for them to update the website, because there was minimal information about -- the -- the -- the renderings of the barn was there and that was pretty much it and -- and it didn't even -- it's a cool idea, but it -- like it -- there wasn't even details about how it was going to -- like what its purpose -- the purpose served. I haven't looked at the website in a while, so I don't know if that's all been updated, but there is no way for me to know that. Tseng: Yeah. No. I don't blame you and -- Perreault: There is -- I mean how am I supposed to know that if -- Tseng: He's the -- he's the website guy. Perreault: Or how is our public supposed to know that and I asked for that probably a year ago and I haven't seen it done. So, if you are wanting us to catch a vision, again, it's not here yet. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 71 of 86 Tseng: Is it okay if Michael comes up to answer that question? Simison: Yeah. Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, no, because it's -- that's a future pending application and it's not related to this one. Tseng: Oh. the website -- Nary: The vision is fine. I mean for what you have talked about. But more than that is this is a future application that hasn't been in front of the Council. Tseng: Okay. I was going to answer the question whether we have updated the website. Nary: Oh. Okay. Tseng: Yeah. Nary: Please keep it really minimal. Tseng: Okay. Sorry. Nary: The project yourself. Tseng: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Slavin: And, actually, thank you. You -- you gave me that. The most appropriate answer is we -- we wanted to get successfully through the development agreement modification to go ahead and roll out the new website. We are really excited about it. We are going to make a lot of commitments to the city with new structures that are coming and we are rolling out, you know, exciting restaurants as we sign leases, but it's really tied to -- to making sure we can do it. So, we don't want to get out over our skis, honestly. So, we are so excited. The website's awesome. I have been putting a lot of hours outside of our normal job and can't wait to share it with you and I think about you every time I'm working hard at nighttime and in the morning getting that website done, drinking my coffee, saying, yeah, got to get this done. I really do -- because that comment wasn't lost on us and we are not trying to hide anything, it's just we have to work with the community and -- and the Council to get things approved before we can make promises is all. And one last note. If you would like to see it offline, happy to show it. Tseng: Okay. Sorry. Okay. Simison: Council, any additional questions? Okay. Tony, I think you can take a seat. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 72 of 86 Tseng: Thank you for your time. Simison: Don't go very far. Council, do you want to take a break before we -- okay. All right. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm happy to kick off discussion. I don't think it will surprise people the opinion that I have, just based on my questions. I -- I feel strongly that this has not met the bar of a PUD application. You know, if -- if we deny it they are certainly welcome to come back with an R-8 application and that I think still allows for a variety of product types, including townhomes, et cetera. I think there is a lot within the R-8 standard to work with frankly. I wasn't on Council when the original Orchard Park Winco development and Linder Village at the time was approved, but it was very contentious and, you know, I'm sensitive to the fact that this was laid out as an R-8 and I -- I think there is an expectation there that things align with the way it was approved. I don't see a lot of hardship here. I don't view the park -- that's an existing condition. I don't view that as a -- a hardship. I don't view the collector road as a hardship. These are all existing conditions. Nothing has changed out of the ordinary in my opinion. I really appreciate the applicant walking through some of the standards. I appreciate you doing that. You know, talking about the -- the lot sizes, talking about the buffer. Obviously, the -- you know, there are some -- there -- there is a reason that they requested this. I just -- don't see it as particularly meeting the bar. The -- the renderings and the elevations did not meet the bar for me -- the very high bar we should be setting. I think there is a way to do a modern feel that would be more consistent with the neighborhood and more consistent with the library. I think the library is beautiful. I don't have any issue with the library. I do have an issue with something that looks like a windowless warehouse where we are going to store people. That -- that freaks me out. I'm sorry, I just -- I had kind of a visceral reaction to a couple of the renderings. But it just -- it -- I -- I think there -- there is a meeting point between modern and where Paramount's at that you can find. So, I -- I'm not on board with it tonight. I would love to see you come back with an R-8 and give it a crack and if there are a couple of exceptions or things that are a little different, you know, justifying those at that time -- but trying to move head on the standard of R-8 and if there is something particularly innovative let's talk about it, but, yeah, I mean that's -- that's just where I'm coming out on this. If the rest of Council, for whatever reason, decides to approve, I'm in strong agreement that we need to get this condition ironed out on -- on Bergman, Arliss, and Director. You know, as someone who drives through that road I could tell you for a fact it -- that the -- the curves in that road will not support parking. It's just a fact. So, I think that needs to be addressed. And, then, you know, I would just say, you know, the other thing, too, I -- again, just giving an example, but I did check and for reference I think it was December 13th -- could have been December 13th or the 15th, but that's when we had the application at Ustick and McDermott that was a PUD and, again, very different site conditions, but I thought that the renderings there of the townhomes and stuff were something that -- that Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 73 of 86 you could look at as an example of something that's a little closer, but still very modern. Yeah. So, I'm -- I'm -- I'm just -- I'm not on board with this application tonight. Thanks. Simison: Thank you. Cavener: Oh, Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Sonya -- I don't know -- someone -- or maybe it was the camera person took down the exhibit from the screen. If they can put that back up I would sure appreciate it. And I'm -- I'm -- I'm happy to weigh in with a couple of thoughts, if that's okay, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Yes, please, sir. Cavener: Thanks. I -- I think I have remained relatively quiet during this application, which is pretty off brand for me. I will just share kind of where I'm coming from on this. We don't get a lot of PUDs before us and so I have really tried to be two ears, one mouth on this particular one. Looking for what all -- what elevates to -- to necessitate an approval of a PUD and appreciate the -- the good questions of -- of my fellow Council Members on a host of different areas and kind of attacking those angles, so I didn't have to. For me I have struggled through this application, through the P&Z, through reading it, to see what our community gains by taking the PUD route. What -- well, how does Meridian win? The applicant I think heard some -- some feedback and testimony about the subjectivity about what people like and don't like. While, I don't particularly -- I didn't particularly care for any of the exhibits, I recognize the applicant's the one that's putting the financial risk and that they believe that those designs, you know, are attractive to a growing market. So, I have -- I have kind of put that piece on the shelf. To me Council Member Overton I think really started things off correctly with the concern about the -- the transportation, the traffic safety piece, connecting that with Rocky Mountain I thought was really well thought out. Appreciate the applicant's quick response to that. So, the only piece that really is stuck with me on this is that what I see the PUD brings is the added density and I think Council Member Strader was -- was pretty direct in saying, you know, if this is headed towards denial, she would like to see an R-8. I appreciate the applicant saying that, you know, another home builder could come in here with an R-8 and do something like that and certainly the free market could support that. I think that we have always challenged the applicant team to be willing to hear from our neighbors, which I think that they have done, but also to be creative and this certainly does some of that, but I think that it could also be accomplished under the R-8 zoning. I think that the -- the -- the public hearing is still open. Perhaps maybe after Council's had some time to summarize some thoughts maybe we could invite the applicant team back up to maybe at least explain what -- what they think they are gaining in the PUD. I think Council Member Perreault asked that question specifically and I didn't get a direct answer. So, maybe giving them one more opportunity. I'm not Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 74 of 86 completely sold on approving the PUD tonight. Just want to be clear on that. I still have too many questions that I feel haven't been answered. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. This -- this presents a lot of challenges from several different perspectives. You know, a PUD, if you look it up it talks about creative land development that preserves natural features. It allows for efficient provision of -- of services. It's not a traditional lot -- lot by lot development and we have had folks testify, well, this is a narrow strip of land and developers talked about the triangle. Okay. Does that make it unique enough to do a PUD? You know, maybe, maybe not. People talk about they like the fact that -- and -- and I like it as well -- you match single family to single family and, then, you move out -- you move out and, then, you have commercial after that and that's -- that's a good -- good following and if you look at our commercial areas that's what you have is a lot of the denser -- densities there next to commercial and -- and you have to realize if you don't have density next commercial centers, it's moving out. You are pushing people out and we talk about and complain about the traffic and people moving out. If we could stop development in Meridian, which we can't, there are state laws that keep us in a pretty narrow lane on that, there will be more traffic in Meridian, because everybody is going to be around us and we are right in the middle and it's going to be more traffic and we have no say over that. So, just one of those things. And I -- I -- I get the -- not liking the -- some of the elements of it. I -- I am not a fan of modern craftsman, Tony. I -- I -- I agree with you, it's just not my thing. But my tastes are not like everybody else's taste. I have to say I have got friends that live in Bridgetower. I love their house. They have a beautiful house. But, boy, the first time we went into Paramount -- I live in a little older subdivision -- a few years a little older. I look and I go you guys are so close together. Where is your side yards? This is terrible. So, you know, I won't have anything to do with Paramount. But no. But it -- but it's -- what I'm -- what I'm trying to point out is it's perspective. It's where we live compared to what's coming in and it's different and so we have to -- we grapple with that. Well, that's not what I have and I don't like that. The situation it is -- it is different. Builders don't build things to not sell homes. They know what the market is. It has changed. It is different. Modern Craftsman is everywhere. But it is and that's what we have to deal with. There are height restrictions on homes, depending on, you know, what they are trying to do. So, it's not -- if it's three stories -- we have three stories in our subdivision, but there -- you really can't tell that they are any taller than a big two- story with -- with a roof. We also have to look at the variety of housing. The house that we live now -- and I look at you as a group, because I fit your demographic -- is probably not the house we are going to live in 20 years from now. My wife and I are talking about what happens when we are this age. Do we want this big of a yard? Are we going to mow this much? It's different. It changes. So, we need the different varieties of housing and the Council has probably heard me preach this before, but it's -- it's just the type of thing we have to prepare our community for, because we are going to see a lot more variety, because people are not wanting the same thing. They don't want Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 75 of 86 to spend their time on yard work necessarily, they want a small yard and so we -- and when the time comes to sell and my wife and I decide to sell, it might be -- we might have a hard time selling our place, because we have a lot of yard and they are going to want something that is more of a townhome, a condo, some of those other concepts that -- that are being -- going to be offered in this. So, I -- I -- I -- I get that. So -- and you also have to think about this. You are going to fill in the blank here. If that land sells to this builder and you fill in the blank of who you think that is in your mind and they are going to build single family homes on that, will you like that? There is something to be said -- and we have had this happen before with neighborhoods that when you have someone who is invested in that property, not just to sell, to develop it and sell it and move on to the next piece of property and they are tied to that property, there are some good things to that and you have to realize that doesn't happen very often. So, just keep that in mind. But for the developer just a couple of things to note on your thing. Yeah. Fitness parks that's not going to work. It just reminds people what they are not doing. They feel guilty. So, you know, I would feel that. But also concept photos. I know they are concept. It's kind of like. Similar. But don't use one -- that one on the left -- that -- that's dog ugly. I would not want anything like that. Please. No. So -- so, how do we get from where we are to where we can have something that I think you would want to live next to and maybe not your style, but what is it that -- that we want. think there needs to be more work to find that. Is it R-8 that we can do some things, because we like the diversity, we like that phasing, but maybe the density is not there and -- and I forgot to ask Sally at the time, but, you know, you had in your letter I think 146 down to 120 and I meant to ask you what did that entail, because -- okay. There is a number. I -- I think that you had talked about that -- Michael, that there is probably a number there that -- that they would be okay with. Now, what is that number? How can we make this work, because you also have to understand land prices have changed since our -- our developments were put into place and the land costs have skyrocketed and what they are dealing with today in dollars and cents -- and I believe in the American dream and I believe you take risks and you can -- you should be -- if you are successful with it you can make money. That's not a bad thing. But at the same time that means that has changed, what -- what they can do to make a decent margin. So, -- and -- and I don't behoove them that, but we have to understand that, it's -- it has changed that way. It's not going to be necessarily 4,000 square feet. Maybe they need those single family homes at 3,000, but it's also a market thing, because people don't want big yards. They want to do other things than spend time in their -- on their yard. They do want the open space. We know that from our surveys that we do for the city, because they -- they want to have that open space, but they want someone else to maintain it, whether it's the HOA or -- or the city, that sort of thing. So, anyway, I -- don't think we are there with this particular one yet. I think there is a lot of good things that has been expressed, it's just a matter of now how do we -- how do we get there with these folks, because I think that's -- that's the issue you have to think about. What are you willing to say, okay, we can live with that to allow this and to make it a win-win in this situation. So, I hope that helps. But that's -- that's my perspective on it. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 76 of 86 Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: You know, when I first looked at this I got to admit it hit a little too close to home. I looked at this and I felt like I was looking at something that was going in east of where I live currently and it reminded me of the fact that eventually we are going to have a development to the east of us and we want to try to make sure that we get the best one we can. It may not be the one we all want, but will it be the best one? Will it be built well? Is it going to stand the test of time? In the same manner of thinking, I listened to both days of testimony in P&Z and all of the neighbors' concerns and how things were addressed and I still have a tough time with this development. I'm not familiar with the PUD. This is the very first one I have ever seen and so far I don't like it. It's -- it's -- I -- I -- I like to see the open space in these developments. I like to see the place where people can get out and walk. I see you -- you got to have open space off to the side, but we really don't have anything in view and this main section of -- of housing it's -- it's just -- it's private roads. It's public roads. It's parking and it's housing. I think the density is -- is tough. I think there is too much parking on street for the type of uses that are going to be there. I think Council Woman Perreault put it so well on all the other vehicles we are not even thinking about that are going to be parking in front of these residences as we go forward. I really struggle with approving this, but I know there is a lot of thought that's gone into this and I think they are close. I just don't think -- and I know I echo some of these sentiments, I just don't think we are there yet, so -- Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: I may be kind of a lone wolf. All in all I liked it. I like seeing the PUD come. This might not be the most classic example what the PUD provision is designed to provide for, but -- but I thought the application was really well designed, very creative, a good transition in a relatively difficult spot. I think the Main Street parking comments from Councilman Overton are spot on, but I thought the applicant -- the development team did a good job with this one in a creative way and -- and I would rather not see this spin off into just a regular R-8 kind of Plain Jane housing development that -- from somebody that might not be invested in this -- this particular region. So, that was one of my main takeaways that I could have been supportive of this project. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Pearl. Perreault: I'm just going to add a couple quick comments. So, I -- I know I have pointed out a lot of -- a lot of the concerns, but I want to say for the positives that I like the creativity of it. I like the uniqueness of it. I agree with Council Woman Strader that I am not a fan of the elevations -- of the designs. I think for me it was as much the -- the coloring and I -- they -- I know these are not going to be exact. It -- it could be that, you know, one very plain looking building that is brown on paper is going to be a beautifully Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 77 of 86 articulated white building in -- in reality. But my main concern about this -- I don't know that I necessarily think we -- we have to keep it right at an R-8 -- with R-8 standards, but I -- I almost would -- I have concerns about the height of many of the buildings and I -- I do have concerns about the proximity of the buildings to one another. If you want to call that density I guess that's what you can call it. I don't think of density that way. I think of density more as the entire project -- you know, how -- how -- the space within the entire project. So, that being said I definitely think there is still some adjustments that need to be made. Agree with all of Council's thoughts on what's happening with the on- street parking, including I would like to see adjustments to on-street parking in all of the corners on the public streets, not just on the street that runs through the middle and -- but as Councilman Borton was saying, I -- I like the uniqueness of it. So, I don't want to take away from that. I just think it needs to be adjusted so that it is not so compact and if the intent of the developer was to have housing that's -- that is residential that's closer together, but, then, create these community spaces, I don't know that they accomplish that, because there really isn't that much diversity in -- in community spaces within the whole development. But there is one central space there on the east side and, then, there is the park that really is not connected and -- and, then, that's it. I don't see it spread out I guess within the development. I understand there is some constrictions, but I don't see it spread out within the development such that every property owner is really going to have great access and have great usability of the amenities that the developer is intending to create by doing the PUD. That's all. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I -- if Mr. Slavin would come up and I'm -- I'm just curious to get your opinion on -- you know, there is some things about a PUD that allows you creativity based on what you are hearing. So, is that something we delay and -- and you work with -- it sounds like you have a great relationship with the neighbors, which to your credit for your -- your outreach or is this something we just start over with? I mean what are -- what are your thoughts? What direction would you like to go on -- on something like this at this point in time? Yes. Yes. Please. We haven't closed the public hearing, so -- Slavin: I first want to thank you all so much for your attention and deliberation. It's -- it's really cool to see a city that cares so much and I really mean that. This is a big deal and we -- we don't take it lightly either. And I love all the comments that have been made tonight. I love the positive tension. That's when you know you are doing something right, because it should be a little bit on the edge, because you want to innovate. And -- and to Jessica's point, to address your question, is that we would love the opportunity for a continuance to come back and demonstrate how we are satisfying, at least in our view, the idea of a PUD. Because what -- and we did ourselves a big disservice. When you look at the little plan -- I think it's displayed now. You see hardscape areas and these little dots that represent fire pits and hangout areas and the community garden on the far left side next to the park and there is a big paved space Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 78 of 86 that actually represents the pool house and there is a tool shed that everybody can come share tools and a bike -- like a bike shed, et cetera. So there is all these cool things that this -- this plan doesn't do justice because the scale so tiny and so we spent so much time on these little dots and so much passion on those dots and we would love to come back and expand these dots, so you can see a much more specific plan of how we feel we are meeting those requirements. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. Just -- I'm just going to push you a little bit, because I just want to understand. So, if -- if you get -- if you request a continuance, is your intention to come back and just further justify the exact same plan and why you feel you meet the PUD or are you guys open to making changes and we could expect to see something that maybe better fits with the neighborhood and addresses these concerns? I just want to make sure, because I think there is kind of a difference. Slavin: Yeah. That -- that's a great question. Excuse me. I think in elevations, in all honesty -- and maybe we are terrible for doing this -- is the application wants to give examples. We -- we Googled examples of stuff and put it in the application. So, please, again, I think -- and we worked really hard and the really bad little brown renderings, those are actually brick buildings we put a lot of effort into and one thing financially we wanted to do with this is -- is why the density is higher, is that allows us to create more open space and a lot more amenities, as well as to put much better finishes on the outside of the homes. Because what you have seen in the valley in the last years -- year and a half, technically, construction costs have escalated by a hundred percent and so now what most developers do is they put up the cheapest materials absolutely possible that wiggle through the design standards to satisfy the design standards and we wanted to go the extra mile with our -- our finishes on this project to make it more timeless and so I think that we would be happy to just finish this one to address site amenities and really drill down on the open space, because even in the center of this triangle it looks like there is a lot there, but that's actually, you know, pool house, barbecues -- all sorts of cool stuff that people that live in communities like this really enjoy and in other seating areas throughout the site. We would love the opportunity to I guess expand further. As far as, you know, moving density around we are running so razor thin offering all these amenities and high end finishes on homes, It's -- it's tough to -- to cut away, because once we start doing that finishes get to be less and community amenities get to be less. Hoaglun: Michael? Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: And Michael. Just a question about Bergman. I know it's done for traffic calming situations, but I was just wondering -- you have buildings there, if there is a way Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 79 of 86 to make it so it's just an S that meets that straight portion in the -- in -- in the curve there and make it so it does traffic calm, you can re -- reconfigure the open space and maybe the parking that goes into where that street was, just it -- it's just a -- such as there -- there -- there is a disconnect. You need parking. It's on-street parking. ACHD is going to require it. So, can we refigure that to make that work for everybody where, okay, you have traffic calming, but they don't have to park there. They can park off of Main Street, but you still can have the open space and access to the buildings and different things. To me that seems like one of the hang ups on -- on that, as well as parking on -- on the other -- other areas that come into the subdivision are -- are going to have to be looked at. But that -- that was one thing that kind of stood out to me. That seemed to be a point of contention with -- with folks. Yeah. Density. I -- I get why you -- you know, zigzagged those buildings, because we want that articulation. We don't want things to be uniform and straight down and so that was very innovative but -- you know. So, yeah, you could just pop them all out and put them to be a zero lot line, but are there things like that that you can do that keeps the uniqueness and the identity for the vision that you have for that whole development, because you do have that vision for that whole thing, not just, well, we are just going to build it this way and -- and move on. You guys are invested in that for the long term. So, is there a way to keep that, but -- the uniqueness, but yet still reconfigure things, make it so it doesn't look so dense -- and maybe it is partly how it's presented here. But what will that look like and -- but work with the neighbors, see if there are some things there that -- I -- I think they have an understanding, too. They -- we -- we get people all the time who come and they have really unreasonable requests. It's just not going to -- it's outside the realm of any possibility. I didn't -- I didn't see that tonight. I mean these are people who care about their neighborhood. They want a nice development. They see good things about this. And -- and there might be some things they are going to ask you, because we don't know your financials and those types of things -- and I don't want to know, but -- that you can't do. But is there some commonality that you could find some areas that people can accept? So, I think -- I'm willing to give you more time to do that and -- and to follow up, then, on that, Mr. Mayor, how much time do you think that would take? And I -- and I know time is money. I -- I get that. Slavin: Yeah. Well, interesting enough -- and thank you. There is a couple questions there -- is one that we would, you know, happily look -- relook -- we look at this thing we called the turtle head. So, that's that squiggly road and -- and I -- as I understand it this is before our time on the project. That was a traffic calming measure that was a misinterpretation by the development team at the time and not maybe necessary, but that is a quick trip to ACHD to see how we can enter the -- the collector road. Because what you see there just north of it there is actually the sewer easement that we can't build on, so we built that as an amenity park, too. So, it's an easy thing to do with the road. So, what you are -- are you suggesting just to run that thing directly north to the collector? Hoaglun: Uh-huh. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 80 of 86 Slavin: Okay. I mean that's something we can -- we can address that -- hopefully that answers the first question. Secondly, we can certainly look at the site plan again. Last thing I would like to call -- call attention to is with open spaces. When you look at the the townhomes just north of -- on the new drive that we -- we would be installing, just -- just north of single family homes, we did those in patches of two. So, each of those townhomes has three -- three sides of light, which is really big for townhomes, because we could stack them closer with our provisions, but the problem is they are not as nice to live -- any middle townhome is a gunshot and just kind of get light at the ends and they are just not nice and so we sacrificed in that since to open the space up more. Oops. Sorry. But those are the things we would be happy to look at. As far as time estimation, I would be somewhat confident we could do it in a month, but we have to, you know, talk to our design team and make sure they have time and allocation and -- and make sure they drink a lot of coffee and work really hard. But we might be able to do it in a month's time. Hoaglun: And Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I would envision another meeting with neighbors to get input and see what -- see what they can come up with. I think you got some committed neighbors to help you be successful, you know. So, I think that's a good thing. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. Just -- I just want to understand where you are coming from in terms of density and meeting with the neighbors. Are you just saying from this point forward -- like you will not adjust the density, you will refine your design more, et cetera, but that's totally off the table. Because I just need to know, because that -- that will influence how I vote. Slavin: Sure. Yeah. With -- with that I'm not trying to be cute at all. It's just pushing the performance we did off recent construction numbers and having level finishes of brick and all the levels of amenities, it's really tough. Like every unit means a lot to us. It means a lot. I mean we could run them again, but -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. That's tough. I understand. Believe me, the conditions right now in the -- in the market for development between the interest rate environment and construction costs and labor, it's crazy. I just -- I can't gear how I vote toward those market Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 81 of 86 conditions, unfortunately. I just -- I have to just try to look kind of from a long-term perspective. But I appreciate you saying that. Thanks. Slavin: Appreciate it. Simison: And -- and just -- again I'm trying to listen to what I have heard from Council. don't want to waste people's time. If we are just going to come back and see prettier pictures of more detail, I -- I'm not hearing that's where Council was lying in just more details personally based on what I have heard. So, if -- if -- I don't want to, again, waste your time and I don't want to waste Council's time and I don't want to waste the community's time if that's what the intention is is just to further define what you have on paper. Slavin: May I respond really quick? Simison: You are more than welcome. And I'm -- I'm just trying to interpret to save everyone time and energy and money. Slavin: And I'm a little bit nervous about it without speaking to my -- my financial partners, because those are big decisions to make with cutting density. That's something I would hate to make a promise on by myself without talking to my partners. And so I mean if that's something everybody is willing to do on our team, then, that's something we would be happy to address. Simison: Yeah. Come on up. Come on up, Tony. Slavin: There you go. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Before -- no. Come on. Before -- to -- to throw this in, one -- one thing wanted to say is the lighting that's going -- that you mentioned you would be willing to do, we have had folks in Paramount who have complained about the streetlights going straight into their windows and so just on -- I wanted to -- as part of your response, understand that these are not streetlights like we are thinking of. We are talking about like pathway lighting; right? Tseng: Yes. Absolutely. Perreault: Okay. Because street -- the streetlights are causing lots of issues from Orchard Park. As a matter of fact, they -- like it's been run though our -- our planning staff and building staff and they have answered a lot of questions from people about -- and they have directed them to the highway district who said there was a lighting study Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 82 of 86 done and it's -- there is people that are investing in like serious blinds, changes, window changes darkening, windows because it's caused so many problems, so -- Tseng: I mean we would literally let the people who live on Bacall, Arliss, decide the lighting. I mean I have been talking to them, I have visited two or three of the neighbors regarding the fence. They let me in their homes. Looked at the fences. I'm getting to know that community pretty well. Really nice people. And if -- we will do another survey. No one's going to -- by the way, they are not all going to agree and we will have to probably do a majority, as some people will be upset. But we want lighting in there, as long as it's not like super -- you know, super super expensive. Normal lighting. We will let them decide. Yeah. We don't -- we have no preference; right? Because it's -- it's needed and whatever type they want we are happy to give. Oh. So -- so to answer your question. Sorry. The reason I walked up here. Is that, yes, look, it comes down to the -- and so the answer is yes, because I -- I -- I can feel the room. If the answer is no, it's not going to happen. So, the answer is tentatively yes and we might not show up at Council next time if the answer is no, which means get some pencil; right? So, I have to say yes to get an opportunity to speak with friends again and if we can't make it pencil, then, it's the same thing as a no. So, the answer is, yes, with an asterisk. I'm not going to -- if I don't show up, I -- I just don't want to break our promise. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. That's perfect. I just -- I just want to know that like part of what you are going to look at is actually making changes and not just like bringing beautiful -- Tseng: No. Strader: -- photos and renderings that -- because that -- that's not fundamental -- at least for me. I don't speak for anybody else. That's not for me fundamentally what the issue was. Tseng: Yeah. Strader: So, if -- if you are going to take a hard look at it, I don't see the harm in giving you a continuance if there are positive changes that could bring you better into alignment with what we want to see. Tseng: It seems like, you know, from the feedback, working with the neighbors is important to you guys and we will work with the neighbors. Density is important to you guys. We are going to work on density. We -- we hear what you guys are saying. We are not -- we are not trying to sidestep any of the issues. You know, I really appreciate -- when Michael says that we appreciate feedback -- by the way all those elevations will be deleted. It really was one of the things I said, they just need some conceptuals and I Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 83 of 86 was on Google for like 17 minutes and that was my mistake. So, I apologize for that. Not him, it was me. I was the Googler that made the mistake. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. But bring something back that -- that does look good, that looks like it's a little bit better fit, please. Because -- Tseng: Yeah. Absolutely. Strader: -- and there is a -- there is like also just, then, I had just seared into my mind what I have seen; right? So, that's -- that's a problem now you have to overcome, but -- Tseng: Yeah. The funny thing is that -- that white building you are talking about is a development in Phoenix. It's called Phoenix -- Karma Phoenix. Their layout is beautiful. Their exterior was horrible. But we loved their interior layout. But, again, that's on me. Strader: We appreciate you saying that you will look at the density and look at making some changes and I think hopefully if you are able to make changes -- you know, I do agree it's -- it's better than what could end up happening. So, maybe there is a compromise here. I would -- I would love to see it given an opportunity if it can happen for sure. Tseng: Okay. We appreciate the possible opportunity. Simison: And leave the condos. I mean -- sorry about that. It was my -- I didn't really speak much on this. I'm a little bit more in Councilman Borton's camp in general. I -- I like the uniqueness of it. I -- you know, I think it is a standalone project that works really well. Maybe challenges as mentioned with the -- with the connection to others. But I think that this project could exist in Meridian. Here I don't know. Density I don't know. But as a general concept I didn't have as much -- the -- the white barn thing was no from that standpoint, But, anyways, just -- Tseng: Thank you. Yeah. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: We get -- we understand that -- that this isn't done until it goes through staff. You know, you -- you are going to -- you are going to do it in line with our code. You are going to review it with staff. However, we have a public that doesn't always completely understand how that process works. So, when they look -- when they get online and they look at that, they are, they are -- the question is like, oh, my goodness, this is what Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 84 of 86 they are doing and we -- for -- for them we want to have clarification. For them we want them to be able to look at the -- at the file and be able to see what's really going to happen. So, that's part of the request to have more accurate renderings; right? We understand that you don't have to, but we just think it's fair to our public to have that happen. The other thing I would say is this is one of the hardest applications I have ever had to view on a computer. I really struggled. I was zooming in and I was zooming out and I was moving it around and it took a lot of time, because you -- you have a correct assessment that there were several things missing that would have been helpful. For example, if you had a -- an exhibit that showed exactly -- like here is the -- what they call ribbon townhomes, which is a word I have never heard before, but I figured out what they were, because they are -- you know, they are long and -- okay. Here is -- here is a map with the ribbon townhomes are green and the two -- you know, the two-story townhomes are red and -- like that -- like the type of unit, if we had a map that just showed these are the condos, these are the ribbon townhomes -- it kind of does on the parking a little bit, but it wasn't about -- it was -- that was about parking, It wasn't about the actual type and what -- how many stories they are going to be. So, that would be really helpful to just say, you know, the -- the single families were -- you know, I just kind of like here is what -- I kind of figured it out from the -- the lines, but like it took me a while just to figure out of the -- of the multi-family units -- okay. There is six that are three story and there is two that are two-story, but why? And, you know, what -- what -- like it just -- and then -- and, then, when you threw in the elevations there were like six or seven single family elevations. I'm like, okay, where is all the elevations for -- I think you will find those in the staff report. So, lots of problems just reading the application and helping it make sense for me on what it was that you were attempting to do. So, you were accurate in that there would be a lot more helpful to dial in to some micro areas of the development, so we can get a sense of what is intending to happen. Just --just for some feedback. Tseng: Thanks. Thank you. And we will definitely work hard on that. Perreault: Yeah. Absolutely. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I move that we continue the public hearing for H-2022-0022 -- H- 2022-0027 until March 21 st. Overton: Second. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Was that a second? Strader: Second for discussion. Second for discussion. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 85 of 86 Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, what I heard the developer say it would be about a month for them. But I wanted to make sure staff has time to analyze it as well and probably you want to make sure the public has an opportunity to see it on the record. So, I don't know if -- if it takes them a month and we submit it -- about a month from now, there is not a lot of time to review it before it has to be scheduled for Sonya to do an updated report. So, I just wanted to make sure there is enough time for everyone. Slavin: I think that's a great comment. Sonya, how much lead time would you need to have new materials to prepare a report for Council, to see if we could back into that time frame. Allen: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Council, applicant, our code requires that any revised plans be submitted at least 15 days prior to a hearing. Slavin: Okay. Allen: So -- and we -- we, quite frankly, are -- are very short staffed right now and this -- this staff member is pretty fried, so I apologize to all for my lack of better responses tonight. But, yeah, probably a little further out would probably -- I -- I -- I imagine it's going to take you guys some time to get things rounded up, too. Slavin: Sure. Allen: How long do you think it will take you to get revisions made? Tseng: We will get it done in three weeks. Slavin: Yeah. Lots of coffee. Emily, are you comfortable with three weeks? Allen: Yeah. And they need time to meet with the neighbors and -- you know, I would say a minimum of six weeks out. Tseng: I think we can get it done. I honestly do. I think the -- the change that we have to make I kind of can picture in my head. I mean I'm going to bug Sally until she meets with me anyways and whoever wants to show up and she's nice enough to not say no. So, we are going to -- I think we are making it happen. We have two weeks. I think we will make it happen. Three weeks. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? I -- I think we have -- we have one hearing on the 28th. That's a big one. Is that right; Sonya? On the 28th? Allen: We have two scheduled right now. This would be a third. One of my projects is probably going to have issues. Meridian City Council February 14,2023 Page 86 of 86 Simison: We can make it to the 21st. If we don't make it we could continue it for two weeks after that for that six week period and I think the community is here still, they have -- they have heard and I think there is good communication, but you could try to go that way. Hoaglun: March 21 st. Yes. Simison: So, I have a motion and a second and we have had kind of discussion. Is there further discussion? Strader: No. Just -- I'm -- I -- I will be here if I can be. Simison: No guarantee. Strader: No guarantee. I might Zoom in from an unexpected place. Hoaglun: Keep your mic off. Simison: All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is continued. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Slavin: Thank you. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or do I have a motion to adjourn? Hoaglun: Move to adjourn. Simison: Motion to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:29 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 2-28-2023 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 2-28-2023 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Counicl may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. i i i i CITY OF MERIDIAN i CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET Date: February 14,2023 Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum: • DO NOT: o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum) Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Family, Career and Community Leaders of America (FCCLA) Week Proclamation C� fIEK IDIAN -- � DAHO The Office of the Mayor P R 0 C .0 A N A -Irl 0 X WHEREAS, Family, Career and Community Leaders of America(FCCLA) is the national nonprofit, family-focused, intracurricular student organization for Family and Consumer Sciences students through grade 12; and, WHEREAS, the FCCLA helps youth assume their roles in society through Family and Consumer Sciences education in the areas of personal growth, family life, college readiness, career exploration, leadership, and community involvement; and, WHEREAS, the organization extends classroom learning through chapter service projects that develop leadership and employability skills and helps young men and women learn how to plan, make decisions, carry out program evaluations, and take action through working with other youth and adults within their school, community, and state; and, WHEREAS, FCCLA offers members an opportunity to work together for everyday purposes for the improvement of themselves, as well as their families, careers, and communities, and, WHEREAS, the week of February 13 through 17, 2023, has been designated national FCCLA Week with the theme, "IncREDible." THEREFORE, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim February 13-17, 2023 as FCCLA Week in the City of Meridian and encourage the residents of our community to acquaint themselves with the activities and values of Family, Career and Community Leaders of America and provide support and encouragement to the students who are working to achieve knowledge and experience that will help prepare them for future responsibilities act nd ncerned adult members of society. Dated this .14th day of February, 2023 - , Robert E. imis , Mayor Brad Hoag un, City Council President Joe Borton, City Council Vice-President Luke Cavener, City Council Jessica Perrault, City Council Liz Strader, City Council John Overton, City Council r— 'Add i All IF Ad a i : .� i � ' ' I �� +y A , AA . • r i � .r t / r 1 Adds 9 Add, AM c — — i - — — — .. .� • _ 14?�J - - ��� • .Add y + 1 Y 74I : x . (F f � � 1 r VP fit If 4 PIS took, pb .� ` 4W Inn In It Of w F ar �n Pi t : dtr tJ ` •• t40 , 1 MOW r. t. a . Id 4, Rr �t t /f w Are OF lb - `_ - _ _ - • s L ,A ti i E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 Changes to Agenda: \[if applicable\] Item #2: Dutch Bros Ustick and Eagle (H-2022-0077) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification  Conditional Use Permit (Commission approved, doesn’t require Council Action) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.2 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at the SWC of the intersection of N. Eagle Rd. & E. Ustick Rd. History: There is an existing DA that governs future development of this site. The concept plan included in the DA depicts (4) commercial buildings on the site with associated parking; the building approved at the SWC of the site includes a drive-through. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-R (Mixed Use – Regional) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests approval of a Modification to the existing Development Agreement to update the existing concept plan. The proposed drive-through is associated with a 1,154 s.f. restaurant (i.e. coffee shop). Commission’s approval of the CUP is contingent upon Council approval of a modification to the existing DA to update the conceptual development plan for the site to allow for the proposed development. The proposed amendment to the DA will result in a reduction in commercial square footage due to the smaller footprint of the proposed use. Access is proposed via an existing driveway connection to a shared driveway from E. Ustick Rd. along the west boundary of the site and a recorded cross-access easement via N. Centrepoint Way, N. Cajun Ln. and E. Seville Ln. The access to Centrepoint Way to the west is indirect until such time the property to the west develops. Direct access via Ustick Rd. is prohibited. The proposed use is required to comply with the specific use standards for drive-through establishments listed in the UDC & referenced in the staff report. A restaurant is a principal permitted use in the C-G district. Additional parking is required for restaurant uses at one space per 250 s.f. of gross floor area. Based on 1,154 s.f. a minimum of 5 parking spaces are required; a total of 14 spaces are proposed, exceeding UDC standards. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structure as shown. Building materials consist of fiber cement siding, CMU Willamette-Graystone, metal roofing, canopy soffit in natural north-western spruce, and glazing. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Commission Recommendation: Approval of the CUP Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Nick Wecker, Barghausen Consulting Engineers ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Nick Wecker iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): None Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. None Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0077, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 14, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0077, as presented during the hearing on February 14, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0077 to the hearing date of February 14, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #3: U-Haul Franklin (CR-2022-0008) Application(s):  Council Review Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 4.044 acres of land, zoned I-L, located at 1030 W. Franklin Road History: A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review (A-2022-0232) was approved for a 11,204 square foot U-Haul U-Box Storage Building. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The Applicant has submitted a request for City Council review of the Director’s decision to allow full access in lieu of emergency access only, via W. Franklin Avenue, as shown on the site plan. Per UDC 11-3A-3A.2, where access to a local street is not available, the property owner shall be required to grant cross- access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties unless otherwise waived by City Council. Access is available via a shared th driveway along the site’s western boundary from W. Franklin Road. Access to NW 10 Street cannot be obtained because there isn’t adequate distance from the intersection to allow local street access due to ACHD policy. Therefore, a viable local street access is not available. Written Testimony: None. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number CR-2022-0008, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 14, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number CR-2022-0008, as presented during the hearing on February 14, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number CR-2022-0008 to the hearing date of February 14, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: Sagarra (H-2022-0027) Application(s): Preliminary Plat & Planned Unit Development Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 17.49 acres of land, zoned R-8 & C-C, located at on the south side of W. Orchard Park Dr., west of N. Fox Run Way & east of N. Linder Rd. History: This property was annexed in 2019 with the requirement of a DA, which was later modified in 2021. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mostly MDR with some MU-C on the west end Summary of Request: A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 114 building lots & 16 common lots (including 3 private street lots) on 17.49 acres in the R-8 & C-C zoning districts – to develop in two phases. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a 146-unit residential community containing a mix of SFR detached (32), SFR attached (38), townhome (38), and multi-family (38) units with a reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A-6. Because multi-family is proposed as part of the PUD, compliance with UDC 11-4-3-27 is required. The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a mix of residential uses consisting of single-family detached and attached homes, townhomes, and multi-family apartments/condos at a gross density of 8.35 units per acre consistent with the density desired in MDR and MU-C designated areas and in the development agreement (Comp plan allows you to round down to the nearest whole number). Access: Access is proposed via the extension of two existing local public streets, N. Arliss Ave. and W. Director St., and N. Bergman Ave. Two (2) local public street accesses (i.e. N. Bergman Ave. and N. Arctic Fox Way) are proposed via W. Orchard Park, a collector street. Private streets are planned for internal access off the public streets; an application for such will be submitted with the final plat application. Open Space and Amenities: A revised common open space exhibit has been submitted that depicts a total of 3.43 acres of qualified open space which exceeds the minimum standard by 0.69-acre. Amenities consist of 12’ wide multi-use pathway along the south & east boundaries of the site, a swimming pool with changing rooms & restrooms, tool library/community workshop, dog washing stations, outdoor activity complex, fire pits, BBQ area with tables and shade structures. All units are required to provide 80 square feet of private open space, unless otherwise approved through the alternative compliance process. Circulation Plan: The uses within the PUD are proposed to be interconnected through a system of local and private streets and pedestrian pathways. Parking: A revised off-street parking exhibit was submitted that demonstrates compliance with UDC standards and exceeds the minimum standards by 16 spaces – an additional 122 on-street parking spaces are also available. Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures. A mix of 1-, 2- and 3-story structures are proposed in a variety of construction materials and styles. Final design of the structures must adhere the design standards in the ASM. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Michael Slavin, Tony Tseng ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Doug Jones, Chris Eastman, Sally Reynolds, Julie Duran, Shane Nye and Jennifer Card, Lisa Metcalf, Kelly Carpenter, Justin Carpenter iv. Written testimony: Michael & Linda Arnold, Leah Balecha, Daniel Briggs, Julie Duran. Matt Mueller, Scott Fuller, and Shane & Julia Duty v. Key Issue(s): a. Request for denial of the project as currently submitted due to the following reasons: 1) project isn’t consistent with the MDR FLUM designation and would be more appropriate in the MHDR designation; 2) the proposed parking isn’t sufficient for the proposed development and will result in substantial on-street parking that will contribute to congestion and make traveling through the community difficult; 3) the proposed contemporary modern design of the single-family homes are not harmonious with the design of existing single-family homes in the adjacent Paramount subdivision; 4) on-street parking along Bergman should not be allowed due to the curvature of the street which will not allow two vehicles traveling in opposite directions to easily pass one another if there are cars parked on either side if the road on the curve; and 5) belief that too many residential units are proposed in this area, which will not complement the existing neighborhood and will negatively impact the community’s livability. b. Increase traffic, density and on-street parking on N. Bergman Ave. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Update the parking plan to ensure the project is adequate parked per UDC standards. ii. Update open space exhibit to ensure the project meets the open space standards. iii. Code complaint fencing along the south and east boundary of the proposed development. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. The Commission required pedestrian lighting to be installed along the pathway along the south and east perimeter boundaries of the subdivision; ii. The Commission directed the Applicant to coordinate with ACHD on installing “no parking” signs on the public streets where the “s” or 90-degree curves are located (i.e. N. Bergman Ave., N. Arctic Fox Way & N. Arliss Ave.); iii. The Commission directed the Applicant to continue working with abutting neighbors on repairing the existing fencing that was damaged during tiling of the North Slough. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: Lorraine Howe, Jennifer Card Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0027, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 14, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0027, as presented during the hearing on February 14, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0027 to the hearing date of _______ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) City Council Meeting February 14, 2023 Item #2: Dutch Bros. AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Modification (& Conditional Use Permit)–& Eagle Ustick Existing Concept Proposed Concept Plan Site PlanLandscape Plan Item #3: UsiSite PlanCouncil Review–Haul Franklin - Item #4: Sagarra AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Preliminary Plat & Planned Unit Development– LegendLegendLegend \[\[\[ Project LocationProject LocationProject Location RUT R-8 C-CC-3 R-4R1 CHINDEN CHINDENCHINDEN MUMU C-N C-C R-15 C-G MU-C C-C LINDER LINDER LINDER OfficeMedium Density RUT R-4 R-8 L-OResidential MU-N RUT Civic Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan (revised) Common Open Space Exhibit (revised) Site Amenity Exhibit Proposed Reductions to R8 Setbacks- Parking Diagram (revised) Vehicular & Pedestrian Circulation Plan Conceptual Building Elevations SingleTownhomesFamily Attached - MultiFamily/Condos-MultiFamily- Amenity Buildings WorkshopCommunity ClubhouseCommunity E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution No. 23-2372: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 22-2372 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, OVERTON, PERREAULT, STRADER A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN APPOINTING JARED SMITH TO SEAT 5 AND ENRIQUE RIVERA TO SEAT 7 OF THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Meridian City Code 2-1-1 establishes the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, its members and terms of their appointments; and WHEREAS, Seat 5 and Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission are currently vacant; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian deems the appointment of Jared Smith to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera to Seat 7 of the Planning and Zoning Commission to be in the best interest of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and of the City of Meridian. NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That pursuant to Meridian City Code § 2-1-1, Jared Smith is hereby appointed to Seat 5 and Enrique Rivera is hereby appointed to Seat 7 of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, with terms to expire January 31, 2026. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho,this 14th day of February, 2023. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 141h day of February, 2023. APPROVED: Mayor Robert E. Simison ATTEST: By: Chris Johnson, City Clerk APPOINTMENT OF JARED SMITH AND ENRIQUE RIVERA-MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Dutch Bros Ustick and Eagle (H-2022-0077) by Andrew Bowman, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., located at the four (4) lots at the southwest corner of N. Eagle Rd. and E. Ustick Rd. intersection Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0077 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to allow the requested drive-through use by updating the overall concept plan of the approved Development Agreement (Inst. #2019- 121599).B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a new 1,154 square foot, dual drive-through Dutch Bros. coffee restaurant on approximately 1.2 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 14, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 3 I PROJECT NAME: Dutch Bros Ustick and Eagle (H-2022-0077) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify i (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please I provide HOA name 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIAN�. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT J A H HEARING February 14, 2023 Legend ----- ------ DATE: Project Location TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0077-Dutch Bros Ustick& E-USTIC ® E-USTICKAD`' Eagle MDA,CUP W LOCATION: 3117 E.Ustick Rd., in the NE 1/4 of W i - W ' Section 5,Township 3N.,Range lE. Z W a } _Z W ; (Parcel#R9161790045) - BUJ a W e j' Z 3 a U Z W LN ; Z I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted an application for a modification to the existing Development Agreement(H- 2019-0082, Inst. #2019-121599)to update the existing concept plan; and conditional use permit to construct a new 1,154 square foot restaurant with associated drive-through on approximately 1.2 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 3.29-acre property(MDA Agreement); 1.194(Conditional Use Permit) Future Land Use Designation MU-R(mixed-use regional) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped Proposed Land Use(s) Dutch Bros.Coffee(restaurant with a drive-through) Current Zoning C-G Physical Features(waterways, The Milk Lateral runs along north and east boundaries of site hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 9/27/2022;4 attendees attendees: 010 Page 1 Description Details Page History(previous approvals) MDA H-2019-0082(DA#2019-121599);PP H-2020-0104 (Wadsworth Meridian Subdivsion)A-2019-0376;A-2021- 0010(site improvements)A-2021-0012(CZC/DES);PBA- 2021-0020(Property Boundary Adjustment);MDA H-2021- 0104(Denied) B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway Not yet received District • Staff report(yes/no) Not yet received • Requires ACHD No Commission Action (yes/no) Traffic Impact Study No es/no Access Access is proposed from E.Bourbon Street via E.Ustick Road. at the west boundary of the (Arterial/Collectors/State site. Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) Trip Generation C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend 0 0 Legend Project Location Project Location r �_,' V LA a oy_ Z Zs. MU-C E USTIC E USTICK RD i,- E'USTICK R^ rE USTICK�RD—`- E _ E r• W— TECATE ►' � r TECATE J LN J MU-RG - JW_ } z C7 E �. MODELO Q< i -J 3 c� W LN W J Z r Z Z Z .v S Page 2 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend Project Location Project Location �® �z-. City Limits U —Planned Parcels F- C-N CGL _ E USTIC -E USTICK RD E-US-TIC - E-USTICK-RD TE AT � a E I R-2 E .-- G LN � p R-8 -, Q J J J ' w 3 (� E / 0 E R 8 Z Q MODELO W R-2 " W LN LN z Z R/� R-15 RUT Z, ,, _ ___ =R1�1 Y R-2 III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Andrew Bowman,Barghausen— 18215 72°a Avenue South,Kent WA 98032 B. Owner: Leo Betz,Wadsworth Development Group— 166 East 14000, South, Suite 210,Draper,UT 84020 C. Agent/Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 11/30/2022 1/29/2023 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 11/13/2022 1/26/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 12/28/2022 2/2/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 11/28/2022 1/30/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (HTTPS://WWW.MERIDIANCITY.ORGICOMPPLAl�: Land Use: This property is designated Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R)on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). The purpose of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment,retail,and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses together,including residential,and to avoid predominantly single-use developments such as a regional Page 3 retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Developments should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with the appropriate supporting uses. The subject site is part of a much larger MU-R area along the Eagle Road corridor that includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed project is generally consistent with the MU-R designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan): Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Plan for an appropriate mix of land uses that ensures connectivity, livability, and economic vitality."(3.06.02) The proposed use will contribute to the mix of uses in this area that ensure the livability and economic vitality of the community. • "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability."(3.06.02B) The subject mixed-use area currently contains a number of retail, restaurant, office, and residential uses and will eventually include a multi family development directly to the west. To the north are a number of big box stores (Kohl's, Dick's, and Hobby Lobby) and the new Brickyard vertically integrated development; to the northeast is Lowe's and various other commercial and restaurant buildings; to the east is Trader Joes's, multiple restaurants, and the Verraso townhomes; and to the southeast are traditional garden style apartments, restaurant users, and The Village. The proposed Dutch Bros. coffee restaurant will contribute to the mix of uses in this area and provide a drive-through coffee chain option to area residents within close proximity to nearby residential developments. The proposed use will also provide employment opportunities to nearby residents. • "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A). A 10 foot wide pathway is proposed within the buffer along the entire frontage off. Eagle Rd and was constructed under the approved CZC(A-2021-0010). There is a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk within the landscape buffer to Ustick Road per the conditions of approval in the existing CZC. The sidewalk will connect to the multi-use pathway at the intersection of Ustick and Eagle Road. Minimum 5-foot wide sidewalks will be required adjacent to all commercial buildings within the Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision development and along the main driveways within the site for pedestrian connectivity and easy access within the mixed-use development. • "Minimize noise, lighting,and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code."(5.01.0117) Operation of the proposed use should comply with City ordinances pertaining to noise, lighting, and odor disturbances. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. PROPERTY HISTORY In 2019, a DA Modification was approved to remove the subject site from the original DA to enter into a new one specific to this site(H-2019-0082,DA Inst. #2019-121599). Subdivision approval was granted consisting of 5 commercial building lots. Several administrative approvals have been granted on the subject site: A-2019-0376&A-2021-0010(CZC for the parking lot, landscaping, and other relevant site Page 4 improvements); A-2021-0012 (CZC and Design Review approval of the southwest multi-tenant building); PBA-2021-0020 (boundary adjustment to remove a lot along the north boundary creating 4 buildable lots instead of 5). In 2022,the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Applicant's request to modify the existing Development Agreement(MDA) (H-2021-0104)for the purpose of updating the concept plan to show two-drive-through uses along the north boundary instead of two larger commercial buildings. The proposed concept plan,ingress, egress,and internal traffic circulation was found to be detrimental to the community. After carefully considering all the testimony received and all the information in the record, the City Council found that the Applicant failed to demonstrate that the Applicant's proposed new plan was superior to the existing one therefore, City Council denied the application which has necessitated the need for the applicant to reapply for another amendment. B. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) The existing concept plan within the approved Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #2019-121599) depicts four buildings on the subject site (Exhibit VLA below)with the two closest to the north boundary and Ustick Road being multi-tenant buildings or similarly sized commercial buildings. Since this concept plan was approved the property has changed ownership and according to the new owners,the existing concept plan is not best suited for site development. Therefore,the Applicant is requesting to modify the existing DA for the purpose of updating the concept plan to show a Dutch Bros. Coffee restaurant with drive-through use along the northwest boundary instead of one larger commercial building. None of the existing provisions contained within the recorded DA preclude additional drive-through uses from occurring on the property—the approved multi-tenant building in the southwest corner of the site is approved with a drive-through. Because of this existing drive-through approval,the request would conceptually allow two (2)drive-throughs within this project. The new drive-through shown on the updated conceptual development plan will need to obtain Conditional Use Permit(CUP)approval prior to submitting for building permits because of the existing drive-through noted. In addition,the proposed concept plan shows a reduction in commercial square footage due to a smaller footprint proposed for the Dutch Bros site. Access to the development is existing via a drive aisle connection to a shared driveway from E. Ustick Rd. approved with the Centrepointe Mixed-Use MDA(H-2022-0035) along the west boundary of the site and a recorded cross-access easement via N. Centrepoint Way,N. Cajun Ln. and E. Seville Ln. The Applicant is not proposing any revisions to the ingress/egress for the overall site but access to Centrepoint Way to the west is indirect until such time the property to the west develops. Within the site, preliminary analysis shows that there should be ample parking for the four(4)proposed buildings and their uses(three restaurants, one multi-tenant retail building, and one urgent care/clinic) and internal circulation shown on the concept plan should meet all requirements of the UDC. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP) Conditional use permit for a new 1,154 square foot dual drive-through Dutch Bros. coffee restaurant on approximately 1.2 acres of land in the C-G zoning district to allow the requested drive-through use within 300 feet of another drive-through facility. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staffs analysis/comments in italic text) Drive-Through Establishment: The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. All establishments providing drive- through service are required to identify the stacking lane,menu and speaker location(if applicable), and window location on the site plan.A menu board location should be depicted on the plans. The site plan Page 5 is also required to demonstrate safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. At a minimum,the plan is required to demonstrate compliance with the following standards: 1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways,drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons; The concept plan shows the stacking lane is a separate lane from the drive aisles and parking which provides access to the rest of the development. The proposed site layout places a drive-through that starts at the southwest side of the building and exits at the southeast side of the building facing N. Eagle Road. Approximately 524 feet of stacking space is available behind the drive-through window to provide queuing for up to 26 vehicles. Dutch Bros. coffee has proposed implementing a runner system at the facility that is designed to increase speed and efficiency in servicing the drive-through customers; as well, employees will travel from vehicle to vehicle to greet and take customer orders. The "Runners" will utilize a handheld device to transmit customer orders to the multiple drink stations inside the building. Additionally, "Runners"will charge customers while in line, so by the time they arrive at the service window, they may pick up their order and be on their way. This system decreases wait times while allowing the "Runners"to have a more personal face-to face interaction with the customers. The drive-through will not include any speaker boxes. All customer orders are taken in person either at the window or with a runner that carries a handheld device to transmit orders to the kitchen. This order process will minimize noise impacts and also decrease the amount of vehicle idling at menu boards that are common at traditional drive-through facilities. If there was additional or excessive overflow from the drive-through lane which does sometimes occur from drive-through establishments at peak times, it would stack into the parking lot from the west, not into N. Cajun Lane or E. Ustick Road. 2)The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking. The stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking. 3)The stacking lane shall not be located within ten(10)feet of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is not located within 10'of any residential district or residence. 4)Any stacking lane greater than one hundred(100)feet in length shall provide for an escape lane; and The stacking lane exceeds 100'in length and an escape lane is required. An escape lane is proposed prior to approaching the ordering window on the southeast side of the building. 5)The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The drive-through is located on the south side of the building and is visible from the N. Eagle Road and the drive aisle along the south side of the building for surveillance purposes. Based on the above analysis, Staff deems the proposed drive-through is in compliance with the specific use standards as required. Restaurant: The proposed use is also subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49 Restaurant,which requires at a minimum, one (1)parking space to be provided for every 250 square feet of gross floor area(see parking analysis below). Page 6 Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Development of the site shall comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G zoning district in UDC Table 11-2B-3. Staff has reviewed the proposed plans and building elevations and they comply with the required standards. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is proposed on the site plan from E. Bourbon Street, a local street on the west side of the property, and the private road to the south, granted through a Mutal Access Easement—Instrument#106169335. A cross-access easement exists between Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision and the property to the west(parcel # S1105110111)depicted on the recorded plat for Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision. Cars will enter the site from the west and will either park in the lot in front of the drive-through or continue to the east along one of the two 12' drive-through lanes merging to the coffee kiosk and exiting back to the same drive aisle to the south. There is an escape lane provided just south of the coffee kiosk that exists to the same drive aisle to the south. Direct access via E.Ustick Road is prohibited. Parking(UDC 11-3C): A minimum of one(1) off-street parking space is required per 250 square feet(s.£) of gross floor area. Based on 1,154 s.£, a minimum of 5 parking spaces are required.A total of 14 parking spaces are proposed, exceeding UDC standards. A minimum one(1)bicycle parking space is required to be provided for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.Bicycle parking is shown on the plans submitted with this application. Pedestrian Walkways: A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the pation on the east side of the building to the pedestrian pathway along Eagle Road as required by UDC I I-3A-19.B.4. Per the Development Agreement(Instrument#2019-121599), a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway with a use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping shall be installed adjacent to N. Eagle Road/SH- 55 as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4C.3 with the site improvements approved with CZC (A-2021-0010). Landscaping(UDC 11-3B1: Street buffer: The street buffer along N. Eagle Road and E.Ustick Road are required to be constructed with the improvements for the Wadsworth Meridian Subdivision along with the approved CZC(A-202 1-00 10) for the common area site improvements. Per UDC 11-311-7.C.3,All required landscape buffers along streets shall be designed and planted with a variety of trees,shrubs,lawn,or other vegetative ground cover. Plant materials in conjunction with site design shall elicit design principles including rhythm,repetition, balance, and focal elements. The landscape buffers shown on the landscape plan are sparse, Staff recommends adding more of a mix of shrubs and River Rock Mulch to the northwest corner of the site fronting Ustick and along the north and south of the drive-through lanes. Parking lot: Landscaping is required in the parking lot per the standards in UDC 11-3B-8C.1. The perimeter landscape buffer shall be planted with one Class II or Class III tree per thirty-five(35) linear feet and shrubs,lawn,or other vegetative ground cover. The perimeter landscape buffer next to the drive-through lane on the west side of the site is missing a mix of trees, shrubs,and River Rock mulch on the landscape plan submitted with the CUP.All other landscaping appears to comply with UDC standards. With the CZC submittal,the landscape plan should be revised to show the required mix of materials (i.e.,trees,shrubs,River Rock Mulch)in the landscape buffer adjacent to Ustick Road,and to the parking lot perimeter landscape buffers to the north,south, and west of the drive-through lanes. Page 7 Outdoor Lighting(UDC 11-3A-11): All outdoor lighting is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11C. Light fixtures that have a maximum output of 1,800 lumens or more are required to have an opaque top to prevent up-lighting; the bulb shall not be visible and shall have a full cutoff shield in accord with Figure 1 in UDC 11-3A-11C. Details of the lighting proposed on the site that demonstrate compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11 should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service and equipment should be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. If mechanical equipment is proposed to be roof-mount, all equipment should be screened and out of view as noted above. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structure as shown in Section VII.E. Building materials consist of fiber cement siding, CMU Willamette-Graystone,metal roofing,canopy soffit in natural north-western spruce, and glazing. The elevations appear to generally comply with the standards in the Architectural Standards Manual;however,a detailed review will take place with the administrative Design Review application. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (UDC 11-5B-1): A Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior to the submittal of a building permit application to ensure compliance with UDC standards and the conditions listed in Section X. Administrative Design Review(UDC 11-5B-8): An application for administrative Design Review is required to be submitted concurrently with the CZC application. The design of the site and structures is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 1I- 3A-19 and in the Architectural Standards Manual(AS*. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the existing Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit per the provisions included in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on January 5,2023.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Conditional Use Permit request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Nick Wecker, Barghausen Consulting Engineers; b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Nick Wecker; d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presentinggpplication: Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 8 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 9 EXHIBITS D. Existing Conceptual Development Plan&Building Elevations UM k% VA WAJF _ r II li =r 5 usnac ..�CK Page 8 Mwidiin City Council Maetg Aapnda September 17.2019- Page fM of 259 Page 10 E. Proposed Conceptual Development Plan �E USTICK RD. T I yI`I� SE � S1 LOT 7-.53 ACRES 91 LOT 3.119 ACRES _ r 61 II _ Z LU 1 f-"�J 'LL Irk / [7 i ZJ2 g i LLI APPROYEO - MULTLTENANr RUILOING E- 1r rI 8,au sgET -- I, DALTON ROYAL JAJANA ' E.Px JUICE LYfIiREI, E.01 O- � ' >LrnsaET Y II j LEGEND: MAIN PROPERTY LINE OF THE DEVELOPABLE SITE - -__- INDIVIDUAL PARCEL PROPERTY LINES _ I CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN [qm strewn SO-01 Page 11 F. Proposed Dutch Bros. Coffee Site Plan(date: 10/11/2022) 1 MUCH WOOS.COFFEE-ID060S-MERIDIAN,D PRELIMARY WM PLAN � ---E. 115TICK ROAD --�------�- �—"---- —�----�- -- 5k G - -- - - - - - - = --= Par�xEEx oEVELaPEn RiOJEGJ DATA -�:': '..':'.:''.'...-:_::�: : .. •I .'1 �- I n n .is I SIZE INFORYAl1ON 0.�IPII. •.•• ® an ` •�—xe. er�4w , , '• • ' 4 I I Qi EIIExOEYELOPMEM NOTES OC ; -- -- ------------- - - �`-_ -_y �'ACw`..s .i I ------.nm.v I n. - - end a I -------------- ---- i; II 1 PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION "¢ Page 12 G. Proposed Dutch Bros. Coffee Landscape Plan(dated: 7/21/2022) .. DUTCH BROa COFFEE-ID06DB-MERIDIAN,D uI i LANDSCAPE PLANTING a E-U i.k P,.d ffo� E 0 _06 LE a I 2e z F; p II` ei PRELIMINARY nNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION o Ids Page 13 H. Dutch Bros. Coffee Proposed Elevations (Not Approved) SIDING scNEDIxE -T DUTCH BROS E4� .mow , SCALE: &W=T GGNICH A pRpFgRpg CDFT]E ID00091 3095EUSTICI(RDAD I MERfC1AN,ID 83698 v s iv EASTELEVATION RCHTECTURE O 5 DI 10915E SANDY BLY➢,SDITE 100�PORRAND,IXt 9R14 wxw.Gn'xYNMmn ..SR4S529GT9 1SRi241]9S5 ADGUST 02,2Y12 PACE - SIDING SCHEDULE I DUTCHBROS 059 T �a3 �,un saeo wiww a _ WW E GNICH BIRCNBROSCDEFff 111O I EUSTICKROAD I MERIUJDGG ^ NORTH ELEVATION-WALK-UP WINDOW ARCHITECTURE STUD O _ 1WI SE SANDY BLVD,SUIT£ILO PORT D,OR 9T214 I wvnv.GTiiJuNimm I M..552.W79 I L 50G241.70%1 AIGUSTM,2022 PAGE M Page 14 SIDING SCHEDULE I DUTCNBROS eo m� SCALE: 318'=V * GNICH III 1 111 O EUSTICKROAD I MERIDMJDB3 � s 1n WESTELFVATION ARCHITECTURE 'STUDO 1001 SE SANDYBLVD,SUITE 1001 PORTLAND,OR M14I awrw.GndAh—Iv.503.552.9079I 1503241.100 AUGUST02,2022 PAGE A] sSIDING SCHEDULE �® I DUTCk BROS —at- ur'�",.'\ �UVII�JL°% O rca,rcere u,eam.eaEx.w m ��� ZI GNICH DUTCH BROS COFFEE I ID060013085 EUSTICK ROAD I MERIMAN,ID 63646 v SOUTN5ELEVATIONP ORIVETHRUMNDOW ARCK rFc I a hI 'STUDIO— -SUITE 1001 PORTLAND,OR 97214 vmw.GnidWrh mm v_503552 W791 f S 2417M AUGUST 02,Mn PAGE AB Page 15 FIBER CEMENT BOARD FIBER CEMENT BOARD FIBER CEMENT BOARD CMU MANUFACTU, NICHIHA -AfTURER_NIMHA MANUFACTURER'.NICHNI MANUFACTURER WIL AMET F- PROFILE:ILLUMIINIATION LE.ILLUMUNIATION PROFILE'.VINTAGEWOOO GRAYSTONE COLOR:BLDG DB BLUE _.__ BLDG DB DARKGRAY COLOR:ASH PROFILE:SLR FACE COLOR:CHAHCOAI-,OR SIM. CANOPY SOFFIT WIMDOWSYSTEM AMNEMADODNS-PAINT ROOFING MATERIAL MANUFACTURER:HEWN MANUFACTURER:KAYRFER OR SIMILAR MANUFACTURER'.SIERWIN-WILLIAMS MANI,- DURO-LAST PROFILE:NWSPRUCE PROFILE:CLEARANOD®ALUMINUM COLOR:BLDG DB GRAY DARK DL-60-60 MIL NATURALBSEALED FINISH'CLEARN01411T WHITE 'yyyy� COLOR:PER MFR.'�11 CTJRE DUTCH OROS COFFEE I IW 13055 E USRIX ROAD I MERIDIAN,1D 83548 MATERIAL BOARD IW7 SESMdYBLVD.SMITE 100 I PORTIAND.OR T1214I xw GnddiAivh n I e5O5.5529079 I L5O5241.7fl55 I AWUST02,N7L PAGE A9 L- 0 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Development Agreement Modification: 1. The amended DA shall be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the City within six (6) months of City Council granting the subject modification. A certificate of zoning compliance and administrative design review application cannot be submitted until the DA is executed. Applicant shall develop the property consistent with the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.B Conditional Use Permit: 2. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. The stacking lane, and menu location(s),and window location shall be depicted in accord with UDC 11-4-3-IIB. b. All mechanical equipment on the back of the building and outdoor service and equipment areas should be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-12. c. Additional signage and parking lot striping is required throughout the site to efficiently and adequately direct patrons to the menu boards and throughout the site with minimal conflict. e. Depict landscaping in the landscape buffer along E.Ustick in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3; landscape buffers along streets shall be designed and planted with a variety of trees, shrubs,lawn,or other vegetative ground cover that elicit design principles including rhythm,repetition,balance, and focal elements. With the CZC submittal,the landscape plan shall be revised to show the required mix of materials(i.e.,trees, shrubs, River Rock Mulch)in the landscape buffer adjacent to Ustick Road. f. Depict landscaping in the perimeter buffer along the drive aisles and drive-through lanes in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C; the perimeter landscape buffer shall be planted with one Class II or Class III tree per thirty-five(35) linear feet and shrubs, lawn,or other vegetative ground cover. With the CZC submittal,the landscape plan shall be revised to show the required mix of materials(i.e.,trees, shrubs,River Rock Mulch)in the parking lot perimeter landscape buffers to the north, south, and west of the drive-through lanes. £ Depict signage ahead of each pedestrian crossing in the drive-through lane notifying drivers to watch out for pedestrians. 3. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-I1—Drive-Through Establishment and standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49—Restaurant is required. 4. Per the Development Agreement(Instrument#2019-121599),a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway with a use easement and pedestrian lighting and landscaping shall be installed adjacent to N. Eagle Road/SH-55 as set forth in UDC 11-3H-4C.3 5. Submit elevation of the trash enclosure o that generally matched the proposed building design. 6. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed use prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structure shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19; the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and with the Development Agreement. Page 17 7. The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6. A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F. B. PUBLIC WORKS Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches. 2. Minimum 14 foot wide paved or gravel road required to existing sewer manholes in the sidewalk adjacent to Eagle Rd. 3. Ensure that trees are not planted in easements for water services. 4. Any unused fire line stubs must be abandoned per City Standards. 5. The existing public water easement does not cover all of the existing water service and water meter. A public water easement will be required over any portion. General Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall provide easement(s)for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility,or 30-feet wide for two. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. 2. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 3. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 4. All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 5. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 6. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 7. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 8. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. Page 18 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 11. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 12. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 13. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT No comments were submitted. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments were submitted. E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) No comments were submitted. F. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) No comments were submitted. G. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=282984&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX IX. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E) The Council shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit requests upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Commision finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the C-G district(see Analysis, Section VI for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Commision finds the proposed restaurant with a drive-through will be harmonious with the is allowed as a Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions noted in Section VI of this report. 3. 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. Page 19 Commision finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will be be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Commision finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection, drainage structures,refuse disposal, water,and sewer. Commision finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Commision finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. 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 the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Commision finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005). Commision finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. Page 20 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll N (, c'M CD O O - -- CU Z) 00 I U Lu USTICK RD . y CD 0 J _j R ~ � � w w D cm O O c� ---------- - ------- ------------ -- ------------- -----—�_ � .__ y cn z LISTING PYLON 131 LOT 1 - .53 ACRES --------- SI N I \ I _ B1 LOT 3 - 1 . 19 ACRES II I PROPOSED BUILDING A STAND ALONE OR MULTI-TENANT BUILDING I I AREA - TO II 1 • I NO DR II I I I_ s I II' I Q c I 14 J � ' Q u = I 0 w � 00 z w � � w Z) � I 2w Imam& — EXISTIN Z J O o _ Q QJ� � O PYLON w — Q Q o w SIGN I 0 0 = H 16 _ ��/ z D U) - - _ — 12 Z I LJ w a 0 o Z — p � O 0 ui > 12 U) < co I O 0 W I rt I 15 I I I B I APPROVED 8 EXISTING I MULTI-TENANT BUILDING E - 8 9 0 I 5 8,242 SQFT r AFC POLE ' SIGN ' — EXISTING I z 0 DALTON ROYAL JAMBA B 1 LOT 5 AMERICAN 131 LOT 4 U) w Io E-02 JUICE FAMILY CARE I I E-01 _ BUILDING D - bi o 3,693 SQFT __T LEGEND: PR E T o� c # 420665 / I DRAWN BY: CJL I I CHECKED BY: AZ w ■ - MAIN PROPERTY LINE OF THE DEVELOPABLE SITE _ �---_ I ISSUED: 09/09/2022 INDIVIDUAL PARCEL PROPERTY LINES _T ----- I A I RR N EP ORTH RED N % i 6276 I I I I � I I CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN NORTH S-1 SITE PLAN N.T.S. SD-01 1 2 1 3 4 5 ©COPYRIGHT DESIGN WEST ARCHITECTS T H E li'Arl W .o AN LAND LEE G R 0 U P W G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G� G -W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W E. Ustick Road S SS — r— SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS ASS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS T T T T T IRRQHP P_— OH - - - - - - — — I S _ — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - — — - - - - - - - - -�� - - - - - - - - - � - — � — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ----- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - - — P 0 P D 0 0 I I h I r I Pads.1 I Pad 2 GIR GIRR I I I___ f. I o.o o.o o.0 50'x 140' 6,600 s.f. � I o.o � I I — — — — — — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - - - - — I � I r I I , IRR 36"GIRR 3 R - - - - - - I IW w w w w w w w W� \ I - D T'771 rz \ MOM Ssz \� II — I CD I i t I \ i Sh psP d4 I I w 8,800 s - G G G 55'x 1 - - I I w/driv -thru I Pad 3 r� I W CL Iw I I I 3,500 s.f. I cc O I I (Nam T I I I Milks La&Meridian irr. I — — — — — — — — — _ I Cs rai �gation�i I RR I� GIRR � \�\ Jw I I strict) I — — 36'GI R "GI — 36"GIRR RR - ---- ------- � � I I y / $ w -I CIO � \ / r — — — `�I Uu�P UGP LU CA III � _ E. Picard Street _ L lJGP - ss ss ss ss ss � � � — — J i COo ss ss $ w C o E. Picard w�w� a CO ane (Pr►vate) SS W SS w- w� s \ SS SS I I W so Wow SS W — — Z Z SS SS — — — — — c C5 -------- ---- C I CD SITE DATA R w 2- B7uilding Space = 25,900 s.f. C, Z Required Parking Stalls @ 1 per 500 s.f. = 54 stalls C CD Provided Parking Stalls = 137 or 5.29 per 1,000 s.f. R c w Cr. J I I z _ cc: Cl- EP EP Q I w - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - M I 0 50' 100, I a I I Project No.: 119025 Date of Issuance: 05.13.2019 SITE INFORMATION SITE LOCATION EAGLE AND USTICK MERIDIAN, ID 83646 TOTAL SITE AREA APPROXIMATELY 9.99 ACRES(435,343 SF) EXISTING ZONING CG(SERVICE COMMERCIAL) X EXISTING USE VACANT PROPOSED ZONING C-G(SERVICE COMMERCIAL) O S E USTICK ROAD PROPOSED USE MIXED USE(RETAIL/MULTIFAMILY) BUILDING SETBACKS FRONT(STREET) 0 FEET IRR. VAULT SIDE 0 FEET BUILDING SETBACK: 25 FEET � BUILDING SETBACK: 25 FEET REAR 0 FEET LANDSCAPE BUFFER: 2L F - / L LANDSCAPE BUFFER: 25 FEET -� - - - _ _ _ _ - - - LANDSCAPE SETBACKS LLJI ILA o p _ - FRONT(STREET) 25 FEET,35 FEET(EAGLE RD) IRR. VAULT m \ - - - - cri m - - O ��' N cn \ / N (n SIDE&REAR(ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL) 25 FEET SIDE&REAR(ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL) 0 FEET PARKING REQUIRED STUDIO(1.0 PER UNIT) 24 UNITS,24 STALLS - 1 BED(1.5 PER UNIT, 1 COVERED) 86 UNITS, 129 STALLS(86 COVERED) 12 0 0- O oN ~ 10 0 12 ~ 10.0' 12 0 2 BED(2 PER UNIT, 1 COVERED) 80 UNITS, 160 STALLS(80 COVERED) IRR. VAULT TYP' �" 10.0' oN ~ 12 I 3 BED(2 PER UNIT, 1 COVERED) 23 UNITS,46 STALLS(23 COVERED) 6 o TYP TYP GUEST PARKING(1 PER 10 DWELLING UNITS) 213 UNITS,21 STALLS N o 0- L J O 9 0' N I I LEASING&CLUBHOUSE(1 PER 500 SF) 3,050 SF,6 STALLS - - - - �i~ p}� M LT o a- TYPE �9.01 I 9•0' �_ I RETAIL(1 PER 500 SF); RETAIL FOOD(1 PER 250 SF) 1,500,3 STALLS(RETAIL);4,500 SF, 18 STALLS(FOOD) 20.0' ~ a' 10 0 11 � Typ � ml }CL 12 p � -TYPE : ( -19 0' IRR. VAULT TOTAL PARKING STALLS REQUIRED 407 STALLS(189 COVERED) 25.0' 12 o w TYP -�}co o' o I -TYP I STANDARD PARKING STALLS PROVIDED 269 STALLS 19.0' - - - - - - - - - - `n - - - - -TYP 9 0 o �' COVERED PARKING STALLS PROVIDED 205 STALLS(12 ARE ATTACHED GARAGE STALLS) w �I O w lei' TOTAL PARKING STALL PROVIDED 474 STALLS(205 COVERED) t U 19.0'- 26.0' 20.0' o o, 0 oizi O ' } Yw LEGEND oO o � IQL' 12 > z BUILDING A o m o 00 BUILDING F d W 0 0_ 0 9 I m -j U) N N 20.0' o Q - - PROPERTY BOUNDARY J J ~ U BUILDING SETBACK .e Q Q w TYP o F- F- U m J LANDSCAPE SETBACK COVERED PARKING 20.0' 25.0' 19.0 29.7 ,5.8 � � � ' I TYP � I g � 308 STALLS PROVIDED 20.0'1 20.0 5.0 � 24.4 302 STALLS REQUIRED TYP TYP 0i H 12 f I � AMENITY o U AREA b 0- I BUILDING B _•F- ' IRR. ESMT. 12 10 ' I t BUILDING - SETBACK: 0' BUILDING C LANPE BUFFE0 R _ I F • F lE @�/FF�k 225S\FEFFT j�u / //l 0 IRR. VAULT ai aI y J AI BUILDING SE TRACK: 0ANDSCAPEB FEET 1 90 2ow FFER. ct� _ IRR. VAULTa N m - - - - g 0' b TYPE 9.0' '' 12 1 p 0, co T 0' 12 0' 19�� N 'TYP�I^ I - - o o Yp II N T Yp N 12 25 0 0 19� �9 i OUTDOOR N o 9 �}A0- , SEATING / 0- 10 Types 12 20.0' 26.0' 20.0 BUILDING D 00 2 T 0' 0 2 TYP TYP G 20.0' 26.0' -19.0' 19.0'- 26.0' 19.0' .0' N ` Yp of h Z TYP TYP TYP -TYP � � r ti90' O Z }r O 0 10 12 rn rn PROPOSED 1N0 NG S 11 N Types g RETAIL � S�Ap FT@ E @U q 10 0 O FF\R. 25 FFET o T 11 <v L o 6 J 119 STALLS PROVIDED ( . �"' o NM r N N 62 STALLS REQUIRED Q � 12 Y� O - - S z(�' QjI w N �0\ a � w°'I cD c� O7 -19.0' 19.0' 26.0' -19.0'-5.0' PLAZA on- w \ O Q �- 9 _ I 10.0 _TYP TYP -TYP Ku 0 100, o TYP`- j oZ N o >- I O7 � CO CIV ~\ � (020'0' ~ 10.0' BUILDING E 8 oa TYP O 9.0' o-� I I o I TYP N ~ O I I 35.0' L/S BUFFER \ 12.0' J LANDSCAP BUFFESETBACK- 25 FEET I O7 C° BUFFER• I 10.p' 25 FEET O b a TYP' of � � _ I � BUILDING BUILDING LANDSCAP SETBACK: 0 FEET LANDSCA SETBACK. BUFFER: 0 FEET BUFFER: O FEET 0 FEET s CONCEPT SITE PLAN - C E N T R E PO I N T GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 80 Eagle & Ustick Meridian, ID August 12, 2022 NORTH DUTCH BROS. COFFEE - ID0608 - MERIDIAN ID 0 Know Call bs oreyou � p Ca Dial you dig.Ui W PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN a z o SITE LOCATION a W 2 v t .° C z s ` ° I 2 E.usslck Rd Z 0 •� N I °' MVIq Lc to Z I F o •c I � Q ° r,@may❑r03 3 T m 00 N ' ° w W CV Q O 4' - - - - - - -- - - - - - - _ 1 co • . 3 E . UST CK ROAD _ o N w Q V Q�Leslie(]+ E tFs� 3 - SS SS ` - SS - S S - S SS SS SS S O 'a C° t(L I I P Dr Z M �_ .+ W U E Challis St ■ ■ U •� w 5L °, w I E Mesdewgrass.St N I J W W a IDAHO POWER E LF ,�PROPOSED CONNECTION TO p n W EASEMENT INSTR. NO. EX. POWER SYSTEM. 55 F a o •� zo 105078233 COORDINATION WITH I / a VICINITY MAP � a ao PURVEYOR IN PROGRESS. N.T.S W C ° o Z E o +, 313' _ I ss o �"'' - ... �.� - - - - - ENGINEER DEVELOPER O U 04 - - - - - - - - - - - - - UCH -H� Uc P UGP c7aP CHP O IP CHP CHIP CHIP CHIP CHI BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. ANDREW AND SHAYNA RANDALL 18215 72ND AVE. SOUTH a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ig - - - - - - - - ' ° ° SANITARY SEWER DUTCH BROS COFFEE OF CANYON COUNTY . C 0 10' 20' 40' - - - - - - - PROPOSED SCREEN WALL. EASEMENT INSTR. No. KENT, WA 98032 SKY RANCH BUSINESS PARK (n ° a - - �- ^ ... - Y °GL 101 135898 t+ W - TEL: (425) 251 -6222 CALDWELL ID o .. W .. W W W . W - W W W .. .. W W . . . -W . W . . .. - m -W-.- r -.-W � - - W W \ �� FAX: (425) 251-8782 EMAIL: RANDALLS@DUTCHBROS.COM ~ a� U SCALE: 1"=20' W . W WWW . W WW . WWWW . W . W . W . W . W . W WW . WWWWW . W , . , W W , . , W W rh WW . W . W . W . W . WWW . WWW � W . W � W co WW . W . W W W WWWWv . W .. W . W . W .. W . W .. . .. I ° CONTACT: JOSH HARLAN, P.E. c 3 . W WW . 4 . WWW W - W ` WW . ` W ` . . 7 W W ` WW . WW . WWWW . . . WWW . . NW ` WWWwW - B1LOT2W - ' WWWWW � WW . W W 3W WWW toa 4 .� . WWW . W . WWW . WWWW \�\ ° ° ° AREA± 1.19 ACRES, ° IRRIGATION DRAINAGE t PROJECT DATA . y W W WW . W WWWW WW . WyWWW . WWWWW . WWWW " W W W . • . WWW . W WSETBA W 16 I W W . WWWW - I \� - S SITE INFORMATION WS.E K W °W S ° ° 1 EASEMENT o '" W PROPOSED TRANSFORMER AND y a BUILDING SIZE: 1,154 SO FT t W W W W PRIMIARY/SECONDARY POWER SERVICE. W ° ° ° y . W oy -• NAME: DUTCH BROS - MERIDIAN, IDAHO •ii11► �•, p 184.79" ° W W W - W - W - W W W 12' - ° ° - ° - - `- -L2 a a - ° 4 ° and a / LOT SIZE: 52,011 SQ FT Po c ° �� ° o ADDRESS: 61 LOT 2 p �� 39.15' ° ° 21' 20.85' ° 0 ° FRONT YARD SETBACK: 35 FT SW CORNER E. USTICK ROAD AND N. 19 12 Ln W a W . �, W W W ° DUTCH BR03 8 ° I GW INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK: 0 FT EAGLE ROAD p ° ° W m &L,�' MERIDIAN, ID 83646 ° W W . . . W W W . . W W W . 16.7' O COFFEE ° °T 13 pin I " a a� EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK: 35 FT0 2 14 W . . W . I° °® REAR YARD SETBACK: 0 FT a ` . N P 5 ° W 1,154 SO. FT. 15 o N GROSS PROJECT AREA: 51,836 SF (1.19 ACRES) W 2 S p 202.96' ° I I I I ±10' IDAHO POWER EASEMENT NORTH OF PROPERTY 0 N W - - 58.58 '0 BUILDING ID: DB2040-AX '. I 20.95' IDAHO POWER EASEMENT NORTHWEST OF PROPERTY ° ° ° �° `t° e W I L� SANITARTY SEWER EASEMENT NORTHEAST OF PROPERTY `- o PARKING SPACES: � WWW 11 WWW - WWWW . WWW W - v' 4 p t t 4 ° ° 10 I I IRRIGATION DRAINAGE EASEMENT NORTHEAST OF PROPRTY - PROPOSED: REFULAR PARKING = 13 W W W • W • ' W 10 p ° ° "T�P s P N P I 135' c ,i - PROPOSED ADA PARKING = 1 - - W - W . . W . . W . . . . ° a 14 .N E - TOTAL PROPOSED PARKING SPACES: 14 � W � . WWW . W W 3 WWWW . WWW . W 4 W . WWW N p PROPOSED "b. 17 I SE BACK Q ®SITE DEVELOPMENT NOTES m o COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE = 20' x 12' . W . 12. 5 . W . W W . . W W W . W W W W W . W W W . W . W W W . W W ` W W . W . W W W . W W W W 12 CK BASIN. 5 I "0I 1. PROPOSED DUTCH BROS COFFEE. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS. 12 2 cVo+ 2QUEUING = 24 . . ao N WW . . W . .. W a . . . W �. W . ` �. W �. ` . ` �. W �. ` . �. WW . W . W . . W . . WW I I I 2. PROPOSED ASPHALT PAVEMENT TYPICAL. a .a 6 - W W W W W . W W W W " PROPOSED 3. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING AREA, TYPICAL. o u - tom W I W W W W 4 I UNDERGROUND I �� a - - _ EP EP - - " ' . W 7 DETENTION SYSTEM I 4. PROPOSED ON-SITE CONCRETE SIDEWALK (WIDTH VARIES), TYPICAL. - o - - - - - - - _ _ ° ° 2 5 ° (APPROX. 1,000 CF). 0 I 5. PROPOSED ON-SITE CONCRETE PAVEMENT, TYPICAL. d I 9' 9' ° d ° . . 12 W I o I 20 - - - - - - W ,ri rn M I Sm �- fi 5 - - - - 0 9 W o ° I SS 7 - -9'_ - - -W _ W W o W 10� �_ i W W I O I 6. PROPOSED 12' X 20' TRASH ENCLOSURE, WITH CONCRETE PAD. SEE _ a �12 I �I I ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS. O � �S Q PROPOSED DOMESTIC 2 _ '" c � L - - - - - - - - PROPOSED IRRIGATION 'S SS-in V CONNECTION TO Ei - - -9' - -8'- _ __ a►re� W o ° - - - - - - - CONNECTION TO EXISTING N a EXISTING WATER SYSTEM. 1 g 8 - - _ W - 7. PROPOSED SITE LIGHTNING. REFER TO PLANS BY OTHER FOR ADDITIONAL LL _ _ INFORMATION. TYPICAL. _ _ WATER SYSTEM. i- - � PROPOSED FLOW i W / I � o - - - - - - - - SS CONTROL STRUCTURE. ' L LJ •� - - - - - - PROPOSED CONNECTION W W / I NAL r J - - - - -TO EXISTING SANITARY 20 SS_UNDERGROUND NDE GROUND CONVEYANCE , i W • 8. PROPOSED 4" WIDE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT PARKING STALL STRIPES, TYPICAL. S\C� F�ci'L e SEWER. INSTALL f I O SANITARY SEWER _ PROPOSED CONNECTION TO CLEANOUT (TYP.). - - - EXISTING STORM WATER STUB. W W W - W I I Q 9. PROPOSED VAN ACCESSIBLE ADA STALL AND AISLE WITH ALL REQUIRED SIGNAGE. a _ W 104J U ' - 2 / i W W W W W W I 10. PROPOSED 1' WIDE WHITE REFLECTIVE PAINT CROSSWALK STRIPING AT 48" ON CENTER. s OF o c 11. PROPOSED NO PARKING STRIPING, 4" WIDE WHITE REFLECTIVE STRIPING AT 45 'i _ - - - - _ � W W W > vH o - - - - W W . W I I DEGREES AND 24" ON CENTER, TYPICAL. - - - - - - - - - EXISTING STORMWATER STUB. _ _ I W W 3 I RIGHT OF WAY WARRANTY 12. PROPOSED DIRECTIONAL ARROWS, TYPICAL. _ W W- - - - - - - _ - - ` - - - - - - DEED INSTR. NO. 95093466 o 0 N c ►/�� W� I- /i 19 O I 13. PROPOSED BICYCLE STORAGE. 0 °_ II M �/�/ N y W� - - - - - - - I N 0 >1 4) Z o `_-' - - - - - - WSW - - - - - _ _ W I 14. PROPOSED ADA RAMP. .` • - - - - - WSW- W W - - - - - - - -E '0 - - - - - - - W I 3 I 15. PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. Y Y = N o ® _ _ _ - -�- - - - - - --I 0 U � = o W W W� ,� I 16. PROPOSED COLUMNS, TYPICAL. o ; 018 c 0 c e' ac r - - - - - - 17. PROPOSED BOLLARD, TYPICAL. N 0. o ° ° ti 18. EXISTING CONCRETE SIDEWALK, TYPICAL. o z o `s ° ° - - - _J ® I I 19. PROPOSED CONCRETE BARRIER CURB, TYPICAL. C� E " I I o c ° II I I I I 20. PROPOSED SAWCUT v �I I 21. PROPOSED VERTICAL CLEARANCE BAR. LOT 5 3B1 r AREA± 1.02 ACRES c V � II 1 " *-1II B1 LOT 4 W c� Q M U II AREA± 0.54 ACRES I Q • CID N N c 3 73d1N ° � ` I ` j o LEGEND _ �, �; N ON.2c II O. m O N � � ` I I BUILDING LINE Lca V � Y ('4 � c a 'U o _ I EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN o+ X X ` ` I � I � PROPOSED CURB CID o a rn c c PROPOSED LANDSCAPING 0 0 Vf .0 0° •� PROPOSED ASPHALT _ . a C J 0 0 IRA PROPOSED CONCRETE ° 7 / E L ` - - - - - - J Z �_ LL CD a s PRELIMINA �H� Y mNkm0T FOR CONSTRUCTION FLOW ARROW �� o N N O N o 0 CN 0 4 / °+ C - O N > o Cn @ E FAIRVIEW AVE Wy DEER CREST ST z a Cl) + 1 16' ` jam Q W 7 U T _ m ±73' it I I n M Z a_C p a o z I. 0 o t z _ > o z " " N 00 " 00 I rn +I o c � 'Ob% Ft] c _ Yl C - --- - C W N � M Q � N '— � dlN Dutch Bros Coffee Dutch Bros Coffee Dutch Bros Coffee Ln N 8649 W OVERLAND RD, BOISE, ID 83709 1351 E FAIRVIEW AVE, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 5072 N LINDER RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83646 m U °0 a) SITE AREA: ±16,074 S.F. (.369 AC) SITE AREA: f11,761 S.F. (.27 AC) SITE AREA: ±25,352 S.F. (.582 AC) TOTAL QUEUING: ±155 L.F. TOTAL QUEUING: ±138 L.F. TOTAL QUEUING: ±218 L.F. 19 co T 3 VJ > O Z � o W M r C O _ E USTICK RD � � �. ='E - - O ` a O P- i ] LL o T f fnEl --- 4 300, Ditch Bros coffee V ONE , -► 1,154 SQ. FT. 0 LL le W. ����� - T-- �� I J C R) a o u Z 10 ® _ ►� , W ' 1 ` N 111 ✓ I N oo U � I •. swanLon � s z Z C W C: N 'Moo N M 2 N Dutch Bros Coffee N 3117 E USTICK RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83646 in U °d Y SITE AREA: ±52,011 S.F. (1.194 AC) TOTAL QUEUING: ±524 L.F. W. Overland E. Fairview Deer Crest St E. Ustick Rd Rd Ave Site Area (Acres) 0.37 0.27 0.582 1.194 Queuing Length (Feet) 155 138 218 524 Estimated Number of Cars that can fit in queue Cfl N � � I XZ � o CV W W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for U-Haul Franklin (CR-2022-0008) by Hillside Architecture, PLLC., located at 1030 W. Franklin Rd., on the north side of W. Franklin Rd. halfway between N. Linder Rd. and N. Meridian Rd. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/CR-2022-0008 A. Request: Council Review of the Director's decision on the Administrative Application (A-2022- 0232) to restrict Franklin Rd. access to emergency access only. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 14, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 i PROJECT NAME: U-Haul Franklin (CR-2022-0008) a Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 2 r 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Mayor Robert E. Simison E IDIAN.� City Council Members: =�� Treg Bernt Brad Hoaglun Joe Borton Jessica Perreault D A H O Luke Cavener Liz Strader February 14, 2023 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor&City Council CC: City Clerk, City Attorney FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner RE: U-Haul Franklin—CR-2022-0008 History: The Planning Director approved a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review(A- 2022-0232)for the 11,204 square foot U-Haul U-Box Storage Building in the I-L zoning district on December 13,2022. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review(A-2022-0116)was approved by the Planning Director to construct a 126,350 square foot U-Haul Store including indoor self- storage for this site on August 30,2022. Per the conditions of approval,the existing curb cut on Franklin Road is to function as a gated emergency access only. An existing shared driveway approximately 200 feet to the west is the main access to the U-Haul site in accord with UDC 11-3A-3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. Unified Development Code: Per UDC 11-3A-3A.2, access to a local street is not available,the property owner shall be required to grant cross-access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties unless otherwise waived by City Council.Access is available via a shared driveway along the site's western boundary from W.Franklin Road. Access to NW 10th Street cannot be obtained because there isn't adequate distance from the intersection to allow local street access due to ACHD policy. Therefore, a viable local street access is not available. Noticing: City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 1/29/2023 Radius notification mailed to 1/26/2023 properties within 500 feet Community Development Department . 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 208-884-5533 . www.meridiancity.org Site Posting Date 2/3/2023 Next Door posting 1/30/2023 Request: The Applicant has submitted a request for City Council review of the Director's decision to allow full access in lieu of emergency access only,via W. Franklin Avenue,as shown on the site plan below. �,w4 -------------- t i \ ?I -_ rymaswsJ _ °••• 9V'... ......�. ..� �� i�N� ]IBST FRANffiIN R e 2 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll CITY COUNCIL REVIEW FEBRUARY 14T",2023 ��_�--- CR-2022-0008 REQUEST: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO ALLOW FULL ""wL :.� � 'J ACCESS IN LIEU OF EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY is ALONG W. FRANKLIN ROAD PROJECT INFORMATION: —� — 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD MERIDIAN, ID 83642 Hl��Jrw�t/s*1 1r�S�M � N•■:■..r■.. .a■s _ APN: S1212346615 LOT: 4.13 ACRES ZONING: IL— LIGHT INDUSTRY CURRENT APPROVALS: A-2022-0116 _. A-2022-0232 i ACHD MER22-0089 H I JIHe MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN architecturepllc_ 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAU CITY CO UNCIL REVIEW �. FEBRUARY 14TH,2023 ' Lip. NMI CR-2022-0008 REQUEST: CITY COUNCIL REVIEW sw OF THE DIRECTORS DECISION TO ALLOW FULL a�r.� � ., � . --1A .i - "r ACCESS IN LIEU OF EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY r � �I ffR"� - MERIDIAN CITY HALL ..rj.JiJ : rn' � WIM +" �"! "---r-= ALONG W. FRANKLIN ROAD '_ L34 1rq,x rr . T r'�� •. � � +-� L .�]4i'� PROJECT INFORMATION: 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD MERIDIAN, ID 83642 APN: S1212346615 PROJECT LOCATION- - - LOT: 4.13 ACRES ZONING: IL— LIGHT INDUSTRY # s CURRENT APPROVALS: i A-2022-0116 A-2022-0232 —T ACHD MER22-0089 "I i HiHside MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN r architecturepllc 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAU V;flr! CITY COUNCIL REVIEW r,crrr wca - - FEBRUARY 14T",2023 REASONS FOR APPEAL Jt HEALTH AND SAFETY ,•h FIRE MARSHAL RECOMMENDATION: THE SITE HAS TO xP aPRcu STORAGE BUILUNG=A' r HAVE TWO SEPARATE ACCESS POINTS, AN APPROVED i1NOERA•2Q22.9,15 •r gar • { UNOBSTRUCTED ACCESS IS PREFERRED, BUT AN I EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE. I �'•.` �� —JOE BONGIORNO, DEPUTY CHIEF—FIRE MARSHAL, MFD PLAN 0 REVIEW JANUARY 19, 2023. ACHD RECOMMENDATION:...STAFF RECOGNIZES THE r NEED FOR ADDITIONAL ACCESS TO THE SITE FOR PRflP05E�5T0 E CIRCULATION AND SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS. „.tea=Eoo,PRINVso,FT BECAUSE OF THIS STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCT A 36-FOOT WIDE PAVED CURB W -. l RETURN TYPE DRIVEWAY FROM THE SITE ONTO ++ �_ PROPOSE TO W@EH -n - y I FRANKLIN ROAD CENTRALLY LOCATED BETWEEN 10TH 1 r — •o.�'.R,� "' STREET AND 12TH AVENUE• 340- FEET WEST OF 10TH - - - - - - -r STREET. THIS DRIVEWAY IS APPROVED AS A TEMPORARY FULL ACCESS DRIVEWAY AND MAY BE -- `� RESTRICTED IN THE FUTURE AS TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WARRANTAS DETERMINED BYACHD... ACHD STAFF REPORT MER22-00891A-2022-0232. *See updated ACHD location(page 7) W -- WEST FI,�J:VI+LI.V ROAD HiHside MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN architecturepllc 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAUL • �� CITY COUNCIL REVIEW rlcrr , r wca w ' — ' - FEBRUARY 14T",2023 a4TS.'052 REASONS FOR APPEAL (CONT.t-4� 4(] - / e �. �..r UNDUE BURDEN, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, INVESTMENT _ .,~.� 4 �. BACKED EXPECTATIONS: 97.—. -.. • PRpPti.'"'z.l7 STORAGE BIJILp1iiG PROPERTY CONTAINED TWO CURB CUTS ALONG - - =A' r Za APPROVEDUNOERA.2Q22.9115 `fir ' FRANKLIN ROAD AT TIME OF PURCHASE. � o • APPLICANT HAD REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT ONE CURB CUT WOULD PROVIDE FULL ACCESS TO THE SITE. • APPLICANT BOUGHT THE PROPERTY WITH EXPECTATION OF ONE SHARED ACCESS AND ONE FULLACCESS. I PRflP05EO STO E s eEJf�°'N�$ ~ THE CITY ELIMINATING ACCESS POINT WOULD 11-2I1A-POOTFRI[iIT50,� o:. dt C C►+ SUBSTANTIALLY LIMIT THE APPLICANTS' OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY. + PROPOSE TO WIPEH ISO _ _ f • LOGISTICALLY, BUILDING B WAREHOUSE DOES NOT s I WORK WITHOUT THE ACCESS OFF FRANKLIN ROAD DUE TO ACCESS AND CIRCULATION. —1 kL " - • REDUCED ACCESS WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OWNERS' ABILITY TO PROVIDE THEIR SERVICES. 'a` - xass pr�ew+rvcl -.,�•— WEST FRAM LIN ROAD HiHside MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN r architecturepllc 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAU CITY COUNCIL REVIEW rrl- - CKHT-VJLE --- f FEBRUARY 14T",2023 ILI _ �T •� - °'_'i5A.56' �l� ACHD RECOMMENDED LOCATION }1RY2o.fY-._-� ___ _� .e: `' • PER ACHD'S STAFF REPORT MER22-0089/A2022- �' 023, STAFF RECOMMENED THE DRIVEWAY TO BE r- LOCATED 340 FEET WEST OF 10T" STREET. PR6Pd:`T30 STORRGF 6LULANG-W 126.352'_ONOSS SOFT, \ 31.558_FOOTPRINT SO.FC. \,Z,• r— I �� V \� • PER FOLLOW UP CORRESPONDENCE WE HAVE �V� '�` - BEEN GRANTED THIS NEW ACCESS TO BE LOCATED AT 370 FEET WEST OF 10T" STREET. • THIS ALLOWS FOR INCREASED SAFETY AS RELATED ,ir.-s _ +�` TO CIRCULATION INTERNALLY ON THE SITE. µI' 4 PROP SEP P+ FQR a k 1 oul ING-PH l2 s.•.-. ,x-.., �` ! Q ffrrr i ACM - pg P - PRAJ1 KL:-J ROAD tz7 i f4�F` - HiHside MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN r architecturepllc 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAUL CITY COUNCIL REVIEW EKHT°'-E — f FEBRUARY 14T",2023 REQUEST/OUTCOME a '. APPLICANT LOOKS FORWARD TO WORKING WITH CITY COUNCIL AND CITY STAFF TO REMEDY THIS SITUATION Pit WITH A SOLUTION THAT PROVIDES A WIN-WIN FOR THE PROP126.3i$TORRGF SO.F NG�A ; 3zB,a52_GRosssa.�r. � � r" CITY AND THE APPLICANT. $1.558_FOOTPRINT SO.FC. +ern. `o- I �� l'�• 1 " ' — \ ` THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME • 1 PROP SEP P+ a k oul NIG-PH E e Q pg P- H ^ ` - •ate-...Yn �a�_— PRAJ1 KL:-J ROAD � tz7 i f4�F` - HiHside MOVING AND STORAGE OF WEST MERIDIAN r architecturepllc 1030 W. FRANKLIN RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 UmHAU V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Sagarra (H-2022-0027) by Accomplice, located at south side of W. Orchard Park Dr., west of N. Fox Run Way and east of N. Linder Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0027 A. Request: Planned Unit Development for a residential community containing a mix of single- family detached, single-family attached, townhome and multi-family units with a reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A-6, and two private streets.B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 114 building lots and 16 common lots (including 3 private street lots) on 17.49 acres in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: February 14, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 5 PROJECT NAME: Sagarra (H-2022-0027) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name �jo 3 60 5 c 6 7 8 —7 ' 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING February 14, 2023 Legend o Grp DATE: 0 DProject Location TO: Mayor&City Council 1 FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ® � 208-884-5533 - SUBJECT: H-2022-0027 Sagarra—PUD,PP (aka Linder Village) ®® LOCATION: South side of W. Orchard Park Dr.,west of N. Fox Run Way, east of N. Linder o ee Rd.,in the NW 1/4 and NE 1/4 of Sectio ° 25,TAN.,R.1W. (Parcels #R5262501800,R5262502100 & ' #R6905540100) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Preliminary plat(PP) consisting of 114 building lots and 16 common lots(including 3 private street lots)on 17.49 acres in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts; and a Planned Unit Development(PUD)for a residential community containing a mix of single-family detached, single-family attached,townhome and multi-family units with a reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A-6. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 17.49-acres Existing Zoning R-8(Medium-Density Residential)&C-C(Community Business) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Community(MU-C)&Medium Density Residential(MDR) Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential(attached&detached units)(SFR)&multi- family residential(MFR) Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 114 buildable lots& 16 common lots(including 3 private street lots) Phasing Plan(#of phases) 2 phases Number of Residential Units(type 146 units(32 SFR detached units,38 SFR attached,38 townhomes&38 of units) MFR units) Density(gross/net) _ 8.35(gross)/16.30(net) Common Open Space ik 4.34 acres(24.8%) Site Amenities 12'wide multi-use pathway along the south&east boundaries of the site, a swimming pool with changing rooms&restrooms,tool Page 1 Description Details library/community workshop,dog washing stations,outdoor activity complex,fire pits,BBQ area with tables and shade structures Physical Features(waterways, The North Slough crosses this property. hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 1/27/22 1 History(previous approvals) H-2017-0088(AZ,PP,VAR)(Development Agreement Inst.#2019- 02837 ;H-2021-0034(MDA,Inst.#2021-102392);FP-2020-0004 7 B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway or District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was prepared by Kittleson&Associates,Inc. in es/no 2017. Access Access is proposed via the extension of existing local streets,which connect to (Arterial/Collectors/State W. Orchard Park Dr.,a collector street;private streets are planned for internal Hwy/Local)(Existing and access to some of the units. Proposed) Traffic Level Of Service Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service "SH-20126 0-feet Expressway 1,406 N/A Chinden Boulevard Linder Road 0-feet Principal 924 Better than"E" Arterial Fox Run Way 0-feet Collector 105 Better than"D" Orchard Park Drive 1,935-feet Collector NIA Better than"D" "Arliss Ave 50-feet Local NIA NIA "Bergman Ave 960-feet Local NIA NIA "Director Street 52-feet Local 65 N/A Acceptable level of service for a five-lane principal arterial is"E"(1,780 VPH). Acceptable level of service for a two-lane collector is"D"(425 VPH). ""ACHD does not set level of service thresholds for State Highways or Local Roadways. Stub N.Arliss Ave.,W.Director St.and N.Bergman Ave.,existing local streets,stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cros to this site from the south and east and will be extended with development. s Access Existing Road Network W. Orchard Park Dr.,a collector street,exists between N.Linder Rd.,an arterial street,and N.Fox Run Way,a collector street. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There are no arterial streets that abut this site. Buffers Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)l Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): Improvements • Linder Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes and enhanced with pedestrian and bicycle improvements from Chinden Boulevard to State Street in the future. • Linder Road is scheduled in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes from Chinden Boulevard to State Street between 2026 to 2030. • Linder Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to receive three bridge replacements over the Boise River,Eureka Canal,and the Phil lis Canal in the future. • Fox Run Way is scheduled in the IFYWP to receive bicycle corridor improvements from Pine Ave to Temple Drive in the future. • Cayuse Creek Drive is scheduled in the IFYWP to receive bikeway signage in 2026. Page 2 Description Details West Ada School District No comments were received from WASD • Distance(elem,ms,hs) • Capacity of Schools • #of Students Enrolled • Predicted#of students generated from proposed development Police Service • Distance to Police 5.6 miles Station • Police Response Time 4:37 minutes in an emergency(meets the goal of 3-5 minutes) • Calls for Service 2,465 within a mile of the site between 5/1/20 and 4/30/22 • Accessibility If climate controlled hallways are proposed in multi-family structures,PD requests further discussions with developer on plans for emergency police access. • Specialty/resource needs None—MPD can service this development&already serves this area. • Crimes 330 within a mile of the site between 5/l/20 and 4/30/22 • Crashes 128 within a mile of the site between 5/1/20 and 5/30/22 • Other For more info, see Section VIILD Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/concerns Water • Distance to Water Services • Pressure Zone • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns Page 3 1 1 1 ON IIIrifill a►���� ONE L&A __nwn= �■ �I�.r =uunum . I al ■ ���i■■1���il�lllllllll\►,.��i, = ' �_ - r.r•IP ',�.' CHI.NDE�I �pI ■� - qi _ulua ♦ �I 1 Ilitltt�1 _ r111111111r=1"1 :IIIIIOIII■nIIIII■m*�� �j- �1�It#�# ■■...'. .I rnllnul■:S'J -■nunnlm I 11■ 1 � /r +#atn ruxul ul►` O - lllim - • D - wrnm■nrr - �INIIIIIIIIr- %����.• ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ,r,�O##�1 ,L !rr1111u■ ♦♦fllllllll �'p ♦♦♦i�♦i♦i♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ �i 1�. r ■IIIII ll►y J�/IIIIIIIII�r�i♦♦i ♦♦i��i�i ♦♦♦♦♦i♦Q♦♦zz IIIIIIII . ■ �IIIIIIII Ilgir�:��lp r11r1a►►per Ilry��a��A1�r11r1a►p AlC_ Irr hull ,■, ■r- - =!Ilan= IIIIIIIIIit .��^ ' • -• •• _111111111�, ■,����-_ _ •.�� ■ ��-� ■11111111111: ■� c�1111 11 �'� ?11111111111 ■� _■■�1111 1 ���� 11111111111_ ■ =11111111111. ■ _ i.*���`1111111111{\ ���Vim - ■,1■ ■ T�/1111111111r1,.��.,� .�1111���1�� ■ ■� 1.�1■■�■1�� ■ �_�__�__��Illlillllll a1 ■■ i,,,i,iii, ,jinni ♦ O�j r '' ♦♦i♦�{{�Ir�I � �--- L�'e or ttHa_nnm �+♦t�♦i a�►0� '-�� ._��'��lrl=1111 ♦f���=\��� �: r■.��111 11-1r IIg111r II �� -J� ■ IR♦ #1��•- r 11"I��'�n■1■r■Ila r�ir��■��a1�♦�r :114�♦i-,,�+■4_Z - moon uouo mf�♦■� . #♦9f ■�w uuunu�J _munnml o■uur nlf,D��r r1♦.�•s•#•+:rr; R4uullln-�� �=Illunnlgl u■IIp■IIII� ♦ �r�a q f1 w■nan nut G pill■Ir � � �J � t� ■ +■ �_IIIIII■11■■_■r r\��♦♦j♦1 ■n Vn \� gllnnu_or111 li r ►��i ♦i ■ rrluu■m - �rti+♦i♦i 4 i• ♦41 q - - ♦♦i♦i ♦ � 0tv rq v �■ C-��- ♦ ♦•Ilrpi ♦,♦♦♦♦♦♦I .1,7: rh11 u ■= no -I -I� ♦ •♦♦ ♦♦ I�Y#j# ainualu■ I■■1 ��p�♦cur►♦ �i♦ ♦♦ err ;•tJ hrrnmrm J I-i]ri ►��-�r♦i♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦♦��♦♦�j##.U► Muunu■. �I■■1 % �-�:�.♦♦♦O�♦♦♦O♦♦ #t• CSC I � +_. ♦p ♦♦ ♦♦ y R ril�m n*� �■ f11111111�-r ♦p00♦i♦♦�I�rN rlrllnu nhr fllllllll�C.-i �i♦i♦i♦i♦♦♦,�♦#i + ♦j .•• ♦psi♦�♦ ♦♦♦ ♦ Q■�■ _■■�+9j '.. 1♦ ,♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦ ♦ #■r\ -- JI11111111r1►�►i♦ ♦ �i♦i4�♦♦♦♦i♦1 r• ■uw l�►r ��IIIIIIIIII� •i♦♦i ♦♦♦pips•♦♦.♦♦♦p♦f �• Irro I�b i � ♦♦4 p G♦ ♦,♦i p♦ full• ■ �I ♦fi 4 ♦i♦i ♦i0♦i♦♦to{ff. m■■n.�� � �♦Oi�♦,♦i♦ ♦♦♦p♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ■•iiiii a'� 1♦�i♦�i,♦`♦ ,I♦♦♦,�♦i♦��,,;� I IIoil IIr�C�f -/+,�����•'♦i♦ ,♦♦♦,♦♦��,,'+• - MIIII■El=er -= �i♦�♦I♦ ♦, rInIII� �II�` _�,l��i♦♦♦ ♦�4 i,�1 _- ■III■r� ■11� ♦ii� ♦�♦ i�4�i�, C= IIIna ��i♦i♦♦j ii�4ii�ii,��i IIIIIR _ ��♦ ♦j ry�ii�ii�1�_� 11 i /_ r •i r ' it � i r .1 11 III. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 11/16/2022 1/29/2023 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 11/10/2022 1/26/2023 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 11/2/2022 1/19/2023 Nextdoor posting 11/10/2022 1/30/2023 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(Comprehensive Plan) Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates the majority of this site as Medium Density Residential(MDR)with some Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) on the west end. The MDR designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school,or land dedicated for public services. The purpose of the MU-C designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU-R) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3C. Transportation: ACHD's Master Street Map doesn't depict any collector streets planned across this site. Valley Connect 2.0 identifies a future express bus route on Chinden Blvd. and secondary bus route on Linder Rd. The higher density is supportive of future transit service. A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was prepared by Kittleson&Associates,Inc. in 2017. Proposed Development: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a mix of residential uses consisting of single-family detached and attached homes,townhomes, and multi-family apartments/condos at a gross density of 8.35 units per acre consistent with the density desired in MDR and MU-C designated areas and in the development agreement. Comprehensive Plan Policies: The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development: • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Urban services are available to be provided upon development. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."(3.07.00) The proposed residential development should be compatible with existing adjacent residential uses. The proposed site design, which provides a transition in density and single-family detached homes with a 35 foot wide linear common area between the proposed development and the existing development with single-family detached homes, should minimize conflicts. Page 5 • "Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity,thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability."(3.06.0213) The proposed development will provide housing in close proximity to the MU-C designated area to the north where a mix of uses are planned, which will reduce vehicle trips and enhance overall livability and sustainability. • "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A) The proposed site plan depicts a linear common area with a pedestrian pathway along the south and eastperimeter boundaries of the site, which will connect with pedestrian facilities to the north in the mixed-use development. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available to this site and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The emergency response times for Police and Fire Dept. fall within established response time goals. • "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections,easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools,and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities." (2.02.01A) Safe pathway connections should be provided from the proposed development to the mixed-use development to the north. Usable open space and quality amenities are proposed. • "Encourage the development of high quality, dense residential and mixed-use areas near in and around Downtown,near employment, large shopping centers,public open spaces and parks, and along major transportation corridors, as shown on the Future Land Use Map."(2.02.01E) The proposed residential development is located in close proximity to employment, shopping, restaurant and civic uses to the north and near US 20-26/Chinden Blvd., a major transportation corridor. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban infrastructure as noted is required to be provided with development in accord with UDC standards. In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area per the analysis above and with the existing development agreement for this site. Page 6 V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD A. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat is a re-subdivision of Lot 2,Block 2 and Lot 1,Block 3,Linder Village Subdivision and Lot 1,Block 2,Paramount Point Subdivision. The plat consists of 114 building lots and 16 common lots(including 3 lots for private streets)on 17.49 acres of land in the R-8 and C-C zoning districts. Note:ACHD has provided written consent for the right-of-way for N. Bergman Ave. to be included in the proposed plat. The Applicant proposes to develop the project in two(2)phases with the western portion of the site first, followed by the eastern portion of the site, as shown on the phasing plan in Section VII.A. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing street buffer along W. Orchard Park Dr. on this site consisting of an 8-foot wide parkway and 5-foot wide detached sidewalk with grass on the back side of the sidewalk; street trees are provided within the buffer. The C-C zoned lot(Lot 8,Block 4)was fully landscaped with Paramount Point Subdivision(SHP-2020-0082),the commercial development to the north. North Bergman Ave.has been extended through this site. There are no existing structures on the site.Note: The Applicant's narrative incorrectly states a 10 foot wide multi-use pathway exists along W. Orchard Park Dr. Dimensional Standards: Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district.A reduction to the setback requirements in UDC Table 11-2A-6 is requested with the PUD request(see below). The final plat should graphically depict zero(0) lot lines on internal lot lines where single-family attached and townhome structures are proposed(i.e. where structures will span across lot lines). Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3): Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 unless otherwise modified through the proposed PUD. Access(UDC 11-3A_3): Access is proposed via the extension of two existing local public streets,N. Arliss Ave. and W. Director St., and N. Bergman Ave. Two(2)local public street accesses(i.e.N. Bergman Ave. and N.Arctic Fox Way) are proposed via W. Orchard Park, a collector street. Private streets are planned for internal access off the public streets; an application for such will be submitted with the final plat application. All private streets shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The Applicant should work with ACHD and the Fire Dept. on traffic calming measures to slow traffic on Bergman Ave. and W.Bacall St. as noted in the Development Agreement.Details of such should be included with and depicted on the final plat. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): The Pathways Master Plan doesn't depict any pathways across this site.A 12-foot wide asphalt access road/pathway is proposed within the linear common area along the south and east boundaries of the site in accord with the development agreement. Several micro-paths are proposed for internal connectivity and access to the sidewalk along Orchard Park Dr. and to the pathway along the south and east boundaries of the site; micro-paths on private building lots should be depicted in public use easements on the plat.Internal pedestrian pathways are also proposed within the multi-family portion of the development. The Applicant plans to propose two(2)crossings across Orchard Park Dr. for connectivity between the proposed residential development and the mixed-use development to the north with one or both being Page 7 smartwalks. The first is proposed just south of the library and the second just west of Bergman with the intention of connecting the residential development to a pathway to the east of The Barn and to the west of the live/work units to create an animated north/south pathway bringing life to the live/work units as well as a connection to the promenade connecting The Collection Library plaza,north promenade of The Barn and continuing through the east 13.7 acre proposed mixed use site (see pedestrian connectivity exhibit in Section VII.G). The Applicant should work with ACHD on the location and design of these crossings. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): A detached 5-foot wide sidewalk exists along W. Orchard Park Dr., a collector street, along the northern boundary of the site.Attached sidewalks are proposed along local streets. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A street buffer exists along W. Orchard Park Dr., a collector street,that includes an 8-foot wide parkway, detached 5-foot wide sidewalk and landscaping on the back side of the sidewalk with street trees. Enhanced landscaping should be provided within the buffer in accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and additional area added if needed to provide a minimum 20-foot wide buffer. Street buffers are required to be maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. Landscaping is required to be installed along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-12C. Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3G-5B.3,which requires a minimum of one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area with a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover. The Landscape Requirements table on the landscape plan and the Site Amenity Plan should be updated to reflect compliance with the updated standard. There are no existing trees on the site to be removed or that require mitigation. Common Open Space(UDC 11-3G-3B): A minimum of 15%qualified open space is required in the R-8 district to be provided within the development per UDC Table 11-3G-3 that meets the quality standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2. Based on 16.79 acres,which excludes the 0.70-acre C-C zoned common lot(Lot 8,Block 4), a minimum of 2.52- acres of qualified open space is required. A total of 4.34 acres of open space is depicted on the open space exhibit included in Section VII.C; however, some of these areas(lots-blocks) do not qualify toward the minimum standards as follows: • 1-1, 1-3 and 2-4(multi-use pathways 11-3G-3B.3b): The referenced code section pertains to buffers along collector and arterial streets—these common area lots are along the south&east perimeter boundaries and are not street buffers. The correct code section is 11-3G-3B.Ie(linear open space), which requires the area to be landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B in order to qualify.No trees are allowed within this area due to the irrigation easement that encompasses the area. In order for this area to qualify, an additional 5-feet would need to be provided outside of the easement area for trees and shrubs would also need to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. This isn't feasible due to an IPCO easement that runs alongside the irrigation easement,which also presumably doesn't allow trees. This area cannot be counted unless otherwise approved through alternative compliance. * 9-1, 39-5, 26-2, 28-2, 10-5, 11-5, 18-5 and 19-5 (micro-pathway&landscaping): 26-2 doesn't have a minimum width of 20-feet,therefore,it doesn't qualify; 10-5, 11-5,28-2, 18-5 and 19-5 are all private building lots,which don't qualify—the pathways should be placed in public pedestrian easements and should be a minimum width of 20-feet in order to qualify. (only 0.071-acre qualifies: 9-1 &39-5) • 1-2,2-5 and 1-4(landscape buffer along collector road): the collector street buffer can only be counted if it meets all of the enhanced buffer requirements listed in UDC 11-3G-3B.3; otherwise it Page 8 does not qualify. A 5-foot wide detached sidewalk was constructed in the buffer—unless this is replaced with a 10-foot wide pathway and enhanced landscaping and amenities are provided per the aforementioned standards,this area cannot be counted. * 8-4 (landscape common lot greater than 50' x 100' in area): This area is not integrated into the development, therefore,it doesn't qualify. * 7-2 (micro-path connection): this 0.04-acre area qualifies. • 3-5 (parking): the parking area does not qualify but the tool share/bike station/dog wash does qualify. • 24-5 (clubhouse/pool/grass play area/parking): this 0.48-acre area qualifies. The common open space exhibit is not approved as submitted and should be revised to comply with the common open space standards prior to the City Council hearing; or an application for alternative compliance to these standards may be submitted if the proposed design includes innovative design features based on"new urbanism", "neotraditional design",or other architectural and/or site designs that promote walkable and mixed use neighborhoods(see UDC 11-5B-5 for more information). Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-4)• A minimum of three (3)points of site amenities are required based on 17.49-acres of development area from the Site Amenities and Point Value Table 11-3G-4. A linear open space area is proposed along the south and east boundaries of the site with a 2,309-foot long multi-use pathway(4 points),which meets the minimum standards. Other site amenities are proposed within the multi family development(see analysis in Section V.B below). Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-IS): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical EngineerinRoo rt for the subdivision. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-I I C. Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. This property lies within the Settler's Irrigation District boundary. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21. Street lights shall be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances/ Waterways(UDC It It The North Slough crosses this site and was relocated and piped along the south and east boundaries of the site;the easement for such is depicted on the plat. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. This project is not within the floodplain. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)• All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. There is an existing wood fence around the perimeter of the development that is proposed to remain; this fence should be protected during construction. B. Planned Unit Development(PUD): A Planned Unit Development(PUD)is proposed for a residential community consisting of a total of 146 dwelling units on 17.5 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Page 9 A request for a reduction to the setback requirements for the R-8 zoning district in UDC Table 11-2A-6 is included with the PUD application(see table below and full exhibit in Section VILE). Dimensions listed as minimum;however,the typical dimension will be greater. Deviations to the setbacks may be approved with the exception that along the periphery of the development,the applicable setbacks as established by the district shall not be reduced per UDC 11-74A.1.Because common lots are proposed around the periphery of the development, deviations from setbacks are allowed for adjacent building lots. SETBACK INFORMATION N-eluuo xEYuesT1 pNovoseo NOYes: alaeou Towxuoues ouIN nulu s a oul' ors msAcx oFccuuoN LOTuwlcNnm cxoNr eecx eFcuRe - MooLe—-N... NwoMcs 6 AMIM NIN aMu1x AUIN sraeEr sloe sereAcx esau utu[ri warm 1 sTReeT a�TracAcram MIN - 4GbIL0iAFV.FS d'I"NIN WP fi'MIM lV" I. - GONittYARp1HEAWJATEA LON-0O6 R' WP 6 r ttr TNEREARE5GARAEf SPACEG AT iNE NGOWA IFAGgVpO LOGIWN W/5'S£!@4[M - SIN—FAMILY IIM 1P ]a' 6 d 17 The uses within the PUD are proposed to be interconnected through a system of local and private streets and pedestrian pathways as desired in UDC 11-7-4A.3 (see preliminary plat in Section VII.A and pedestrian connectivity exhibit in Section VII.G). Buildings are clustered to consolidate small open spaces into larger,more usable areas for common use and enjoyment in accord with UDC 11-7-4A.4. Private Open Space(UDC 11-7-4B): In addition to the common open space and site amenity standards in UDC 11-3G-3, a minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit.This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios,decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. Residential Use Standards (UDC 11-7-4C1: Typically,the UDC does not allow multi-family developments in the R-8 zoning district; however,multi-family dwellings may be allowed in the R-8 district when included in a PUD per UDC Table 11-2A-2,note#2 and UDC 11-7-4C.1. Single-family detached/attached and townhomes are listed as principal permitted uses in the R-8 district. A variety of housing types are proposed,including single-family detached(32 units), single-family attached (38 units),townhome(38 units) and multi-family(38 units)units. The gross density of the proposed development is 8.35 units per acre;the net density is 16.3 units per acre. A density bonus is not requested or approved; dedication of land for public use is not proposed. If some of the multi-family units are proposed to be condominiumized, a short plat shall be submitted where all buildings are constructed or have received building permits for construction as set forth in UDC 11-6B-5 Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3-27): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text) 11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: Site Design: 1. Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties.Lesser setbacks are proposed with the PUD(see Section VII.E for more information). 2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully Page 10 screened from view from a public street. The plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should demonstrate compliance with this standard. 3. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios,decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other access ways shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section,the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in section 11-5B-5 of this title. Compliance with this standard is required. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space.Some of the parking areas in the multi family development were included in the common open space calculations and should be removed from the calculations and not be counted. 5. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate,designated and screened area. The Applicant should comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 shown below. Staff ryee,,..m end-x. M 964i e*hibit in Seetio n W. Use And Form N umber of Bedrooms(Per unit) Required Parking Spaces Dwelling,duplex and dwelling,single-family(detached,attached,townhouse) 1/2 2 per dwelling unit at least 1 in an enclosed garage,other space maybe enclosed or a minimum 10-foot by 20 footparking pad 3/4 4 per dwelling unit at least 2 in an enclosed garage,other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10-foot by 20-fo0t parking pad 5+ 6 per dwelling unit at least 3 in an enclosed garage,other spaces may he enclosed or a minimum 10 foot by 20-fo0t parking pad Studio 1 per dwelling unit Dwelling.multifamily 3(triplex,fourplex,apartments,etc.) 1 1.5 per dwelling unit:at least 1 in a covered carport or garage /3 2 per dwelling unit at least 1 in a covered carport or garage per dwelling unit at least 2 in a covered carport or garage Guest spaces 1 per 10 dwelling units cotes: the Me,of the garage or carport required for dwelling units shall be measured by exterior dimensnns and shall be at least ten(I o)feet by[very(20)feet for a one-space garage or carport and 20 feet by 20 feet for a two-space garage or carport. The parking pad shall be measured from edge of sidewalk or edge of paved travel lane(public street,private street,or alley)where no sidewalk exists.For alley accessed properties the parking pad is not required in front of the garage if the garage is located at the five-foot setback to the rear property line;the required parking pad must be provided along the side of the garage unless equivalent off-street parking,as determined by the Director,is provided in accord with SeMon 11-3C-5 Table 11-3C-5 of this Article. 3 For—domino,pmjIthe required number of parking spaces shall be determined by the Director based on the proposed development if the proposed development is similar to asingic,family develapment,such standard,shall apply.if the proposed development is similar to multifamily apartment complex,such standards shall apply. The required number ofp,rking,p,c,,forth,residential portion of a vertically integrated project shall be in addition to that required for nonresidential uses as listed in s,bs i,n B of this section. i:q submi The proposed off-street parking complies with and exceeds the minimum standards by 16 spaces; an additional 122 on-street parking spaces are also available (see Section VIT F). 7. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: a. A property management office. b. A maintenance storage area. c. A central mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. I A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development. (Ord. 18-1773,4-24-2018) The site amenity plan included in Section VILD does not depict these items;a revised plan should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that includes these items. Page 11 Common Open Space Design Requirements(UDC 11-4-3-27C): The total baseline land area of all qualified common open space shall equal or exceed 10%of the gross land area for multi-family developments of 5 acres of more. The proposed development is exempt from this standard because a single-family development is concurrently proposed, which requires compliance with the minimum open space standards in UDC 11-3G-3 (see above analysis in Section VA). Common open space areas are also required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 27C.2,which state that open space areas must be integrated into the development as a priority and not for the use of land after all other elements of the development have been designed. These areas should have direct pedestrian access,be highly visible,comply with CPTED standards and support a range of leisure and play activities and uses—irregular shaped,disconnected or isolated open spaces do not meet the standard. Open space areas should be accessible and well connected throughout the development(i.e. centrally located,accessible by pathway and visually accessible along collector streets or as a terminal view from a street). Open space areas should promote the health and well- being of its residents and support active and passive uses for recreation, social gathering and relaxation to serve the development. The proposed common open space meets these standards. All multi-family projects over 20 units are required to provide at least one (1)common grassy area of at least 5,000 s.f. in area that's integrated into the site design allowing for general activities by all ages,which may be included in the minimum required open space. The area shall increase proportionately as the number of units increase and shall be commensurate to the size of the development as determined by the decision-making body. The Applicant proposes one (1) common open space area (Lot 8, Block 4) at the northeast corner of the development consisting of 30,384 sf. that meets the size requirement but is not integrated into the site design.Although the area is included in the proposed plat, it was developed with and appears to be part of the adjacent commercial development(Paramount Point subdivision). Therefore,Staff recommends a minimum 5,000 square foot common area is proposed that complies with this standard. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area.All multi family units contain more than 500 square feet(sf.) of living area. b. Two hundred fifty(250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred(500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.A total of 38 units contain between 500 and 1,200 s f of living area; therefore, a minimum of 9,500 sf. (or 0.22-acre) of common open space is required. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.None of the units contain more than 1,200 sf of living area. At a minimum, a total of 9,500 sf. (or 0.22-acre) of qualified outdoor common open space is required to be provided per this standard. This is in addition to the requirements in UDC 11-3G- 3C. Overall, a minimum of 2.74-acres of qualified open space is required that complies with the standards in UDC 11-3G-3B and 11-4-3-27C.A total of 4.34-acres of qualified open space is depicted on the qualified open space exhibit;however, some of these areas do not qualify as noted in Section VA above. The open space exhibit should be revised prior to the City Council hearing to only include qualified open space that complies with the aforementioned standards. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred(400) square feet in area,and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty feet(20'). The open space exhibit should be revised Page 12 to exclude areas that are not a minimum of 400 sf. and that don't meet the dimensional width and length standard. In phased developments,common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. An exhibit shall be submitted demonstrating compliance with this standard for each phase of development prior to the City Council hearing.If changes are necessary to the phasing plan to comply with this standard, a revised phasing plan should be submitted. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4) in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. (Ord. 09-1394, 3-3-2009, eff.retroactive to 2-4-2009) The street buffer along W. Orchard Park Dr., a collector street, was constructed with the previous subdivision (Linder Village) and does not include a berm; the buffer is included in the common open space calculations. Staff recommends the buffer is allowed to count toward the minimum standards if enhanced landscaping is provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B.3 as recommended. Site Development Amenities: 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2) Fitness facilities. (3) Enclosed bike storage. (4) Public art such as a statue. (5) Dog park with waste station. (6) Commercial outdoor kitchen. (7) Fitness course. (8) Enclosed storage. b. Open space: (1) Community garden. (2) Ponds or water features. (3) Plaza. (4) Picnic area including tables,benches, landscaping and a structure for shade. c. Recreation: (1) Pool. (2) Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. d. Multi-modal amenity standards: (1) Bicycle repair station. Page 13 (2) Park and ride lot. (3) Sheltered transit stop (4) Charging stations for electric vehicles 2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as follows: a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty(20)units,two(2)amenities shall be provided from two (2) separate categories. b. For multi-family development between twenty(20) and seventy-five(75)units,three(3) amenities shall be provided,with one from each category. c. For multi-family development with seventy-five(75)units or more, four(4)amenities shall be provided,with at least one from each category. d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred(100)units,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development. 3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in addition to those provided under this subsection D,provided that these improvements provide a similar level of amenity. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) A total of 38 multi family units are proposed; therefore, a minimum of three (3)site amenities are required, one from each category. Proposed site amenities consist of a swimming pool with changing rooms and restrooms; walking trails/pathways; a community workshop building that will allow for bicycle repair, woodworking, etc.; a dog wash station and related amenities for pet care; a BBQ area with tables and a shade structure; a dedicated open space area around the pool area for fire pits; and another dedicated open space area for bike parking, bench seating, tables, moveable planters and string lights, which exceeds the minimum standards. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide. b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches (24")shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict landscaping in accord with these standards. F. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Street buffer landscaping is required to be installed with the subdivision plat as noted above in Section V.A. Landscaping is required to be installed along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-12C. The common area lot along the south and east boundaries of the site where a 12-foot wide access Page 14 road/multi-use pathway is proposed is encompassed by an irrigation easement that prohibits trees within the easement. Prior to the City Council hearing,an Alternative Compliance application should be submitted to relocate the trees required in this area to along micro-paths within the development, as proposed; shrubs and other plantings should be provided within this area if allowed by the easement holder in accord with UDC 11-3B-12C.2. Landscaping is required in common open space areas in accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3G-5B.3,which requires a minimum of one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area with a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover. The Landscape Requirements table on the landscape plan and the Site Amenity Plan should be updated to reflect compliance with the updated standard. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 5-foot tall fence is proposed around the swimming pool; the fence is required to comply with the building code requirements for such. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures,included in Section VII.H. A mix of 1-, 2-and 3-story structures are proposed in a variety of construction materials and styles. To ensure quality of design for an exemplary development, Staff recommends final design of all structures comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual,unless otherwise approved through a design standard exception.The Applicant's narrative includes a request for exceptions to design standards#R3.IE and#R3.1F in the Architectural Standards Manual;these exceptions should be included with the Design Review application and are not approved with this application. A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of all structures.A Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) application is required to be submitted for the multi-family structures along with the Design Review application; one(1)CZC may be submitted for the overall multi-family development if desired. In approving the planned development,the Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, additional conditions,bonds,and safeguards in conformity with this title that: 1. Minimize adverse impact of the use on other property. 2. Control the sequence and timing of the use. 3. Control the duration of the use. 4. Assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly. 5. Designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development. 6. Require the provision for on site or off-site public facilities or services. 7. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required in this title. 8. Require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts,which provides services within the city. Because like uses (i.e. single-family detached homes) are proposed to existing abutting single-family detached homes in Paramount Subdivision and a transition in housing types and density is proposed along with a 35 foot wide linear common open space area as a separation and buffer, Staff is not recommending any additional conditions to minimize any adverse impacts of the use on adjacent properties. Page 15 VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested preliminary plat and planned unit development with the conditions noted in Section VIII,per the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on December 1,2022 and January 5,2023.At the public hearing on January 5',the Commission moved to recommend aqpproval of the subject PP and PUD requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Michael Slavin,Tony Tseng b. In opposition:None C. Commenting. Doug Jones,Chris Eastman, Sally Reynolds,Julie Duran, Shane Nye and Jennifer Card,Lisa Metcalf,Kelly CgMenter,Justin Carpenter d. Written testimony: Michael&Linda Arnold,Leah Balecha,Daniel Briggs,Julie Duran. Matt Mueller, Scott Fuller,and Shane&Julia Duty e. Staff presenting gpplication: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. Request for denial of the project as currently submitted due to the following reasons: 1) project isn't consistent with the MDR FLUM designation and would be more gppropriate in the MHDR designation; 2, the proposed parking isn't sufficient for the proposed development and will result in substantial on-street parking that will contribute to congestion and make travelingthrough hrough the community difficult; 3, the proposed contemporary modern design of the single-family homes are not harmonious with the design of existing single-family homes in the adjacent Paramount subdivision; 4)on-street parking along Bergman should not be allowed due to the curvature of the street which will not allow two vehicles traveling in opposite directions to easily pass one another if there are cars parked on either side if the road on the curve; and 5, belief that too many residential units are proposed in this area,which will not complement the existing neighborhood and will negatively impact the community's livability. b. Increase traffic, density and on-street parking on N. Bergman Ave. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Update the parking plan to ensure the project is adequate parked per UDC standards. b. Update open space exhibit to ensure the project meets the open space standards. C. Code complaint fencing along the south and east boundary of the proposed development. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. The Commission required pedestrian lighting to be installed along the pathway along the south and east perimeter boundaries of the subdivision; b. The Commission directed the Applicant to coordinate with ACHD on installing `no parking" signs on the public streets where the"s"or 90-degree curves are located(i.e. N. Bergman Ave.,N. Arctic Fox Way&N. Arliss Ave.); C. The Commission directed the Applicant to continue working with abutting neighbors on repairing the existingfg that was damaged duringtiling iling of the North Slough. 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 16 VII. EXHIBITS A. Preliminary Plat(dated: 9/19/22)&Phasing Plan PRELi MINARY PLAT FOR SAGARRA SLJ601VISION a w!lLnT of corm z_a of acoeK�.Aeao core.-3 Qo w�oe,c a,c.NOEw v°Lco.ce aa.aamelor+ -_ n MouwT Po•NT a�.ao�vlaior+ m�TunTlrJ IN Twe NW}nNo Nf_$aF m�GT1oN as.Tow,aewlP a N wTn.rss.kG!1 wlsT, saiaE M�•'�Ial-su,non eoY�eTv.fowHo � c�� ' Legend Notes X. 33147 Standard Local Street n 9 _, VRMFY map ® 25•PrWate Street(Phase 11 ��.---.f,•®•• I 17 ","`••.. 26•Prlvata Street 1Pheae 2J n ,•...•. :_:.._ _ ___ Kp W� YA 4 a .I I , Contacts �� r - __.�, � _f� __— _ _k - � __ -.v`sctvaa� �^. me�ou •,ow PRELIrA1NARY PLAT-PNASE 7 PP.7 � u Phasing Plan Parcels Included iW1Y... 1,,.1. '� _� t f.f •tom �I i I - _ -I.1��._.._. 494 `-y'�'� ! - ' � wva�.o.,�,-✓m+ ._.� ,gz- III bl _ PRELIMINARY PLAT-PHASE 2 _ I` PP.2 Page 17 PNORTH PARCEL#6 PARCEL#5 PARCEL#4 PARCEL#Z PARCEL#3 PARCEL#1 (INCLUDES EXISTING N.BERGMAN AVE. ROW) DEVELOPER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MODIFY THE PHASING PLAN BASED ON MARKET CONDITIONS Page 18 B. Landscape Plan(dated: 3/22/2022) -REVISED LANDSCAPE NOTES L..o^zL'rz CLAND CEAPEIREUUIIRREMEWS STACKo ROCK LANDSCAPE PLAN-OVERALL I I N LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN � .a�. AP- C3 r a_ a s I SC.4PE PLAN LANDSCAPE - LANDSCAPE PLAN , I� � �LANDS PLAN 1 ESCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN r LANDSCAPE PLAN -OVERALL I I L— ---------1------------ ------ ------ ------------ ------------J LD rT_C1 L100 Page 19 —r--------------------------------------------- l— I I f----- .,...._...,..,.�_._... I .®..��... ---------�— ...ems,.......1".. m-A 0 • • — I I C¢7 a • I I N ® I I __—_—___------•--------------- ____________ ae • 4 I ' � / I I I UNoscnPE I g,m,�J II I II I anN-nNEa2 I I o o _ L102 r----------------------------------------------------T- _ I I I I I I I I _ I I I � - • I i� m o I 0 I _ LANNSGAPE _J______________ 0 0 A—. L104 Page 20 C7 long® C07 a■■■® CO] a■■■� a■■■® ® a■■■MCCOMMIZE ova■■■� .`>'Yd�B; M�EEI Its i �A ®tea■®�o� -- ® a■■�� ova■■■� ®tea■■©� �a� o�■■■vim � •-- ` s: o�■■■vim . gloom v®a■■a® KI®a■■a® ®a■■■® ■ , G � � Y , � EO® ®a■■■® 1�`� 1N ► ova■■■� ' " �� ���_ ,s ®tea■®�� I r' _ `— . ®tea■■�� �I �� �:, , ,�: __. ova■■■� ..a 'i MEN��IIIGL. : . IIIEI ®®a■■ate " --� ova■■O® `T i'1 1 1 ' 11 '1�_ 1 1 r mmm 0�O■■O® — _ -s s o�■■■NM — — -- 0��■■■® ,. r�`.':s.::3t .a,„:, .r;_.: .._ii_.. .:. ,:e .r ..s._.3�_ . ,r�c..::...._iL!�n. --- ___ -- '- — -------------f-- __ ______________ I s7ncK NocK � I -- ---------- • _ I I • I � I o I ® I s I PUN ANEP 7 I ' I —Ll07 I I .. 0 I ..�....... 0 I 0 m I I _ I I —• I I o I I ® I I I ® e I I ¢ • I I e.. • � I � I I • _ I I o m. I I UNOSCAPE I I PUN-AREAS I I 0 f EO 0 L108 Page 22 A STAY. ROCK r�l BALLS BURLAP TREE PLANTING � lZ SHRUB PLANTING �® /3�PLANTER ISLAND DETAIL � 4:STEEL IAIJDSCAPE EGGING N C CD a JIB .�, Ll� �,.JI .,m DETAILS 1"'1 �51,5'POOL FENCE L150 Page 23 C. Common Open Space Exhibit(dated: 2/"�2 12/21/2022)—REVISED STAC oROCK OPEN SPACE SUMMARY PHASE 1 OPEN SPACE SUMMARY OVERALL OPEN SPACE SUMMARY PHASE 2_ . PATHWAY LEGEND: IM ' Q I i I _ __ __II __—__— _—___� _� -•.""�� -. T— - -_ __ .. -- _____ OPEN SPACE T �T EXHIBIT- OVERALLrLrLIZf� SEX-1.0 Page 24 OPEN SPACE SUMMARY PHASE 1: PAiHWAV LEGEND' . ��ao�=��� es I„ ' II_ I ______ ____ - O 7 — I . - I , SPACE F —BR- \� P-SE I 1YLTL�� �EX-1.1 W EN SPACE SUMMARY PHASE 2' ■ss ..aMum�ncu.m� .w oas m. � - . '�mwo�_®�o��_an \b nwcw exouP 3 F 1 �I I f Z ! / ——— N I � r�. I ' l 'I i � I i i 11 R—'Lr1 EX-12 Page 25 D. Site Amenity Exhibit LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS PI_ _ OPEN SPACE SUMMARY. .,'=R.E.am..c.m.ewwucmwz .e,�,,,x.mm,amw..n.we •�,••,"`•,•,:"C6 ago .o„-,G. n If 1110[I wa._..00...�. ..� LANDSCAPE MATERIALS LEGEND' �\ � o a Q Z 2 � € VJ co cc PUD SITEAMENITY pp5 PLAN T7 fZl—L�� L160 Page 26 E. Proposed Reductions to R-8 Setbacks PHASE a i a fill �'C i ij � I Development setback diagram era..cK INMR TION w ai—.E M f - ocu�ow.urn ..uiH wn s uw ov r u�N LL � coum�.wwxE.ew.TEacoHvos v w. a ,o .Hma.Hrso.«.cT SH.ces..�He Huow..eH�wlooiee.,wk wis sne.cH � — u .a,e .sriccu�:He...HOWH,Hisis�is.Eo.sTME��rviMW.HE nT�u�oi..«s�oHw�«BE aaE..Eq,�..«.His .rc,o ;�,� THE DO-EA.wrx He+ EP.caua*M NDO One VUO-Inrar---Roan--ERIHe—nrn1— o1 Page 27 F. Parking Diagram—REVISED Sagarra I Parking Analysis wan aoq'd nml emuided Req'd G.- Cmered Covered in T Covered in Packing Parking Parking PhaseI Phase ll Do radar Guest Total Provided Carport., Caw— u3 it Gesig nation Bed Cevnt Faller Factor factor IC.unq [[.wll Total ou, Requl,ed Required Total Required Gn511e Garage Garage Extra Spares Two Pack 1—h—, 2 2 OA 1.0 16 22 38 )6 ❑.0 ]6 ]6 3R 16 38 kibbo�Tawehomes 2 2 0.0 1.0 16 19 39 70 0,0 70 TO 35 10 35 M.ddle Thra.Tounhomes 0 2 t11 11 3 0 3 6 1 0 6 6 3 6 3 Multifamily-Headwater 1 T.5 DI 1.0 3 0 1 5 03 S S 3 — 3 Muklfamiiy-Headwater 2- 2 0.1 1.0 2 -0,. A 4 0.2 4 4 2 2 $FN GaragY Spacaal k/J4 4 G.0 - 13 ]9 32 in 12 -1 — 32 . 33 Total1 35 41 146 352 3,9 355 3111 1 146 2;41 108 Total Provided-OR We 372 o p 1 Total Reg utrad 355 47 76 Tot al AvailaMParking 493 I 'I I :I - CLPJJ - -- —�--E— — ----I '—_ — 1 — V. -- -- — — ---- _ --� I --1 -, Page 28 G. Vehicular&Pedestrian Circulation Plan HIGH DESERT DEVELOPMENT 1 1 28 NOVEMBER,2022 a I ---- CHINDEN IMPROVEMENTS PER . o . o STARS AGREEMENT—= -- — - 11I I H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I.......I..I I..I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -- - J f fin uTI muwlllllh a IwE uu IDu"III � an`� ' ---- � °� ,[ uulnalnlnr 1- ° FUTURE OFFICEIRE TAILI MULTI FAMILY _ DEVELOPMENT = 1 ImIf 11 N+9 OjIf DI uu�nunnnnmuuP 7\ z z \�`J\++,llllllllllltll' G C- � d c� 1 '6 / 1 S� — CONNEC ION POINTTO C = ? ----+JIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII' — ADJACENT PARCEL a r � w LOT 2 ; �Sa c _ Z a ° I�4-vIHInIIHHHI,,,J�IIr� nrr'n m Y.+++++a+\nlHnlutIHNNNnun+++p++ I. .._ - L-'�f-9 = _ \+``+``,+`++H,I��11�INn nnn N�NTNTN�N1�NNntIIHn NInfN Nnlnn Nninnlnnl+ - = ...I ( I I IIIII N IIIH FUTURE RESIDENTIAL =11111111n FUTURE RESIDENTIAL 1 Illi EXISTING RonowAv DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT o EXTENSION CONNECTION POINT TO _ _ - I11 I IIIII II I1111 I 1111 I IIIII I 'Illl lll� y llllll 1111 �n11L01111 \ '� .al Y ++\�+` 2 \\1t11111111 11 I lllll llllll)........—........... I Ill)llnlllllllllllllllll11......11ll+� AnJAGENT 1" _ - -- \1V\ �lI II llllll _ 1111#IIII ^ SUBDIVISION �� _ l+I HII#HHIHNTIII r__r \7 - I I I I I IIII I — _. -- -� �1111 11115111111111111111111111 IIIII 111111111111111111111 llllll = .11lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllll Erb, NEW STREET PER �EMSTING ROADWAY EXTENSION CONNECTIONI LEGEND L--- ACHDSTANDARDS POINT TO ADJACENT SUBDIVISION 1 111111111111 NEW VEHICOIAR FOALS 111111111111 PEDESTRIAN PATHSf SIDEWALKS �1111*EXISTING VEHICUW 11— Scale:1:100 CIRCULATION PLAN MDA I pg.2 Page 29 H. Coneeptual BuildingElevations Concept Elevations for Single Family Homes � 11R # II BuildingConcept: IF: T FE FE E 1, 7L — M El ICI Page 30 __�- -� �� �Illllllllllllll[IIIIIIII � -�- ' - _o-�= IIIIIII�1� __-����_■ � II�� �Imr,�,�' I-O-■_�._ __- I , ..�.: .:-1,_i�,.Illllllll�llllllllllllfi� ___-_--❑---=-II�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIi��,,� ll RISEN mmu ■■■ ff ■ - FIR-11 1■■ It I - Building"D"Concept: F .. Building"E"Concept: �- A-� 5 --..... I _ ,.., _ - ■ ■ ■ '1 Page 32 Building"F"Concept: .. u _emu . Building"G"Concept: It I� 11 Page 33 ICI■'■ ■ != ■ 1 1 ��'LJ Building"H"Concept: �.:' - ®E--;-9m:�] I.F.I F I.F:VAM. FAR FJXVATW- RIGHT ELEVA7'IETIy 4 • "t r � Fxisting Single Family Residential-, 13 u� u = W New Single Family Residential K.s 08 Page 34 o 0 Two Pack TovmM1omea Location 6�agram owe xi_s Typo'A'-Two PackT hones�.n..i., Type'6'-Two Pack Trnvnhanve vxrxis Two Pack T-h.- � 8 ® ® PFP1 } JU El Lip Q M raaor cuvnnon _ AZ nrwn i -. � O 0 0 I un FFT M o o fl s c, 04 Page 35 •L y O Y EL WIN �,► , ��� ✓I� /,/,/ ,/�^[,!, ,a mar �:;F�..�� o 1■ FE—M-0 Ron ■1 Ems ■1 11 IF ■1111■111111 01111 LL ggg� 'L L '' © Q C J f AA Z n TL L O 7011 Oil a-r' 6. F ri c ■ ni ie 19 c � rS O ri I O W o : Amenity BuiWis�g Laceiionz srrc xis s` /�! / O Q O Community Wotkzhep.x.s Community Clubhouse s:.,.:.i... ■ , p i Bl sou.x ELEvnTlox 01 wesv e�vn.iox BR sou.x euvwnox p� �C m Community Waxkzhap-Ceneap!Elzvalianz su,e��r-�s Community CWbhnuzs-Canmpt Elavatlanz sine ys'-rs 09 Page 38 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION At least 15 days prior-to the City Getineil hearing, Staff reconunends the Applieant eomplete the following:Submit an appheation for Alternative Compliance to UDC 11 3B 12C,whieh re the south a-ad east boundaries of the site to aleng mief:e paths within the development as pf:eposed on the!a-n ds,ape plan The Irrigation District allowed Class I trees and shrubs to be planted within their easement through an addendum to the license agreement(Inst. #2022-099262); alternative compliance is no longer needed or required. • S4mit a revised off stfeet paf-king exhibit that demonstrates eemplianee with the mifliffm sta s list T-abk-4 4-3 C.66.See updated parking calculations in Section VII.F. The proposed parking complies with and exceeds the minimum standards by 16 spaces; an additional 122 on-street parking spaces are also available. • SHbmit a revised qualified open spaee exhibit theA demanstreAes eemplianee with the mini qualified r-e"ir-ed to be provided. Areas tha4 don't fneet the lifie4ions should be_�emie_viedd 4 Rem the plan. The seale bar depieted on the plan should Ae be. An appheafieft fef altemative eemplianee to these sta*dards may be submitted if the proposed design ineludes innovative design feat+wes based on ccnew » neatfaditional cc » , e or-ather- arehiteetur-al anEVer-site designs th4 promate walkable and miXed USe fieighbOrhOE)ds (see U_D�_ Il Il SB 5 for-more in f anti^^ `.A revised common open space exhibit was submitted, included in Section VII.C, that depicts a total of 3.43 acres of qualified open space, which exceeds the minimum standards by 0.69-acre. • In phased develepmen4s, eemmen open spaee shall be pr-evided in eaeh phase of the developm eensistent with the rvquir-emen4s for-the size and HUmber of d-welling tmits. An exhibit shall be submitted demoastFmiag eemplianee with this sta-adafd fof eaeh phase of development. if ehanges are neeessary to the phasing plan to eemply with this standard,a revised phasing plan should be s4mit4ed, The revised common open space exhibit, included in Section VII.C, depicts common open space that demonstrates compliance with UDC standards for each phase of development. Preliminary Plat: 1. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Graphically depict zero(0) lot lines on internal lot lines where single-family attached and townhome structures are proposed(i.e. where structures will span across lot lines). b. Depict traffic calming measures to slow traffic on Bergman Ave. and W. Bacall St. as allowed by ACHD and the Fire Dept. in accord with the Development Agreement. c. Graphically depict public use easements for the micro-paths that cross private/townhome building lots. 2. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised as follows: a. Depict landscaping along all pathways asset forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.A mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative groundcover is required. b. Depict additional/enhanced landscaping within the 20-foot wide street buffer along W. Orchard Park Dr. in accord with the updated standards in UDC 11-3B-7C.3 and 11-3G-3B.3. Page 39 c. Update the Landscape Requirements table to reflect compliance with the updated common open space standards in 11-3G-513.3,which requires a minimum of one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area with a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover; shrubs and other plantings shall be depicted on the plan as required. 3. Future development shall comply with the minimum dimensional standards for the R-8 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 or as otherwise approved with the Planned Unit Development. 4. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B,unless otherwise waived by City Council. 5. A private street application shall be submitted with the final plat application for the proposed private streets within the development.All private streets shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F- 4. 6. Approval of a preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two(2)years of the approval of the preliminary plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if signed by the city engineer within successive intervals of two(2)years,may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections(A) and(B)of this section, the director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two (2)years.Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted.With all extensions,the director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of this title. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension,the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again (UDC 11-6B- 7) 7. Pedestrian lighting shall be installed along the pathway along the south and east perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. 8. The Applicant shall coordinate with ACHD on installing `no parking signs on the public streets where the"s"or 90-degree curves are located(i.e.N. Bergman Ave.,N.Arctic Fox Way&N.Arliss Ave.). 9. The Applicant shall continue working with abutting neighbors on repairing the existingfencing encing that was damaged duringtiling iling of the North Slough, Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development: 10. Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi-Family Development and the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district is required,unless otherwise approved through the Planned Unit Development(see deviations to setbacks approved in Section VII.E). 11. The site/landscape plans included in Section VII shall be revised as follows: a. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.2. b. Depict the location of the property management office;maintenance storage area; central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access; and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. Page 40 c. Depict landscaping along all the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E. d. Depict shrubs and other plantings adjacent to the pathway along the south and east boundaries of the site in accord with UDC 11-3B-12C as allowed by the Irrigation District within their easement. e. Update the Landscape Requirements table to reflect compliance with the updated common open space standards in 11-3G-513.3,which requires a minimum of one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area with a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover; shrubs and other plantings shall be depicted on the plan as required. f. Depict a minimum 5,000 square foot common grassy area integrated into the site design that allows for general activities by all ages that complies with the standard listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C.3. g. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.A mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one (1) tree per 100 linear feet ofpathway. h. Provide bicycle parking spaces per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi-family building and the amenity buildings. i. Provide off-street parking spaces for the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and 11-3C-6B.1 per the analysis in Section VI. j. At a minimum, depict site amenities consistent with those proposed with the subject application. k. Minimum 7-foot wide sidewalks shall be provided where parking abuts sidewalks if wheel stops aren't proposed to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B4; if 7-foot sidewalks are proposed,the length of the stall may be reduced to 17 feet. 1. A detail shall be included of the fencing proposed around the swimming pool that complies with building code requirements for such. 12. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.5. 13. All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F. A recorded copy of the document shall be submitted prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 14. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units in accord with UDC 11-4-3- 27C.6. 15. A minimum of eighty(80)square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit per UDC 11-74B. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. 16. The Applicant shall coordinate with ACHD on the location and design of the proposed crosswalks across W. Orchard Park Dr. 17. If some of the multi-family units are proposed to be condominiumized, a short plat shall be submitted where all buildings are constructed or have received building permits for construction as set forth in UDC 11-6B-5. Page 41 18. Future development shall comply with the vehicular and pedestrian circulation plan in Section VII.G. 19. A Design Review application shall be submitted for all structures within the development to ensure quality of design for an exemplary development. All structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual unless otherwise approved through a design standard exception. 20. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) application shall be submitted for the multi-family structures concurrent with the Design Review application; one (1)CZC may be submitted for the overall multi-family development if desired. 21. A conditional use permit/planned unit development,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the city. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits/planned unit developments that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the city engineer within this two-year period. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsection(F)(1)of this section,the director may authorize a single extension of time to commence the use not to exceed one (1)two-year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the commission may be granted. With all extensions,the director or commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of this chapter(UDC 11-5B-6F). B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 No permanent structures (trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls,fences,infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.) are to be built within the utility easement. See "WW Comments - Sagarra" for details. 1.2 Must provide access path per City requirements to existing manhole located on western end of site (Sheet CE.1)and existing sewer just south of Orchard Park Dr. (left side of Sheet CE.2). 1.3 SSMH-4E is outside the easement. Easement needs to by 20'and extend 10'beyond the manhole. Also need access path up to manhole per City requirements. 1.4 Do not have sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. This comment was made during the preapp also. There are a few areas that this is occurring. Ensure that this is corrected in future submittals. See "WW Comments -Sagarra" for details. 1.5 Sewer services must be installed at 90 degrees to a sewer main or connected to a manhole. See "WW Comments - Sagarra" for details. 1.6 Provide 10'separation between sewer main and infiltration trench. 1.7 To and through required to parcel R5262501200. 1.8 Flow is committed. 1.9 There is a gap in the water line along road 4. This needs to connect. 1.10 Have callout to remove blow-off valves. 1.11 Add valve on existing water line in Bergman Ave for a total of 3 valves on the crossing. 1.12 Add valve on existing water line in Road-1 for a total of 2 valves at the tee. 1.13 See Change Marks on"Public Utility Plan"pdf for additional details. 1.14 Streetlight plan will be required at time of development. Page 42 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover from top of pipe to sub- grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Per Meridian City Code(MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 2.3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor.DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-313-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 2.7 Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. Page 43 2.11 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.18 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.19 At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.20 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272. 2.21 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 2.22 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=277043&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCity D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancit .00rg/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=2 77044&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City Page 44 E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) h yps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278542&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City F. SETTLER'S IRRIGATION DISTRICT(SID) https://weblink.meridianciN.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=277091&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity G. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278840&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City H. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=282445&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=276873&dbid=O&roo=MeridianCiU IX. FINDINGS A. Preliminary Plat: In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision- making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The Commission finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section IV of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section VIII of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire,ACHD, etc.). (See Section VIII for more information) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, The Commission is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 45 B. Planned Unit Development(UDC 11-7-5) Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant a planned development request,the council shall make the following findings: A. The planned unit development demonstrates exceptional high quality in site design through the provision of cohesive, continuous,visually related and functionally linked patterns of development, street and pathway layout,and building design. The Commission finds the proposed development demonstrates an exceptional high quality of design through the provision of integrated cohesive development that is linked together by vehicular and pedestrian connections. B. The planned unit development preserves the significant natural, scenic and/or historic features. The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic and/or historic features that exist on this site. If any such features do exist, Staff recommends they be preserved. C. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not cause damage,hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. The Commission finds the proposed arrangement and/or structures in the development does not cause damage, hazard or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. The Council should rely on public testimony to determine this finding. D. The internal street,bike and pedestrian circulation system is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles,bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions contained within the development,nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area. The Commission finds the proposed internal vehicular and pedestrian plan will provide a safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without an undue burden on existing transportation in the surrounding area. E. Community facilities, such as a park,recreational, and dedicated open space areas are functionally related and accessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways. The Commission finds the proposed open space areas are accessible to all residents via proposed pathways. F. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with chapter 2, "district regulations", of this title. The Commission finds the proposal complies with the density and use standards of the R-8 zoning district in UDC Table 11-2A-6. G. The amenities provided are appropriate in number and scale to the proposed development. The Commission finds the proposed amenities are appropriate for the proposed development. H. The planned unit development is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. The Commission finds the proposed PUD is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan per the analysis in Section IV. Page 46 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll Sagarra in Orchard Park PUD, PP0027-2022-H Lighting on Easement Parking on Bergman/Arliss/Director East Side Exposed Side Yard not compromised Staff Report p.9-during construction."fence should be protectedproposed to remain; this of the development that is fence around the perimeter There is an existing wood 7. -3A-listed in UDC 11comply with the standards "All fencing is required to West Side UDC Table 11 35Maximum building height (in feet)50Interstate35Entryway corridor25Arterial20Collector(in feet):2 Street landscape buffer12Rear setback (in feet)5Interior side setback (in feet)5Alley25Collector10Localto living area and/or side loaded garage (in feet):1 Street setback5Alley25Collector20Localto garage (in feet):1 Street setback32With alley loaded garage, side entry garage, or private mew lots40Minimum street frontage (in feet)4,000Minimum property size/dwelling unit (in square feet)Requirement8 Standard-R 8-6 Dimensional Standards for R-2A- Setback Request of the planned development, the applicable setbacks as established by the district shall not be reduced.ery iphdistrict in accord with chapter 2, "district regulations", of this title may be approved. The exception is that along the perDeviations from the development standards and/or area requirements of the Deviations from underlying district requirements.1. A.4 Standards of Planned Unit Developments-7-UDC 11 Not a Planned Unit Development 2007)-10-1325, 7-2005)(Ord. 07-15-2005, eff. 9-30-1170, 8-(Ord. 05.the dimensional standards in the districtB. It is NOT the intent that the PUD process be used solely for the purposes of deviation from provision of public services.effective -3. Creates functionality integrated development that allows for a more efficient and cost; anddoors are generally not fronting the streeteight (8) units per acre where design guidelines are in place for development and where garage residential development at densities greater than development (including, but not limited to, 2. Allows for innovative design that creates visually appealing and cohesive patterns of 1. Preserves natural, scenic, and historic features of major importance.for exemplary site development that meets the following objectives:The purpose of the planned unit development (PUD) requirements is to provide an opportunity A.Purpose-1. -7-11PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS-Chapter 7 Not a Planned Unit Development 2007)-10-1325, 7-2005)(Ord. 07-15-2005, eff. 9-30-1170, 8-(Ord. 05 the dimensional standards in the district.B. It is NOT the intent that the PUD process be used solely for the purposes of deviation from provision of public services.effective -3. Creates functionality integrated development that allows for a more efficient and costdoors are generally not fronting the street; andeight (8) units per acre where design guidelines are in place for development and where garage development (including, but not limited to, residential development at densities greater than 2. Allows for innovative design that creates visually appealing and cohesive patterns of 1. Preserves natural, scenic, and historic features of major importance.for exemplary site development that meets the following objectives:The purpose of the planned unit development (PUD) requirements is to provide an opportunity A.Purpose-1. -7-11PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS -Chapter 7