HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-02 Mke and Malissa Bernard Dear City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission,
Thank you for your volunteer service to the community, for it is greatly appreciated.
Becky McKay of Engineering Solutions has been friendly and truly professional. I haven't had the
pleasure of meeting Sherri Stiles. A thank you to Bill Parsons and Sonya Allen for answers to any
questions along the way, especially with their intensive workloads.
There are many components at play surrounding this project and how it interacts with adjacent
properties, even for a little seemingly ordinary piece of infill.
In a nutshell, I think it is too dense, under-parked with only four spaces to spare for guest parking,too
tall and not transitional, its one ingress/egress point to be in the wrong spot, and it should be situated to
be more circuitous with the adjacent properties as Mixed Use Regional properties should, most
importantly the now inactive proposal of Stellar Senior Living in Boise. This is not a single-family
neighborhood, but MULTI-FAMILY with different needs. Furthermore, its reliance upon the Centrepoint
Way, as designed, may not be optimal.
Delano Apartments is PHASE 3 product in the Development Agreement. Phase 2 is not underway at
Delano Single-family yet though PHASE 1 is progressing. This planning and execution may be a bit
premature at this point for this area's needs.
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182373&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
PHASE 3 for Delano.
� 64 /71 'r� Q 0 0 66% 1B VAN Plain text
U
SHEET INDEX
IDT SUMMARY {4lA PIAT
PP I_] U)T�E]B'J16
M.W] MG G�7 PP20 CMCFPII)Y FMGIEETMF RAW
w2I P1161MW+1 SEMF DES
R-is)[]N 11.37 ppu p(�yyN.gY$[lY[)q PRpfy[$
NYLY AEGF]Tl1L m
WMCw'C(fin.ic15 O
Chhw�' ] 4fE MTA
aAK'AaR-nr-1HY W
�W 2fGE S.W
98 d:.ri %
I 1 I ncswi wnm Iminaiu[el
�I I 1 I` Sri
I I _
I I I i I •may 1 �
.52
2$ I rr aslol I�vsc�1
I
II �I I I I�cYG�6 De-u mq
I
I 1 1�'o rC T I II I use ea ar¢
I I l M1tOTES
1
l L IILf61a �L
The ACHD report in the Agency Comments erroneously identified Centrepoint Way as a "local street"
when it is indeed a collector road,subject to technical standards such as driveway spacing and access,
landscaping buffers, lining up with existing streets, (ex.Jasmine should be the access), sight distances,
and so forth. The driveway access point per ACHD standards on a collector,for 25 mph speeds does not
comply with the technical standards of 245-feet minimum (driveways). If the collector speed is set
higher, more spacing is required.
Table 1: Access Spacing on Collectors{away from a signalized intersectiony Successive
Driveway Spacing
Minimum separation Minimum driveway Minimum driveway
Pasted Speed Limit for Local Streets separation for more separation for less
than 100 VTD than 100 VTD
25 MPH 330' 245' 150'
30 MPH 330' 260, 150'
35 MPH 330' 265` 150'
■ All dimensions are to be measured centerline to centerline.
Tech requirements state 330-feet for street spacing on collectors and 125-feet for local roads. The
appropriate reasoning and explanation for the deviation from the standards is not in the packet. ACHD
comments, Agency Comments
https://web]ink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=286647&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
There are concerns for this area that have been submitted to the public record for a past application
Kingstown Subdivision and to ACHD;the concerns have not dissipated. I do not think there was any
intent to be less than adherent to technical standards,yet the sum of the many variations does not
result in a safer road, rather variations were okayed to get development interests approved as a possible
grace to the developer but not necessarily of benefit to the finished product. Such graces are
sometimes necessary, or things might not be able to get built at all.
CENTREPOINT WAY IS THE ONLY ROAD this project will rely upon, solely,for its access and the
carriage of traffic into other directions; its design and function are important.
Centrepoint Way has many deviations from the technical standards as it is, waived via the individual
parcel application and approval process,for the Brickyard Apartments of note.The deviations came
online as applications are rarely in step with each other, sort of in a crazy-quilt fitting and stitching
process.
Now we are adding two new high density projects to this square mile as in Stellar High Density in
Boise (which could change to a hotel or multi-family, not for seniors, mixed use, etc., and its status in
flux could have it annexed into Meridian) and Delano High Density product to a flawed system.
Deviations from standards and said performance and function of those roads (i.e., collectors not up to
typical standards and local roads performing in function as mid-mile collectors) in applications is
everyone's civic responsibility re. planning and in chambers, no matter whose "lane" it is.
Kingstown Sub., public record. Master Street Map designated existing Collector roads in dark blue
https://webIink.meridiancitV.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278384&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
ORANGE SHOWS VARIANCES AND C°p�'° °"F'^"u""`�'°v°``" f°"�- "
DEVIATIONS FROM CURRENT _ 1' r¢
ACHD POLICIES AND SPECS WHEN { _ P� More examples found
LOCAL STREETS ARE USED AS •. r°` since 25 Aug 2022
COLLECTORS AND APPROVED-BY-
ACHD VARIANCES ON EXISTING �` F
MSM COLLECTOR5 THUS CREATING p
POTENTIAL CRITICAL POINTS,
NOT INCLUDING ALL DRIVEWAYS ELEM.
OUT OF SPECS. RE ROUNDABOUT School
4 SCHOOLS now
Room for more •u �,, .
We will experience cut through ingress/egress from Locust Grove city mile d
W via Leigh Field to use the light at Wainwright/Eagle as well as cut-through "Li
i !I from the heavier Village uses via Wainwright/Records collector A zn: EjJ C
ingress/egress to the East.
.� cr:cers r
Red Circle is the coming new Roundabout at Leigh Field/Locust Grove. ta„sL
With four existing schools and mare coming In the future,safety and proper =n-^�a^•� 4
road spacing and specifications are most critical,as the mid-mile"collector" e sxwsxa
roads will be Leigh Field via Champion Park,and more traffic will he coming r"
via Kingstown to go to Locust Grove,Ustick,or Eagle Road. Much of the "° r
roads in between are not to COLLECTOR STREET STANDARDS though they �s x
are being GROOMED to function as mId-mile COLLECTOR ROADS.
The entrance, ideally, should line up with Jasmine St.to alleviate conflicts, as the northern entrance
will be subject to a somewhat blind corner and possible inappropriate sightlines on the tangent curve
when the northern parcel develops with the parking lot shown...no one can see through parked cars or a
building if it comes to pass. Setting this one up for safety and transition will set up the northern parcel.
The rule for visibility for stopping sight distance is 200-feet, and the existing curve may not meet that
lower speed standard as it stands, and collectors are typically a higher speed.
7206-5.9 Stopping Sight Distance
A safe stopping sight distance is required for all vertical and horizontal curves_
The minimum sight distance allowed is 200-fret_
This is not to ACHD standards for the future access north of this parcel,when that rural acreage
develops; again, access points (driveways) are too close together against collector standards and on a
curve.
https:Hweblink.meridiancitV.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182373&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
OEVELOPly1FNT PHASING
4 � I
Possible Future Development Pattern
k -
r —J--
+ 1LLLLLLLFL
------ �_�__�
rrr
71 -- z
TRANSITION TO THE NORTHEAST
City Staff requested 8n illustration of a passible future development plan for the undeveloped parcel to the Northeast of
the DeIEiuo Development.The layout above depicts what a road network and possible transition might look like.
Furthermore, is the driveway width enough?The driveway does not seem to meet the minimum width
of 30-36 feet in accordance with ACHD. It is shown as 26'feet. I would also point out the parking in the
traffic stacking area at the sole ingress/egress point is not ideal.
Land Use Projects(Projects,Findings.Orders) > Projects > 2022 > Delano Apartments CUP H-2022-0082 > Projec[Drawings >
T b i t OL 0 0 soy S $ Yewaialntext E
� I
I
I I I I
I I I
fl I
II i
Table 2'. Driveway Design Griteria on Collectors
Low Volume
Driveway high Volume Driveway Ftesidentiai+ industrial
driveway {less than 100 Agriculturalf Field
Tyler (100 VTD or mare) VTD total ernterirrg Access Driveways
and exidn }
Width x 10 -feet Z410 304Mtto -1ee1 34 to 4 -Feet
Minim
ur'n 364eel 15-feat 15-1tel 15 to 304eet
Radii
(flack of
curb)
50-eet
feet"(minimum)or (rninimurn)or
Throat greater based an 3010 50•feet greater based
Length anticipated vg4urreandlor on anlippa+ed
analysis in T1S volume andar
a siis in TIS
The traffic is also currently blocked at the red points by Fast Eddy's and NW,cross access to one
neighbor.This makes the Stellar Parcel, essentially, a closed campus or island, not in tune with typical
MUR traffic circulation policies.The Delano rendering has since been updated on February 27, 2023. No
neighbors saw the updated plan via Neighborhood meeting, and this places three stories much closer to
them than previous plans. Centrepoint Way actual path is TBD.
.. vLast Irri9nwithout a proposaT,racrn0,ftriin-far"d
F wAdaCDuntyArgip411-13PafrqrnCiryofMeridian
Arcs of InppA t via Ordinance opplitation at city of ,
' Mendierl l
--
` � '�' Engineering Solution14 . .
' fife-apP concept 84 units City 0! Boise '
i DEitAN_ 0 � :� Three Story Apartments Senior Living,' ;
SIDE - - -- _ r . Permit Expired i
FAMILY
ll
66 Units
4.
Fr
One might ask why the Centrepoint Way Collector is the way it is? COMPASS maps and older street
maps showed Centrepoint to BALDCYPRESS (access lane ingress/egress at Fast Eddy's/Hobby Lobby)
as the intended collector route at the quarter mile points for the SE corner, likely with an intended
mile light. At some time that was eliminated and west of Eagle BALDCYPRESS was made a commercial
private lane,and the grassy landscaped patch, aka LOT 7, by Wainwright was sought by ACHD, around
2005, after it was treed and landscaped in Zebulon Heights#1. Lot 7 was an intended landscaped
buffer from residential and Zebulon Heights#1 (office buildings and daycare). It appears to be that
landscaped strip in every way today.
Wainwright Dr. is deemed a partial mid-mile collector, supposedly,yet it functions fully as a collector far
beyond the set point to Centrepoint Way,with a lot of front-on housing.
This ROAD to Wainwright does not show up in our title company documents when homes were
purchased in 2007 forward in Zebulon Heights,aka Alpine Pointe,though ownership to ACHD is filed
in Ada County by 2005. This road does not show up in Ada County Assessor online records as owned by
ACHD either. There are no curb cuts or signage saying this is a road. Utilities are laid in the intended
road. The road is not searchable by anyone in the general public until the ACHD Master Street Map
(MSM) amendment in 2018 unless they go to Ada County to pointedly dig up via specific record request
regarding the singular lot transfer of the common lot#7 to ACHD.The Zebulon Heights commercial plat
was filed in 2004.
Here is the Ada County Long Range Highways and Street Map 2030 Functional Street Classification
System Adopted December 20, 2004, after Zebulon Heights Commercial is filed. This is what was
available to many for a search before buying a home before the next updated map. PURPLE are
collector roads. https://www.compassidaho.org/documents/prodserv/maps/adafun2030-B.pdf
--- ----- --- --------------
r �• Ada County
t • Lung Range Highway&Street Map
]nteESlete • 2030 Functional Street Classification System
----- Proposed Interchange ,•. Adopted:December20,20(b
—Principal Arterial r •
----- Pmposed Principle Arterial r ♦♦
Mi-r Arterial
----- Proposed Minor Arterial `♦ ��
—Mi-r Art—](Rural) �♦
----- Proposed Minor Art.(Rural)
Urban Collector
a
•-••• Proposed Urban ColleAor �♦
—Sxtian Line Road � ' •
r••••�MPU B.—dry r s
.
O Future Urban Interchanges A
5
i _ ♦
/ ♦fl
= a
r
r
f
llowmawn Bairc]mia Map r
r
��1
� r
10
sic
Kim
i
rr�
■ . �� f,ll �� rrr.� �
Zebulon Heights, Search by Subdivision, Ada County Assessor Land Records, GIS
https://adacountyassessor.org/propsys/SubParcelList.do?gfgroupld=6064
Each of these show individual lots owned. There is no assigned owner or agency of LOT 7,the grassy
treed strip. 13990 West Wainwright is a no-build common lot assigned an address. There is no road
overlay indicative of a road. A dotted line or future street name are not shown.
Back to Subdivision Search
11 items found. displaying all items-1
Parcel Year Address
P9846840015 2023 13900 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE.ID 83713
R9846840030 2023 13960 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE ,I 83713
R9846840040 2023 13990 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE,ID 83713
P9846840050 2023 4037 N EAGLE RD BOISE r ID 83713
R9846840060 2023 13905 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE,ID 83713
R9846840070 2023 13923 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE ,ID 83713
P9846840080 2023 13945 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE.ID 83713
R9846840090 2023 13967 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE ,ID 83713
R9846840100 2023 13999 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE,ID 83713
R9846840120 2023 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE,ID 83713
R9846840130 2023 W WAINWRIGHT DR BOISE,ID 83713
Tools
25
ale• ���
�E Wm;len9i p1 s'
F 1M1ainw�ht Cr \
1396I
6 39A5 11309
5 5
jr. Z 1 9i5 . fO
E 061355
-1
11945
9 19 i
E10
407
E 10A5 EE
3
139�13913901
_
P
STE3G113:'
A012 Ir!I: 93 .
111 r!I
_F1
F F....Ia vwa
http://www.adacountVassessor.org/adamaps/
A prospective buyer, realtor, or title company cannot do any due diligence if the information is
omitted from pertinent title documents and searches; if the road is not signed; if there are not any
curb cuts indicative of a future road; and if the intended road is covered in utilities and trees. I do not
think there was any ill intent, but rather information should have been revealed and made obvious that
a future road was planned, as people are making some of their biggest decisions in life by investing in a
home and a community.
This is a 44-foot wide Right of Way or ROW, repurposed from a landscaped Common lot#7 in Zebulon
Heights#1. This ROW will not have enough required shoulder buffer space typically required for a
collector road without a revamp or purchase of other property,or eminent domain or via significant
waiving of expected policy. I would hope the ten-foot wide newer ACHD multi-use pathways design
would be vital to this area with all the Pathways and Bikeways existing.
` 1 ,-v -
tir
� � C
- 1
i
� 1 1
With the barest minimum width of 29 feet of road with Fire Department Approval,typically twenty-
foot buffers on each side for collectors containing ten foot multi-use pathways or sidewalks,there
may be some deviation from typical collector road design and that is not a good thing, in my opinion,
especially with intended functionality and volume expected. Of note this ROW has gone from City of
Meridian impact area to Boise impact area to Ada County impact area in less than a year's timeframe (all
done quickly recently), though the future road services Meridian and likely requires our emergency
services. Which Fire Department's approval of any lowering of typical technical street widths?
7206.52 Street Sections and Right-of-Way Width
The standard right-of-way width for collector streets shall typically be 50 to 70-
feet, depending on the location and width of the sidewalk and the location and
use of the roadway. The right-of-way width may be reduced, with District
approval, if the sidewalk is located within an easement; in which case the
District will require a minimum right-of-way width that extends 2-feet behind the
back-of-curb on each side.
The standard street section shaii be 46-feet(back-of-curb to back-of-curb)_This
width typically accommodates a single travel lane in each direction, a
continuous center left-turn lane,and bike lanes.
Generally, collector streets will be designed with sufficient pavement width to
accommodate both motorized and non-motorized traffic-
1- Street Section in Residential Areas
The standard street section for a collector in a residential area shall be
36-feet(back-of-curb to back-of-curb). The District will consider a 33-foot
or 29400t street section with written fire department approval and taking
into consideration the needs of the adjacent land use, the projected
volumes,the need for bicycle lanes,and on-street parking_
As Zebulon Heights#1 was recorded in 2004 in Boise, ID,Ada County in 2004.
PLAT SHOWING
A PORTION OF THE SE A OF THE NE A OF SECTFON 37-T.N.,RAE.,13-M- imn
8015L ADA ODUNTY,IDAHO
W u!
B �nWa
%W✓1 rw.NUF[0.
-�r.-ywuM ric vr.ar
�o�y r .1rr.wn
s nn ram
—� -- —
e
4,
� � • � ��. . .9 � •fir AS • .,.ram ... n
1 ' I 11W
` n ia.e ^^"' . •me..,we•er rye i J $ SSA
IP ..
1
� III __ '_`'iG.��.�';�' �• �I ,��
�E•CR6`A90. I uaPUTi[n �ry
YNf
rc� MI .Nn riy, w nww
iPrpTO$BY V+LLP
4437 . -.-
m .s r.r• .. .ne. u. .. ..r.w. r. es =..rr '1.;a'° OM
MG• :on..o
II-
Sp1.gTIQMS... cr+rnly
x+..,•o-, vw w wm+ar z
Zooming in from the 2004 recorded Plat. The ROW bought/transferred to Ada County Highway
District and was recorded in approximately 2005 timeframe at Ada County, after Zebulon
Heights/Alpine Pointe#1 was built, in yellow. No ROW path shown, but a small cross access
agreement to the property to the south was recorded (25 feet). Lot 7 is now the ROW.
7. LOT 4, BLOCX 1; LOT 7, BLOC[ 1, LOT 1, BLOCK 3 MD EDT 1, BLOCK 4 ARE 00WO"1 LOTS 1>KH
SK41 BE 0"ED AMC UW[TAMM BY THE 1EBULDN HOGMS LOT OWER5 ASSOC?,ATIM.
I UNPU1TTED
N 643Tu w S———— S 89'S1_58'f 740.00' _
N W51'50 163.6r a �
lsff NOTE aJ �
RM 3
1i+y y
g.62 �1 43.24 30.00' 90.6 C20 Cl \
r I I IS'CAM/CCf35 fkwx� \ 7 � a➢'LMOSCARE ZWKNf
A6'a9uff or tors 3&6.a" ��, (SEE NOTE f!J
1 AAO'1W PAQCfL To nsL Sam! �, \ 25'L%1055 AaM
f45f4(fNl FOR 1075
PARCE1 ro Mae9
Ilk I I \
\ (Sff A071 11)�
Ape:T uroww
"ro RUND�SrarM I I L
mv,y tia
WSrR ND F0I01B57A 1
It 7 I I \ �B�yx,•
g JuiI I I
IL 1 I i ' CID '-1 Z
z
� I I
$ I I X.ruosf4cf� c° �
z H I 5 69'2r41t S 69'2644 E (SCf TAvic„) \
I 12950' 121.64
1 I I
1 j 6 3 $t
! I 8 2
I I
1 in
rTs'I I
115'MISS AXFSS use"FP
�""POW or Lo1S 5 A A&CCK
I I 1 AW nF A4RC1 To n[MO
C£N I
,, 4 A N lw49'n1►1wzoe' 4sir
G,R — N W49'175 50.00'
�'A S—
}
I ,
When this comes to pass, since Zebulon Heights#1 sold/land swapped the common lot#7 to ACHD
and didn't sign anything, it is my opinion it would be fair for them (Zebulon Heights#1) to cede/sell
the extra land required for appropriate ROW collector design,to not interfere further with the peace
and privacy of residents that never knew a road was behind their fences until 2018/2019,well after
purchase. If ACHD is going to proceed forward with the Centrepoint Way extension north to
Wainwright as planned then there should be a closer look at this roadway's placement,functionality,
and safety, especially with the Stellar Senior Living project being expired and dormant. All local
development is relying upon this road, and all development now and in the future has been planned in
place based on this road.
The orange area is for the collector...how is this appropriate? We certainly would hope for a new
multipath with all the bike lanes and Paths in the area or somewhat detached sidewalks for safety.
Again, the Alpine Pointe residential HOA owns 20 feet from the fence.
,v
This odd width 44-foot total width for street and sidewalks is not keeping with the rest of Centrepoint
Way,with 20-foot wide drive lanes, not including the 13-feet sidewalk/utilities easements depicted and
typical buffer lots as depicted in Delano No. 1 FP-2021-0001>CC- Final Plat. It would appear to need a
min. 66-foot wide section to be designed similarly, and it is lacking at least 21-22 feet of width required.
https://weblink.meridiancitV.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=219580&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitV
Land Use Projects(Projects, Findings, Orders) } Projects 2021 ) Delano No. 1 FP-2021-0001
T 2 r 3 Q O a 333% $ View plain text
5i8i NT5
I
---------J p I BLOCK 1
a b L-----------
---I
294D"W 100.00",
w � r-S89g42'RQ"W 104,98"' s � i — -- —��•--�
16 23,10' 20.0 0.00'
$I gi
4
_---- �W�c�u�s rIIII1IIII�
f
II11
1I1
�
-
- I
(TTV)
20"W IOU. O', L---------------
vy I
10'(TYP) 3
2'00"W 100.00", WXM.2 r-N89°42DD"E 14.99'-I
200"W 100.00` 2
12 2A.5' 20.5' 89°42p0"E ID5,21' 2a' 2D'
-440.00'- Ln4 act
40.00' 40.00' 40.00' 40.00' 40.00'
----I r---- ----7o 2p' 201�:'
N 9'3.p
9 LWW 3 2
p
�S1
L ' 0.0 $i4Rl� 6( 20 0 0S69°42'00"W 1204.01' PLS7876 7376
Centrepoint will be traffic heavy with oversaturation of commercial and apartments in the area, and it
appears the road will deviate from optimal standards due to limitations with the skinny 44-foot wide
former Common Lot 7 deeded to ACHD ROW. Note the Delano Concept has since been updated to its
current form compared to this older rendering. The route of Centrepoint at the NE veering a bit is my
wish for the path, since the existing driveway is too close to the "Collector" and the existing utilities, and
to site
it further away from residents that never knew of its existence.
to
•Y -f.IF RGF Y fr A.`i FSs tr,�.1�' �1:.•I
+.d�;lrwn R•Ae n�'y ji i
4®rabIL-A" ■■l -•
4 ..-
Phase 4-7 units
DE€ANO ~� Permit
Single Family Expired
59 writs t r
Stellar
Phase 1 and 2 p� - -
Ut i� OFLANdApts-
y Phase i
CHAMPION PARK
Brickyard Townhom 1 -
l Apartments -_ r) ? ��r�•�.
1 ~ lr 1
City of Boise link to now inactive Stellar Project, Choose "Applicant Presentation_CAR20-00004"
https://boisecityid.igm2.com/Citizens/Search.aspx#SearchText=stellar&Tvpe=All&MediaOnly=False&Sor
tBy=Relevance
N onhern i
Pa*ce1
era
yr�rwwrww• -
• New
a•r
u
rtt
`R arcel P Parcels
r � R
As illustrated below, here along Eagle Rd are the lined up access points as they exist in marked in
purple, exception is the Stellar project, and that is where it seems it should line up; I have placed a
purple mark on top of the red to show where it could line up at Stellar. Stellar was planned to be a
closed campus with an access easement but no through vehicular traffic allowed. ITD limited that traffic
use for the applicant, as it was good for the senior development not to have through-access and only
one ingress/egress. Stellar applicant said in chambers that the access would be blocked or gated.
It always seemed a bit odd that the area marked in red with an overlay in purple (see below) is not a
potential right in/right out access with properly spaced approach from Eagle as the spacing is fine
across the street at the east as approved intervals and the highway has a concrete island at that point.
ITD approved the approach to Stellar and decided the approaches' separation was acceptable. It could
line up with the purple mark across the street. Stellar Senior Living had been granted sole access points
at Eagle, with no cross access to adjoining properties at all with the exception to the rural parcels on W
Eagle View. Eagle Rd has an island separating traffic north and south.
lne =ointe �r
EiYIERGEHLY AGCFSS
V
Last phase-7 units y 4 • •-,
... •• /
Permit
_. DELANO Expired
I Single Family
59 units r 1 �•,.r
Steil
Phase 1 and _
aj ',�� DELANO Apts. « .;
CHAMPION PARK
W .4-
Bri[kyardTownhom
..tee
] Apartm i- j �r•�
Is there a recorded cross-access agreement instrument between Stellar parcel and the Delano
Apartment parcel now, or is it just implied? If so,without a valid plat or forward progression for
Stellar, can this access point change?
The Delano Apartments are now submitted at this point and if Stellar entitlements are not revived as
the time extensions are now void, there may be an opportunity with ITD and ACHD to seek this right
in/right out area for improving traffic flow. In fact, a lane could be at the northern part of Delano,
public or private. I have heard Mayor Simison and his comments about seeking a reduction in speed at
Eagle Rd. and therefore an access near the red and purple mark may make sense now as it is and it
would also be appropriate if designated at a lower speed, as Fast Eddy's cut off the northern
connectivity via hearing at the City of Meridian City Council process and received permission for
emergency access via bollards decision recently. See Fast Eddy's MDA.
ITD is currently in the process of an Eagle Rd Corridor study. Perhaps this and other proposals should
wait, putting Delano MF and Stellar parcel on hold,temporarily.
Fast Eddy's formerly had cross-access to the north/south with Stellar, but Steve Eddy was concerned
Stellar would sell and be high rise high density apartments in the future if it changes hands (perhaps
he heard Stellar was not viable as senior living PUD,thus increasing expected traffic). The DA was
modified. There is now emergency access only with bike/pedestrian path. N Dashwood PI is emergency
access/bike/pedestrian via City Council decision, and it certainly would have functioned as the de facto
collector without the extension of Centrepoint Way north at this time.
Only two low density rural residential properties use W Eagle View,a private lane not subject to being
a public road, and it should remain so.Again,Stellar was going to gate and block all cross access to the
east/west to Delano and beyond, except to let the one rural neighbor to the west (parcel with the
future collector) and one to the north to have access to the residence. Path in yellow.A portion of Eagle
View Ln (a private lane) at Eagle Road was being absorbed and eliminated by Stellar into its plat.
The dotted blue lines in the pic below the Boise correspondence could be access for this area as a
lane,official road (when the RUT parcel sells),for cross access and for emergency services,as it
mirrors what is across the street EAST on Eagle Rd. and gives room for deceleration lanes for all. In
fact, Centrepoint Way could be redesigned altogether should ACHD buy or eminent domain the RUT
parcel land for the collector, as it has switched recently from City of Meridian to City of Boise to Ada
County area of impact. An expired project East shouldn't hamper potential benefits of access, especially
routed for the RESIDENTIAL aspect versus cutting through COMMERCIAL interests to get home. It may
better serve development for Mixed Use Regional or MUR on the Stellar pad,though it is in Boise
currently. With Fast Eddy's in Meridian, Stellar could change to Meridian. All remaining infill could
possibly be annexed by Meridian in the future. From Boise documents a 12-pathways is required for
development of the Stellar parcel, and we should think of Pathways in this area.
RE: [External] Checking on Stellar once again, previous inquiry RE: Contact Form Submitted to PDS
0 Crystal Rain <crain@cityofboise,org>
To Mike and Malissa Bernard
OYou forwarded this message on 2J23/202312:35 PM.
Hellol
Definitely glad for the short weekaftera long weekend 0 Hope you had a relciAng one.
Since our last correspondence,we have had no new activity on the project site recorded in our system_
Please let me know it I con be of ony further assistonce_
Best,
Crysdol
Crystal Rain
Planning and Zoning Manager
Planning and Development Services
B 0 1 S $11 Office-208.60870&5
Cell-208.296 8031
Pronouns:She/Her
cra inOcifyafboise.am
cifyofboise_org
From:''i—a id`,1a1'_sa Bernard SMMBERNARDl@msn.com>
Sent:Tues.lay,Februaiy 21,2023 1:12 PM
To:Crystal Rain¢train@cityofboise.org>
Subject:[External]Checking on Stellar once again,previous inquiry RE:Contact Form Submitted to PUS
Hi Crystal,
I hope this finds you very well after the Holiday weekend. IIZ>
The Delano Multi-family CUP is coming upon March 16,2023,before P and Z Commission in Meridian,and I just wanted to see if there was
any momentum on the previous Boise PUD for Stellar project. I am about to write my testimony for that hearing item,and I thought I would
check with you once again before proceeding.
Thank you for your assistance! I know how busy you are at the City.
Best regards,
Malissa Bernard
0 Crystal Rain <crain@cityofboise.org> l Fj Reply «j Reply All I —> Forward U
To mmbernardl@msn.com Thu 12/29/2022 10:53 AM
OYou replied to this message on 2/21/20231:11 PM.
PDS-PreApp Conference-13%4 W Jasmine Ln.pdf
33 KB
i
Hi Malisso,
Looks like there was an approved PIJD for the referenced project in 2020 that was never acted upon and has since expired.We
haven't seen anything further came in since the Neighborhood Meeting Radius List request in July.There was a preapplication
meeting done for the site in May of this year(summary attached)but,as it's been longer than sax months,another would have to
be conducted before we would allow them to submit any new entitlement applications_
Let me know if you have any further questions_
Best,
Crystal
Crystal Rain
Planning and Toning Manager
Planning and Development Services
B [ S E Office:208.608.7Q85
Cell-208296.8031
Pronouns-She/Her
cra ini9cifyofboise_am
cityofboise_org
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
15 0 1 5 E BOISE CITY HALL 150 N.CAPITOL BLVD I MAIL PO BOX 500,BOISE.0 8 3 701-0 50 0
Now GITYOFBOISEARGIPDS I R 20$-4O9-71001 r:?Q6-3OA-5753 I TTY[TiD WO-377-3579
PRE-APPLCAWN CONFER84=SUMMARY
mml hearing level applications are required to hold a pre-applieaiian conlerenre meeting uriu to iioridng or holding a
neiehbarhaod meeting-9ath must be held within 9x months of su mining an apFAcalian.T1*10rrn18regrhed air partcof tM
app callon iublydthi paclapti.
Deco d No-, D 3MVWMttIfC Hamm
PAC22-ODDM 05f051=2 1030 AM Delanie Garlick
Addm= corlilloft
13964 W JASMINE LN,BOISE,ID B3 713 Appticanl:Grant Reginoro
Pcrtmk
R415&25302D2
Pmfttants llli�.h
TYPS Of Appilicntbn#1-.
FluriricG We �v.:I pment,Madificaiian
AddRarld Ibevfm:
No%kbatlaod Jwieeling Required:
'+:s
GIS lydonTFalIon,
St m of ft4mty; zariw. Add Giwl Zoning; FCC
1 AcrCS C-21D1DA N-b
Rcadplaln: RDod Iona: WUI: WUI NanW
A
Ak-W In luerlce Zone, fartdng Crellay: QxTlp.Planning area: LwId UM
Nol in Amp-orI InItulgr ic. Wesl Bench Mmed We
,Ai co
r"tftNXl W*d A9oCi56W::
Genlennial
Neighdod,bDoJ Amciation contact Informolion can be found online
hHps;lfv'ww.cityaf Boise-ar�lprcr�rarrrs}enee�oaf nc�cahf�artroad-a ssaciai iansl
Pe111'IN"I MW..
uD20-00W8 and CAR20- ]4
Proposal descrfplton:
Me Plan Presented;
tssues Dl CURFIKt
- rya Iris for the neighLHxhoad meelong shall be moiled io neighbors all least 10 days prior No holding the
meeling-The meering must be held no later I nan 6 months pnor and no earner than 12 days before submittal of
yotw application-
- Design Review requred for any exterior alterations-
- Provide Bike parking-
- Cross access to adjacent parcels shal be provided.
- Other_ Submit a new PUD application and Then can submit for a Design ReviewApplicaFion. The site is
located in a Landscape Frontage designation per the City DR guidelines,so parking has to be either
on the sides or in the rear but never in the front- If multi family residential then parking on the sides
cannot exceed W%of the frontage and need I block with landscape buffer-Accessible spaces
would be allowed in the front so there is eosy access to entrance of building-An emergency vehicle
cross access will be looked into-Multiuse pathways are planned along Eagle Road stemming From the
COMPASS Eagle Rd Corridor Phase III Report-A 12-foot wide multi-use pathway segment is
recommended abutting this site.See page 36 of the study0egment 14B]
ai l:WMER: Pre-application conference meetings are-advisory in nature to ensure the applicant is aware of
neighborhood meeting and opplicafion submittal requirements as de toiled in Boise City Code 11-03-03.The
discussions within,this conference are preliminary in mature based on limited information provided by the aIlendee
on the dote listed above. II is the applicant's responsibility as the development proposal changes to ensure
compliance with City Code-
Last phase-l
DELAN4
j singie Famify
5s7 uilit5 _ � '
NhaS, l and?
r�� bfLJ4N0�4pts,
t
CHAMPION PARK ' #-
�. � ..+
-_�4xiF
From ACHD
7 06-4-8 Miscellaneous Access (Out-Parcels, Emergency Access, etc.)
Where a property is being developed and there is a legal out-parcel (as
determined by the lead land use agency) that is not part of the development
application, the District will require that the applicant provide adequate access
(i.e. stub street, crass access, or other as appropriate) to that parcel for future
development and/or re-development in order to ensure that the District's
access management goals are achieved.
I think it is important that we should not sit with bated breath while an expired and non-viable PUD
project sits in dust at City of Boise with expired entitled and limited through access, and many other
projects and existing neighborhoods could benefit from a lane, public or private,to alleviate the
stresses in this area now,with ample spacing between accesses and highway approaches as well as
letting the RUT remaining have some peace,especially with Eagle View Ln. being cut off in the future
and absorbed by the Stellar plan. I believe Meridian and Boise should be talking,with ITD and ACHD.
One parcel shouldn't bogart access where it might be warranted.There has not been any movement
on this expired PUD since May 2022 re.the Boise planning meeting. Let's face it: Centrepoint Way
has been planned and designed to have issues. Its concept and birth are not easily found. There are so
many piecemeal deviations from the expected standard which could possibly undermine safety.
Approximate area for access, lining up with the Tree City Church point, not essential since this is divided
by concrete barrier. The approach for more than one project could be sited to the north (Stellar to
Delano, etc.)
There may be enough room with the approach and safe lane for right in/right out from the Fast Eddy's
approach. The purple line across Eagle shows approximate lining up though it is not required due to
concrete barrier.
The lane uses examples exist by the Walmart on Ten Mile, and such access lanes were also approved for
the private lanes at Bienville Square (Jackson Square) at Eagle Rd and Ustick, southwest corner.
Picard/Cajun/Seville, Bing Maps
1
1 rl ;
HOW—
i'
,
It could be as simple as this with cross access stubs north. Parking could be rejigged as not to be
accessible to the lane to alleviate conflicts,with deep landscaped buffer at the north for privacy to those
rural neighbors in place.
How might the lane might link up with the Stellar parcel? It may improve circulation over the currently
designed non-accessible Stellar parcel if the lot sells or is reassigned another purpose, of course with
rejigging plans and having buffers, Pathways, etc. Or bisecting Delano with a lane to have R-40 south
and R-15 type housing north for better transitional aspects to the RUT and Delano single family east.
rr
4 �
Q I ff =
I I
Y M/.47l11
. _., .-1'1 Y , I l f f ii� I I Y'S f'•^F�•F 7-T"T'tiM7 1 I r5 1 I f I I I I
Furthermore,there are concerns with the density of the parcel and the access. Only one viable
ingress/egress for 84 apartments? That would be an automatic cancellation and point of contention for
any single family projects of that size.
Since it is tied to the Stellar access point but with no thru traffic, is this good enough? Is the access
point NW appropriate, especially with the past deviations from ACHD policy and technical specs already
noted in abundance?
Why aren't there any sidewalks leading towards Eagle Rd or Fast Eddy's to walk/bike for a gallon of
milk in the submitted Delano proposal? Pathways? Multi-use paths?To be used by all?The existing
Delano plan forces walking in the traffic of the complex.
The Delano Project is denser than the Brickyard Townhome Apartments. It would seem to me that the
project should be much lower in density than proposed. It is so oversaturated with highest density
multi-family on this corner,with an expected total count ranging from a count of 578 total R-40 units
minimum to potentially much more, depending on future applications on this SE corner of the block.
Delano Single Family product to the west is at a gross density of 5.7 per acre, 66 units divided by 11.57
acres. All the homes on the border of this project are single story homes at the East, with one two-story
adjacent to the Brickyard edge. This is impactful to the peace of the RUT properties as well.
Delano Multi-family density is listed at 24 DU, or 24 units per acre, at a higher density than many
other projects in the area, and particularly dense for an interior project one-lot removed from a
highway or arterial abutting rural and single family product.
Recently,the Meridian OZ apartments proposal was before you, and the Commission spoke to the
concern of the density, and Meridian OZ was much closer to a hard corner than this project. The OZ
density was at 25.08 per acre and the height was 30'total. Delano Apartments is listed as 31 feet AT
THE EAVES, not including the roof line, so closer to 45 feet?
Also,the very contentious Bridgetower Apartments heights were improved, and designs revamped in
proximity to single family homes to be more compatible to the area.
Revisions and betterment of plans have occurred time and time again in chambers, or via continuation
or denial, and I can cite many such revisions to conceptual plans presented to improve the product for
the situation.
Past entitlements and conceptual plans are not set in stone. Modifications happen. Rezones occur, and
maximum densities lowered. Example,when the recent Centrepoint Apartments at SWC Ustick and
Eagle came forth their conditional use permit and previous MDA, stories were shaved, parking
optimized, apartments reconfigured, better buffers and plants asked for, and so forth. Still R-40 but
improved. Concepts and heights and better access are within your purview to discuss and "condition"
with modifications, or to continue the hearing for a new plan or revision. Or a denial, to come forth with
another proposal.
Higher intensity density will also set the stage for the future development of the Rural properties to
the north and NE when their time for transition occurs, as in if you go three stories,then possible three
stories can go to the north. Two stories or less is appropriate on this parcel to temper the density and
prime the lots north for a transitional height for housing or office use. Delano single family residents of
single stories just west of the proposed Delano Apartments certainly do not need three stories across
the street peeking into their single story yards. This is four-stories across from single-family homes on
Records, but three-stories will have the same looming and massive impact. Note: Records has a center
lane and bike lane as well, making it a much wider example of the collector roads.
- d
_ y a■ sa
r ru op In[.'e — -
•�e/7 n ..r
It was our local area residents' opinion that during the Delano past process the multi-family piece was
very important for appropriate transition, but it was stated in chambers the ultimate project for that
parcel would be decided upon in the future via CUP process to hash out the details, and it is now here.
MIXED USE REGIONAL residential could range anywhere from 20 units to 139 units on this parcel. High
Density Residential could range from approximately 42 units to 139. A developer can always downshift
the intensity or rezone to the more appropriate R-15.
Future Land Use Cutsheets below, provided by the City of Meridian, Community Development, Long-
Range Planning https://meridiancity.org/community-development/planning/long-range-
planning/future-land-use-cutsheets/
Page I fiAlfDRA
MED-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION CUT SHEET
0 GENERAL CRITERIA
MAP IID O SANPILE
11 Z41mingi Varies by project and location
OESSRIPSION This designation allows fora mix of dwelling types including townhouses,condominiums,and apartments_Residential
gross densitfesshould range from eight ro twelvedivelling units peracre.These areas are relatively compact within
the context of larger neighborhoods and an-typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment
areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents_Developments need to incorporate high
quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also
incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways,attractive landscaping and a project identity,
I
SAMPLE f] Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering,
POUCT screening,transitional densities,and other best site design practices_
1] Promote area beautification and community identity through context sensitive building and site design
princEples.appropriate signage,and attractive landscaping.
13 Support and protect the identity of existing residential neighborhoods_
13 Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together and to prnmota
neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.
13 Require pedestrian access in all'new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood
cnnneetivity.
13 Require appropriate building design.and landscaping elements to buffer, screen, beautify,and integrate
commQroal,multifamily,and parking lots into existing neighborhoods. I
13 Encourage the integration of public art as an integrated component with new development.
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Page I HDR1
FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION CUT SHEET
■ GENERALCRITERIA
MAP COLOR ZON ZONING Varies by project and location
DESCRIPTION This desrgnaUvnallows forthe developrraenr ofrxrufU larraifylrorraes if)areas where high levels ofuebr2ta.eOtwcesaee
rp ovided arror where resideirriafgross densities exceed Twelve dwelling unas per acre-Oeve lopment rni ght include
duplexes,apartment buildings,townhouses,and other multi•unitstru€tares.A desirable project would consider
the plaeementof parking areas,fences,berms,and other landscaping features to serve as transitions between
neighboring uses.These areas are compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and aretypi€ally located
around or near mitred use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs
for residents.Developments need to incorporate high quality ar€hitectural design and materials and thoughtful
site design to ensure quality of place:they should incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways,
at tractivelandscaping,gathering spates and amenities,and a project identity_
S"ft t 0 Require all new development to create a site design cornpatiblewith surrounding uses through buffering,
POLICY screening,transitional densities,and other best site design practices.
13 Promote area beautification and community identity through context sensitive building and site design
principles,appropriate signage,and attractive landscaping.
0 Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together and to promote
neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system.
0 Require appropriate building design,and landscaping elements to buffer,screen,beautify,and integrate
commercial,multifamily,and parking lots into existing neighborhoods.
0 Encourage the integration of public art as an integrated component with new development.
Page�Mu•R_2
MIXED USE REGIONAL ( U-R)
FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION CUT SHEET
11 GENERAL CRITERIA
DESIGN 0 Development should generally comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed Use areas_
DIRECTION
13 Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 10%of the development area atgross densities ranging from
6 to 40 units/acre.
13 There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as office,clean industry,
or er terta i nm ent uses-
0 Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area_
Where the development proposes public and quasi-public uses to support the development,the developer may
be eligible for additional area for retail development(beyond the allowed SO%),based on the ratios below:
0 For land that is designated fora public use,such as a library orsfiaol,the developer is eligible fora 2:1 bonus_
That is to say,if there is a one-acre lihrary site planned and dedicated,the project would be eligible for two
additional acres of retail development.
13 For active o pen space or passive recreation areas,such as a park,tot-lot,or playfield,the developer is eligible
for a 2:1 bonus.That is to say,if the park is 10 acres in area,the site would be eligible for 20 additional acres
of retail development.
0 For plazas that are integrated into a retail project,the developer would be eligible for a 6:1 bonus_Such plazas
should provide a focal paint(such as a fountain,statue,and water feature).seating areasr and some weather
protection.That would mean that by providing a half-acre plaza,the developer would be eligible for three
additional acres of retail development.
Many Alpine Pointe residents signed a petition asking for a R-15 or 2-story townhome product on the
multi-family parcel of Delano and that is on the public record. In fact, 236 residents signed the
petition asking for the multi-family density to be reduced to a more compatible R-15 density. That
view still stands among our residents.
Delano Subdivision AZ, CPAM, PP H-2019-0027, Public Comments, excerpt from Petition. In addition,
PowerPoints were presented asking for something other than apartments here.
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=167682&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity
3.Alpine Pointe will be over-connected in relation to its size,if all ofthe planned access roads(three)
are approved.We will have eight connections if those three are opened up,effectively turning our quiet
neighborhood into a gigantic shortcut to avoid Eagle Road traffic.No other Meridian subdivision our size
has this much connectivity.
4.QevCo's proposal creates an abrupt transition between Alpine Pointe's three homes per acre to 8.5
homes per acre and then to anywhere From 19 to 40(or more)per acre with the apartments.We ask
that a smoother transition be made on this 15-acre parcel with a reduction to R-15 from R-40 plans.The
parcel can be used to gradually transition to the Brickyard Apartments,now under construction.
We believe modification to the DevCo application and changes to a traffic pattern accepted in 2005 will
benefit residents and vehicular traffic,for those plans in 2005 do not fit the present and future
development of the Ustick/Eagle/McMillan/Locust Grove city square mile.
We trust that our prevailing concerns will be favorably received.
Here's a mixed product idea, meeting the density of R-40 while adding another transitional product
type to the area. 42 units which is still multi-family yet more appropriate in density.Two potential
access lanes bordering Stellar,for options as that project concept may be deceased.
II T17fFFFfIfTjF;T-M i I L!I iA[_� -
' 1 'iII1f111"IllflfTf-T;3tT1IIAIEI11IIfIII
Each two-story townhome lot is approx. 25x105 feet. Blue lot shown for comparison is 40X100, using
Delano SF south. 18 townhomes with 2 car garage, 2 parking spots on pad. 2 story apartments in the
center at 8 units x 3 = 24 Units. Requisite 50 X100 play space across from clubhouse. Backyards large
enough for required easements. This is more transitional in density with a mixed housing option. 42
units to temper the density at 12.1 units per acre (still R-40) over the proposed density of 24 units per
acre,which is denser than the adjacent Brickyards...we need transition. Jasmine lines up for safety so
the parcel north can have safer access and spacing on the curves coming when Centrepoint Way is
continued to connect to Wainwright and that rural infill develops. Less parking is required.
While unit counts are less,townhomes with two car garages and a small backyard or front yard on
mew for parents or pet-owners commands a demand for those higher quality-of-life amenities and
increased privacy over stacked apartments and the shared walls reduces construction costs over single-
family detached, and this type of housing is in very high demand and offers the market some options,
and this product would be in the right place for said placement.
The townhomes could be 2-4 bedrooms with water-wise Xeriscape and patios for low maintenance
costs. This sets up transition for infill to the north. CBH already has plans on file for Centerville
Subdivision near Hillsdale Elementary that may be more appropriate in this location.
Or this could be an all condo community that the Honorable Mayor Simison and City Council have
been asking for, repeatedly so. All two stories, or three-story condos south,two-stories to the north
and west, if planned.There are many options.
- 1
IFIII III III
v
This square mile and surrounding area have the lion's share of High-Density with apartments in
Meridian as it is, and Centrepoint Way is the one of the most parking violations ticketed streets in the
area. The larger garages and ample parking will reduce those infractions and create a housing mix.
The existing Delano plan is short on additional parking,with only 4 parking spaces to spare for guests,
with only 168 spaces for 84 units. That will not be adequate, and you can bet there will be parking
tickets for those parking on Centrepoint Way and the practice of parking in other neighborhoods.
I also find the green spaces chopped up by walkways to detract from the quality of the required 50 x 100
open space.
Other mixed product neighborhoods exist for multi-family portions on a square mile. Modern
Craftsman,for example.
Another example is the recent CBH Centerville project,with a mix of commercial, single family,
townhomes, and apartments, East of Hillsdale Elementary School. Delano could emulate the same
pattern offering a variety of styles for the neighborhood. Single Family detached is already under
construction in Delano. We have so many apartments already. Commercial is in place.
Centerville Subdivision AZ, PP H-2021-0046
https://webIink.meridiancitV.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=232417&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitV
Two-story product preferred for transition over three-story apartments.
CENTERVILLE
FRONT LOA6 TaWNH0451
11,MOM
cum _.
CENTERVILLE
I./LE%AFAR T ME MT BUILDING
f
The townhome lots for Centerville are 24 feet by 96 feet at the minimum. A CBH elevation and floor
plan already exists via this precedent. Delano could be planned with groups of three homes as
Centerville is.
f o -33
— sV
I. 1 14r I 91, 79' 79' 76' $'
S'PAIIAYAY 5'PAI$GIY o
11MISG1 17
J 035 k WE i - W 9.,86 si 7.96b sf ].92t sr g r,5dl s, -'itz l.. to g 9 g 8
IIIrS•—'1 I F t
36 36' jr19— 3$'
1813169 s! PRNATE LANE E.YGOpAURRA IANE' #6
142' 28. E _ 53-969 f1—; -. 26
96,
- IM'--_ -
i 52 i 20
35 _ � 1 36 ._
55 t 64 I 51-2,Yl r 21}2.713,1 p. 3 4
50 3.12o p 22: 7,186 r
i, 22.149 s7
04+
i 13L0C , I I 4$' I
49,.3,120 sl 23 3,346 1 �� 1 41'
48 2,304 s1 24 Z457 p # 40 39 3$ 3
PRNAIE ORNE 55 w- 54 47 11T6 st 25 3,320 r e x,'
t 55 (C6S410K IANE) -� 19.111 s, - - Imo• o a F
3
aQ
�4�646 sr —._-
_aB'
3,458
_.._..-. 5 3, r
1 �--- -'12LY �-^ 32 3,n7r �,
..a24o r 31 2.4W r
BLOCK 6
38
e
pf 38 7.900 9F 29 5 r�
12W e
37
� 3,406• 28 111 r n ..'1 4 'Z617.r.
x 38 1,927 0 27 2.512
6
r 11 3.666 sl
r. 24
42
145' 140 F 0-92 k .1ar
43 4.is;s1 22 l.706 r 14 4,366 r '�
I
15 Z646 r
Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. Just because this is a small phase of infill from a 15 % acre
total plat does not mean its traffic patterns,walkability, connections, and design are not important.
2.02.01 Elevate and enhance the quality and connectivity of residential site and subdivision planning.
2.02.02E Assist development groups to develop multiple plats into one cohesive plat. Delano Multi-family in
Meridian and Stellar Parcel in Boise could be more cohesive.
2.02.02F Ensure that new development within existing residential neighborhoods is cohesive and complementary
in design and construction. Too dense and too tall. Delano MF is part of a plat with Delano single family.
3.02.01D Support the appropriate expansion of City facilities,services,staff,and other resources to keep up with
demand and established levels of service. Perhaps it is time for our own traffic engineer for staff.
3.02.01E Phase-in developments in accordance with their connection to the municipal sewer and water system
and the provision of other necessary infrastructure and services. Road needs are lacking.
3.02.01G Establish and maintain levels of service for public facilities and services,including water,sewer,police,
transportation,schools,fire,and parks. Road needs are lacking.
3.03.03J Encourage the assembly of parcels for master planning,design and entitlement purposes;discourage
piecemeal annexation and development. Delano and Stellar interests should be talking,and talking to ITD,ACHD,
and City of Boise as well.
3.04.02D Improve the neighborhood meeting and public notice process. Adequate notice for neighborhood
meetings, please. USPS is not timely or reliable.
3.05.00 Ensure that all planning,zoning and land use decisions balance the interests of the community by
protecting private property rights for current citizens and future generations.
3.05.01 Enact land use ordinances,policies,and fees,and make decisions,including land use restrictions and
conditions of approval,that do not violate private property rights. Strong conditions of approval, lower density,
and better transition are warranted.
3.05.01C Preserve private property rights and values by enforcing regulations that will prevent and mitigate
against incompatible and detrimental neighboring uses. Too dense. Too tall. Perhaps premature.
3.06.02 Plan for an appropriate mix of land uses that ensures connectivity,livability,and economic vitality. The
commercial and high density residential access to Eagle Rd is insufficient.
3.07.00 Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land.
3.07.01 Proactively address potential conflicts between incompatible uses.
3.07.01A Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through
buffering,screening,transitional densities,and other best site design practices.
3.07.02 Integrate land use and transportation planning to ensure that they mutually support the communities'
goals and desires.
3.08.02 Cooperate with other agencies and service providers around the Valley to continuously provide essential
services and utilities to all residents. Roads and lanes where needed with appropriate technical design for safety,
and not waiting for a collector connection north that was a camouflaged afterthought in 2005 but hidden until
2018 as it stands.
5.01.01 Encourage the safety,health,and well-being of the community.
5.01.02 Support beautiful and high quality development that reinforces neighborhood character and
Sustainability.
5.01.02A Maintain and implement community design ordinances,quality design criteria, and complete street
policies to set quality standards citywide. This is where the interconnectivity to the commercial and to EAGLE
ROAD may be warranted.
6.01.00 Facilitate the efficient movement of people and products to and from the City. Again, a lane to Eagle Road
via Stellar parcel or better traffic flow.
6.01.01 Support multi-modal and complete-street transportation improvements. Choppy access
6.01.02 Enhance existing transportation systems.
6.01.02C Require new development to establish street connections to existing local roads and collectors as well
as to underdeveloped adjacent properties. Street connection to Stellar parcel to Eagle Rd.
6.01.02E Consider incomplete and underserved roadways and timing of necessary roadway improvements in all
land use decisions.
6.01.02F Improve coordination with ACHD, ITD, VRT, COMPASS,and developers in addressing transportation
issues and needs before public hearings,including having school and transportation agency comments in with
adequate time to allow for review by the City before a decision is made on a land-use application.
6.01.02G Work with the Transportation Commission and transportation partners to implement needed
neighborhood traffic calming and address safety concerns.
6.01.02H Work with transportation partners to establish and implement a system of performance measures to
gauge whether transportation goals and objectives are being realized.
6.01.02M Work with transportation agencies and private property owners to preserve transportation corridors,
future transit routes and infrastructure,road,and highway extensions,and to facilitate access management.
Better access and circulation are warranted at higher density areas and circulation to services in the nearby
commercial areas.
6.01.03 Provide the most efficient transportation network possible.
Without transition, lower density, lower heights, and more than one ingress/egress this plan seems to
be lacking. The newest design looks as if buildings are shoehorned in for maximum profit for little
benefit to the community or appropriate transition,with four leftover parking spaces to spare.
Delano multi-family could be designed differently to prepare for the future and ultimate infill that will
come forth,to integrate more seamlessly with the restrictions and dictates of the traffic conditions,
environment, and to be more compatible with established neighborhoods.
Less is certainly more in this case, as it would be a benefit to the area. I don't think this is the right
project for this space, and improvements to the plan to be more congruent and thoughtful to the area
are warranted.
There is only one chance to get this right. If the time has passed to get it right,then we should have the
best possible plan in place for the area. We should ask for some clarification of Centrepoint design to
ensure the appropriate standards and safest routes are in place to serve Delano and other projects.
I also think ACHD should go door-to-door and have an open meeting with the remaining RUT owners,
Delano interests, Stellar parcel owner, Fast Eddy's, Zebulon Heights/Alpine Pointe Commercial-Office
and homeowners adjacent and nearby the intended right-of-way for the extension of Centrepoint Way
to Wainwright. ACHD did this for the expected Linder overpass transition as noted by Justin Lucas
during the recent Joint Meeting between City of Meridian City Council and ACHD.
A smaller extension of a collector road is not in the same league as a big overpass, but it is of the utmost
importance to those land interests, business owners,future tenants, and homeowners.
At this point, it may be time to take a long pause or continue this item.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Malissa Bernard, Alpine Pointe Resident
4025 N Dashwood PI, Meridian ID 83646