Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-04-06 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, April 06, 2023 at 6:00 PM MINUTES PRESENT Commissioner Nathan Wheeler Commissioner Maria Lorcher Commissioner Patrick Grace Commissioner Enrique Rivera Commissioner Mandi Stoddard Commissioner Jared Smith Commissioner Andrew Seal ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted Motion to approve made by Commissioner Wheeler, Seconded by Commissioner Lorcher. Voting Yea: Commissioner Wheeler, Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Grace, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Seal CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved 1. Approve Minutes of the March 16, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for Chipotle, located at 1737 S. Meridian Rd., by Jeff Likes, ALC Architecture 3. Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for the Delano Apartments, located at 3850 N. Centrepoint Way, by Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP 4. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial of Variance Request Concerning a Proposed Addressing Change for 2201 E Gala St. by Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Motion to approve made by Commissioner Lorcher, Seconded by Commissioner Wheeler. Voting Yea: Commissioner Wheeler, Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Grace, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Seal ACTION ITEMS 5. Public Hearing for Costco Development (H-2023-0007) by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., located at 3403 W. Chinden Blvd. Vacated A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to modify the existing Development Agreement {Inst.#2018-069276 (H-2018-0066), amended as Inst.#2018-114828 (H-2018-0066}, which currently prohibits deliveries occurring between the hours of 10:00pm and 5:00am to prohibit deliveries from occurring between the hours of 11:00pm and 3:00am. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow extended business hours of operation from 6:00am -11:00pm to 3:00am -11:00pm. 6. Public Hearing for Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) by Riley Planning Services, located at 4135 W. Cherry Ln. Recommend Denial to City Council, tentatively scheduled for May 9, 2023 A. Request: Annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 residential building lots (including one existing home to remain). C. Request: Alternative Compliance. Motion to recommend denial to City Council made by Commissioner Lorcher, Seconded by Commissioner Grace. Voting Yea: Commissioner Wheeler, Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Grace, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Seal 7. Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman Franklin (H-2022-0079) by Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 4540, 4490 & 4420 W. Franklin Rd., approximately 1/4 mile east of the northeast corner of W. Franklin Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd. Recommend Approval to City Council, tentatively scheduled for May 9, 2023 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst.#2020-117678) to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed multi- family development. B. Request: Annexation of 10.29 acres of land with an R-15 (medium high density residential) zoning district. C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of one (1) building lot and (1) one other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Motion to recommend approval made by Commissioner Grace, Seconded by Commissioner Smith. Voting Yea: Commissioner Wheeler, Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Grace, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Seal 8. Public Hearing for Artisan Victory Market (H-2022-0066) by Kindi Moosman, Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 2820, 2910, 2960, 2990 and 3020 S. Eagle Rd. Recommend Approval to City Council, tentatively scheduled for May 9, 2023 A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 14.47 acres of land with the R-15 (12.45 acres) and C-C (2.03 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 building lots and 1 common lot on approximately 13.6 acres in the requested zoning district. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 132 units on approximately 12.45 acres in the R-15 zoning district. Motion to recommend approval made by Commissioner Lorcher, Seconded by Commissioner Smith. Voting Yea: Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Grace, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner Seal Voting Nay: Commissioner Wheeler ADJOURNMENT 9:23 P.M. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting April 6, 2023. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of April 6, 2023, was called to order at 6:03 p.m. by Chairman Andrew Seal. Members Present: Chairman Andrew Seal, Commissioner Nate Wheeler, Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Patrick Grace, Commissioner Mandi Stoddard, Commissioner Enrique Rivera and Commissioner Jared Smith. Others Present: Joy Hall, Kurt Starman, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Stacy Hersh and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X_ Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher Mandi Stoddard X Patrick Grace X_ Enrique Rivera X Jared Smith X Andrew Seal - Chairman Seal: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for April 6, 2023. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The Commissioners who are present -- present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff from the city attorney and clerk's offices, as well as the City Planning Department. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see you see that you are here. You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have process questions during the meeting, please, e- mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. With that let's begin with roll call. Madam Clerk. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Seal: And that is the first time in a long time we have had a full -- full panel. So, thank you, everybody, for being here tonight. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. The Costco H-2023 -- H-2023-0007 application has vacated and will be rescheduled for the 4th of May. So, if there is anybody here to testify on that application tonight we will not be taking testimony on it. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? Wheeler: So moved. Lorcher: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 2 of 60 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the March 16, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for Chipotle, located at 1737 S. Meridian Rd., by Jeff Likes, ALC Architecture 3. Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for the Delano Apartments, located at 3850 N. Centrepoint Way, by Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP 4. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial of Variance Request Concerning a Proposed Addressing Change for 2201 E Gala St. by Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Seal: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have four items on the Consent Agenda. The first is to approve the minutes of the March 16th, 2023, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. We also have Findings of Facts, Conclusions of Law for the conditional use permit for Chipotle. The conditional use permit for the Delano Apartments and the denial of variance request concerning a proposed addressing change for 2020 -- 2201 East Gala Street by the Orme Family and Implant Dentistry. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent -- Consent Agenda as presented? Lorcher: So move. Wheeler: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Seal: Okay. At this time I would like to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the public testimony. The clerk will call the names of--the names individually of those who have signed up on our website or in the back to testify in advance -- or to testify. You will, then, be unmuted in Zoom or you can come to the microphones here in Chambers. You will need to state your name and address for the record and you will Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 3 of 60 have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and you can run the presentation. If you have to establish that you are speaking on a -- on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA where others from that group will yield time to you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance of spoken we will invite others who may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on the topic you may come forward in Chambers or in the Zoom app press the raise hand button or if you are listening on a phone, please, press star nine and wait for your name to be called. If you are listening on multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please, be sure to mute those extra devices, so we do not experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished if the Commission does not have questions for you you will return to your seat in chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak. And, please, remember we generally do not call you back up a second time. After all testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public hearing and Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully be able to make final decisions or recommendations to City Council as needed. Some other rules of the Chamber. Please do not cheer, whistle, moan, groan or otherwise outburst. It's something that we don't like to see here. Let's treat each other with respect and dignity as we move through this. ACTION ITEMS 5. Public Hearing for Costco Development (H-2023-0007) by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., located at 3403 W. Chinden Blvd. VACATED A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to modify the existing Development Agreement {Inst.#2018-069276 (H-2018- 0066), amended as Inst.#2018-114828 (H-2018-0066}, which currently prohibits deliveries occurring between the hours of 10:OOpm and 5:00am to prohibit deliveries from occurring between the hours of 11:00pm and 3:OOam. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow extended business hours of operation from 6:00am -11 :OOpm to 3:00am -11:OOpm. 6. Public Hearing for Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) by Riley Planning Services, located at 4135 W. Cherry Ln. A. Request: Annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 residential building lots (including one existing home to remain). C. Request: Alternative Compliance. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 4 of 60 Seal: So, at this time I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2023-0006 for Crowley Park Subdivision and we will begin with the staff report. Hersh: Good evening, Mr. Chair and Commissioners. The applicant is here to present their application for the Crowley Park Subdivision and the applications that were applied for were annexation and zoning, preliminary plat and alternative compliance. Doesn't require Commission action on that one. The size of the -- the site consists of 1.002 acres of land, zoned R-1 in Ada county, located at 4135 West Cherry Lane. There is no history on the property. The Comprehensive Plan FLUM designation is medium density residential and the summary of the request from the applicant is annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district, preliminary plat consisting of five residential building lots, including one existing home to remain and one common lot and three alternative compliant -- compliance requests, at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre, which is within the desired density range of the medium density residential designation for the Crowley Park Subdivision. The proposed development offers lot sizes ranging in size from 4,011 square feet to 57,168 square feet, with the existing home on a 9,744 square foot lot. Single family detached and attached dwellings are listed as a principally permitted use in the R-8 zoning district. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in the UDC for the R-8 zoning district. An existing home on the property is proposed to remain on Lot 1, Block 1, is required to connect to the city water and service within 60 days of becoming available. The outbuilding located on Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, should be removed with the development of this property. And there were three alternative compliances that were applied for. One was for common driveways shall serve a maximum of four dwelling units. In no case more -- shall more than three dwelling units be located on one side of the driveway. The applicant is proposing five dwelling units to take access off the common drive. All five dwelling units are also located on one side of the driveway. Based on the analysis the director is supportive of the request for alternative compliance proposed for the five dwelling units to take access off the west side of the common drive. The second alternative compliance was for parking. The existing home does not meet the required number of off-street parking spaces per the UDC for a three bedroom home. Four parking spaces are required, at least two in an enclosed garage. Other spaces may be enclosed. Or a minimum of a 20-by-20 pad -- parking pad. The existing home does not have an enclosed two car garage. However, the required number of parking spaces is provided by an existing attached carport and driveway and based on this analysis the director is supportive of the request for alternative compliance to the existing carport with the addition of the lattice. Off-street parking for this development is required to be in accordance with the UDC standards for the single family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Staff will confirm compliance with these standards at the time of building permit submittal for each residence. The applicant has provided additional parking. Three stalls at the end of the common drive on the southeast side of the site for overflow parking. Landscaping -- a 25 foot landscape buffer is required along West Cherry Lane in accordance with the UDC. Alternative compliance was applied to this -- was requested for the front porch encroaching from the existing home more than two feet into the required landscape buffer and based on the analysis the director is supportive of the request for the alternative compliance with staff Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 5 of 60 recommendation to modify a few things on the plans. Access is proposed from West Cherry Lane from a common drive on Lot 2, Block 1. Direct lot access from West Cherry Lane for Lot 1, Block 1, is prohibited. Interior lots 3, 4, 5, 6 in Block 1 are proposed to take access via the common drive to West Cherry Lane. So, this meets the requirements in the UDC. Common open space requirements. There are no common open space requirements for properties less than five acres in size and the building elevations that were submitted demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like. There were variations of two-story homes with a two car garage are proposed. The submitted elevations depict field materials of lap siding, different-- color different color accents, roof profiles and stone and the final design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards listed in the UDC. These are also pictures up here of the existing house that is to remain and you can see the carport is enclosed by some lattice and the landscaping in front of the home. There was no written testimony on this and staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a development agreement and preliminary plat per the conditions in the staff report. And then staff--that concludes the presentation and staff stands for any questions. Seal: Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward. Good evening. Constantikes: Mr. Chairman. For the record Penelope Constantikes representing the applicant. Post Office Box 405, Boise, Idaho. 83701. And I'm a bit of a novice when it comes to the PowerPoint, so -- oh. Awesome. The mouse is not working. Seal: I think you can run it with just the arrows if you need to advance the slides. Constantikes: Oh. Okay. They are the top. I don't know how to get it to -- all right. We will figure it out. Thank you. It's always rewarding to work on a project that checks uncommon boxes and -- and this one does, in fact, check some uncommon boxes as you can see from the two elevations that were shown. This is an old house that was built in 1938 and it was remodeled in 1958. So, it kind of qualifies as a historic structure and it's quite charming with all the river rock that's on the front porch columns and the fireplace. Even though the door is not centered on the porch it's -- it's a lovely looking home and it was -- it's been fun. The developer has spent a lot of time and energy upgrading and dressing up that house so it looked nice. As Stacy stated, the applications before you this evening are or for an annexation into the city with a zoning designation of R-and And a preliminary plat for five residential lots, one existing residents and four new ones. The team is especially appreciative of staff's recommendations regarding the common lot and the alternative arrangement. If we can -- I don't know how to -- like to show you this. I can't -- the mouse does not seem to be working. There we go. Thank you very much. Staff made a recommendation regarding the common lot, which we really appreciate. So, to preserve the view of the home the applicant is interested in doing a picket fence along the boundary between the landscape buffer and the front lot. The green line that you see towards the top is how we are going to change the common lot to accommodate that porch. The red line right below it is a privacy fence that we are proposing. So, the -- the site includes a dedicated water line -- this is the blue line on the left-hand side that comes down and, then, turns and goes east and it's going to feed a fire hydrant for the project. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 6 of 60 Since it's a dedicated water line it needs to sit in an easement, which will run along the west property line. We also have on this exhibit the two parking spaces that are going to be added to the carport. You can see them in the orange colored box that's below the carport on the south side. As I stated there will be two fences, the common lot fence and, then, a closed taller vision fence that will be set back a bit in order to provide some privacy for the patio area that goes along with the front house. The remainder of the site is already fenced. Each of the new residences, four in total -- and if you could advance that to the parking exhibit. Perfect. Thank you. Each of the four residences, the new ones, will have two car garages and they will also have two additional parking spaces. So, the red blocks on the top exhibit show you the 20-by-20 pads that will be sitting in front of the parking of the garage, which provides us with four parking spaces for residents. And, then, as Stacy mentioned, down at the bottom the blue square shows you where the three additional guest parking spaces are located. The existing home will be connected to municipal sewer and water with development of the subdivision. The well house is in the small structure that's attached to the existing residence. The residence will be disconnected from the well water and will be using that to irrigate the site. The HOA will, through the CC&R's have responsibility for maintenance and repair of that well. We don't have any surface water. Stacy's already covered the alternative compliance elements and I just, again, want to mention that we really appreciate the approval of those alternative compliance applications and the excellent recommendations we received from staff with that regard. We do understand the implications of the nonconforming status of the house, which means that if it's ever modified or added to it will require a conditional use permit and that was one of the alternative compliance elements in the application and that's due to the carport, as opposed to an enclosed garage. A development agreement is required, as you know, and the team will move forward with that as quickly as staff will allow us to get that done. I would like to address the fourth bullet down on page six where it recommends that the utilities go to and through the site to the south. If you would go down one more exhibit. It's this bottom one. Thank you. What you have in front of you now is the -- the top illustration is just the subject site. Below it is what's to the south of our southern boundary, which are two platted lots. So, there is really nothing to go through to, because there is probably not enough space between those two houses to accommodate at least a 20 foot wide easement that would be required for a utility line. So, we would ask that maybe that particular item be modified or deleted, so that we are just stubbing a sewer waterline to nowhere. I think that that's pretty much it. In conclusion I did want to say it's been a lot of fun working on this. I don't often get to work with existing structures that have history and an in-fill development and trying to package it together in such a way that it serves the community and provides nice homes for people. So -- and the assistance we got also included from the engineering staff. So, thanks to them all. With that I would be happy to answer any questions you have. Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Commissioners, do we have questions? Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 7 of 60 Wheeler: Thank you, Chairman. Just a quick question. So, do you have any -- any hesitation about your -- the -- the homeowner there or your client they are going and connecting to the Meridian City water when it's made available within the 60 days or is it just running that stub? Constantikes: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, no we -- they will be hooked up with the -- with the subdivision -- the site improvements. Wheeler: Perfect. Okay. That's it. Seal: Commissioner Lorcher? Lorcher: Mr. Chair. The -- the two houses in the back, there are two detached buildings; correct? Constantikes: Yes. Lorcher: Four families? Constantikes: Uh-huh. Yes. That's correct. Lorcher: And they will be ownership not rentals; correct? Constantikes: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, that is correct. Those are going to be on platted lots. Lorcher: And are there backyards at all or -- Constantikes: Yes. We -- one of the reasons why we wanted to put all of the -- the new residences so that they are facing east and along the common drive -- and this was a recommendation we got from Bill -- was so that we had backyards matching backyards. So, that's -- so, they have backyards on -- on the new residences that abut the backyards of the adjacent properties. Lorcher: Okay. And -- and they are proposed to be two stories; correct? Constantikes: Yes. That's correct Lorcher: All right. Thank you. Seal: Anyone else? Constantikes: Thank you. Seal: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify on this? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 8 of 60 Hall: I have two names listed. A Sally Butter. Okay. Then, no, I have no one signed up. I have two ladies, but neither of them are checked to sign up. Seal: If anybody online wants to -- Hall: No, There is no one online. Seal: No one online. Okay. Anybody in Chambers want to testify at all? No? Applicant have anything further to add? Okay. Indicating no. Okay. With that, unless there are any further questions for staff or the applicant, I will take a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2023-0006. Lorcher: So moved. Wheeler: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-2023- 0006. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed aye? And the motion carries. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: AL AYES. Seal: Who would like to jump in first? Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: This is in my neighborhood. I go down Cherry Lane every day and there are two similar in-fills that have occurred on Cherry Lane in old farmhouse settings like this one, but the difference is is that this shares a common driveway with the house in front and, then, additional ownership in the back of the house. I applaud the developer for keeping the historic house. That's I think important for the City of Meridian, but I just wonder -- if it's a family and they have teenagers and they are coming in at 2:00 o'clock in the morning with the radio blasting and coming through the farmhouse first and, then, to the residence, how can -- how can anybody really guarantee there be always good neighbors when there is a common drive, especially passing the house. If this were reversed where the buildings -- the ownership buildings were in the front and the private was in the back it might be a little bit different, but this is a pretty tight space. We are only talking an acre and even though the backyards abut another backyard, we are talking about a very small piece of land with a six or eight foot fence in between and because they are similar projects on the same street it's hard to say no, but on the other side, just because it fits doesn't mean it should. I just wonder -- I mean I guess it's up to the people who want to buy that, knowing that there is somebody living in front of them and they have small parcels and -- and if there is going to be an HOA they all have to kind of follow Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 9 of 60 it, but this one acre parcel to put really five families on seems very aggressive and even though by code they can fit, I struggle with -- because you don't know who is going to be ownership there, that --would they be all good neighbors and we wouldn't have problems going forward just the way it's set up, so I'm kind of just struggling with the design. I understand it fits and I understand it meets code, but with the private residence in the front--the historic residence in the front and having the other ones in the back and having to pass that house every single time, that's my challenge personally. Thanks. Seal: Anybody else? I can jump in here. I'm -- I have similar struggles. I mean the -- the one problem that I can see here is basically one car -- or one obstruction in the front and the fire department cannot service this at all. So, I mean it only takes one thing blocking that and the next thing you know fire department, ambulance, whatever it is cannot get back there. So, I -- I really struggle with the safety aspect of it. As far as it meeting code, I mean it's got alternative compliance for three things, so -- which is not necessarily uncommon for in-fill properties like this, but I'm kind of on the other side of the historic piece of this. I mean it's an old house. I don't know what it's historic relevance is for Meridian, other than being one of, you know, probably an original house in Meridian, so -- I mean personally I would have rather that the older house be removed and this, you know, be developed with a little bit more harmony between the -- you know, the dwelling units that are there, so that we don't have to deal with such a small opening. I mean, you know, the -- some of the additional parking that's being done is kind of beyond the parking that's already there that's temporary, you know, I mean putting up temporary lattice and calling that a wall is -- I'm not quite sure how that one squeaked through to be honest. That's -- I don't agree with that one either, but that's a pretty minor issue, so -- I mean my biggest -- the biggest issue I have with this is -- is literally the safety piece of it where there is one lane going in there. If that gets blocked or you need multiple -- you know, if you needed multiple fire trucks or ambulance and fire truck you can't -- you wouldn't be able to get them in there. Just -- it wouldn't fit and once you get one in you can't put anymore in there and if one needs to get out can't get out, so not sure how to reconcile that. Grace: Mr. Chairman? Seal: Go right ahead. Grace: Yeah. I was struggling just conceptually. I -- I didn't -- I kept looking through the materials and trying to find a better depiction of what's going -- going to happen here and I was really struggling with the concept of that house in the front and in those -- the proposed houses in the back. So, I -- I think what that tells me is I'm -- I'm a little confused by it and -- and that probably means that I -- generally I want to -- I want to favor things, in-fill projects like that -- like this and so -- but I'm not following this as well and I echo -- I probably couldn't have articulated them, but I really echo some of the comments that Commissioner Lorcher made, so -- but one question maybe for the Commission or maybe the Council, are we just at the annexation and zoning stage? So, is it -- is this subject to some modification and are we really giving feedback to the applicant for when that occurs Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 10 of 60 or are we at a point where we are saying we don't like the proposal? I just want some clarity on that. Seal: I will let you -- I will let you handle that, because you will say it much better than I do. Starman: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'm not sure about that, but I will do my best. So, I will say that we have two items before the Commission. You are a recommending body on both topics, the annexation and, then, the second topic is a preliminary plat as well. So, you have both those topics before you as a recommending body and I will just add onto that in the sense that there was some discussion about whether it meets code and so forth and that's certainly part of your deliberation here tonight, but, obviously, this is an annexation as well and so there are certain findings required ultimately by the City Council in that regard, including that the annexation is in the best interest of the city, and so if the Commission doesn't feel that's the case for a variety of reasons that can certainly be part of your recommendation would be you don't feel it's in the best interest of the city and articulate your reasons why. So, those are the two -- but back to the specific question, those are the two issues before the Commission tonight, would be the annexation issue, a recommendation to the Council, the preliminary plat. Also listed on the agenda, but not within your purview is alternative compliance. That's a director decision. But that's a third component to the overall application as well, but not before you tonight. Seal: Thank you for clarifying that. Appreciate it. Commissioner Grace, did that satisfy your question? Grace: It did. Seal: Okay. Perfect. Anybody else want to weigh on -- weigh in on this? Love to hear your opinions. Or we could take a stab at a motion. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go right ahead. Wheeler: I think fire -- fire would have written off on the alleyway and the access to it, so I think -- I mean they would have seen that they would have been okay with that access on it. The density on it is, you know, within the -- within the zoning of it, so for that -- for just annexation purposes, I'm okay with on the annexation purpose. 1, too, though, am concerned that there will be vehicles that will be parked in that alley street and, then, what happens then when there is a need or an injury or hurt or a need for emergency vehicles to be serviced there, there can be ways to put up signs that say no parking, things like this, and that can be in the HOA, that can be put up with signs, what have you. I -- I -- have a struggle with the density on it myself, too, and going back to what counsel said here about being in the best interest of the city, that many dwellings on -- in one acre that tight with only one access point in and out, that's just -- that's hard to say okay to. I would Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 11 of 60 be up for not as much density on there, just because of the unique fit on an in-fill project and that's also what we see sometimes happen with in-fill projects is even though there are afforded more based upon zoning,just because of the nature of them they sometimes go lighter, too, even with the conditions or adjustments. So, I'm -- I'm -- I'm fine with it being annexed on it. I'm not in big favor of the way it's platted. Seal: Yeah. The -- the density -- I mean the -- the density of it-- if-- if this were one acre of ten the density is fine. In fact, it's kind of what we shoot for. But it's one acre of one and so -- and especially the orientation of it where it's, you know, a long, you know, lot that's not very wide where we are trying to, you know, put the house -- kind of stack the houses in as they move up towards the -- Cherry lane there, it's just -- it's -- it's a very odd configuration and I'm -- I -- I struggle with it. I -- Wheeler: Yeah. Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead. Wheeler: In that same note there is a 20 acre -- 20 acre. That would be massive. Twenty foot -- square foot -- or 20 feet -- foot long parking area there, some of even just trucks or even just longer than that, so they would be hanging out into that -- that drive aisle. So, I'm just -- that's where I'm just having some -- just some logistical issues with it on that side of it. Seal: Yeah. And I always bring up the -- you know, the Super Bowl party scenario. Wheeler: Yeah. Seal: That's one of my famous lines, so -- I mean I don't even want to think about that in here, so that's -- it just doesn't work in here at all. So, again, one gathering like that creates-- I mean a -- a huge safety issue in this configuration in my mind, so -- somebody -- something's going to get blocked -- somebody is going to get blocked in there and, then, emergency services can't get there, so -- Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead. Lorcher: To give any feedback to the applicant, I would say in this particular case they may want to consider removing the historical house, because it just doesn't fit to be able to have them all in -- you know, in a row. If you go down Pine Street you can see where there has been in-fill where they have had either apartment buildings or duplexes that are -- that face either east or west and so they have the parking out in the front and so there is always that kind of extra space, but having the house in the front inhibits that flow in this particular parcel and even the two similar ones that are in the area, it was part of a - - kind of a cul-de-sac and somebody had a big property, but they extended it out, so they Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 12 of 60 -- everybody has their own drive aisle and there is two ways -- you know, one -- two different ways in and out. So, with that in mind I will make a motion. Seal: Go right ahead. After considering all staff and the applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council for File No. H-2023-006 as presented during the hearing of April 6th for the following reasons: Safety because of the narrow lane with only one way in and out and the best use of the space to hold five residences in a small parcel. Seal: And to clarify the file number is H-2023-0006. Lorcher: Oh. Pardon me. Did I forget a zero? Seal: Forgot a zero. Does the motion still stand? Lorcher: Yes. Seal: Is there a second? Grace: Second. Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to deny -- or recommend denial for File No. H-2023-0006 with the aforementioned reasons. All in favor of denial, please, say aye. Any opposed to the denial, please, say nay. Okay. The denial passes. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 7. Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman Franklin (H-2022-0079) by Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 4540, 4490 & 4420 W. Franklin Rd., approximately 1/4 mile east of the northeast corner of W. Franklin Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd. A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst.#2020-117678) to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed multifamily development. B. Request: Annexation of 10.29 acres of land with an R-15 (medium high density residential) zoning district. C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of one (1) building lot and (1) one other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11 .47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 13 of 60 Seal: And with that I would like to -- do you want a second to work on that, Bill? No? Okay. Got you. So, I would like to -- or I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2022-0079 for Modern Craftsman at Franklin and we will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The next applications before you are request for annexation and zoning, conditional use permit, and preliminary plat. There are also concurrent development agreement modification and private street applications, which do not require Commission action. This site consists of 11.47 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and R-15 in the city, located at 4540, 4490 and 4420 West Franklin Road. The western portion of the site at 4540 West Franklin Road was previously annexed into the city with the Compass Charter School East expansion project and zoned R-15. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium high density residential in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. The applicant is requesting a modification to the existing development agreement to remove the property at 4540 West Franklin Road from the agreement for the purpose including it in the proposed multi-family residential development and the new development agreement associated with the proposed annexation. Again, this application does not require action from the Commission, only City Council. The applicant is proposing to annex the eastern two acre parcels shown on the plan on the east there, consisting of 10.29 acres of land with an R-15 medium high density residential zoning district. A medium -- excuse me. A multi-family residential development with a mix of housing types is proposed with a gross density of 10.6 units per acre, consistent with the medium high density residential future land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan. A development agreement is recommended as a provision of annexation that includes the west parcel proposed to be removed from the existing development agreement for the charter school. The plan shown there on the left is the concept plan that's included in the existing development agreement that was approved with the Compass Charter School. A preliminary plat is proposed shown there on the left consisting of one building lot and one other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. Right of way is proposed to be dedicated with the plat for the extension of West Aviator Street, a collector street, across the northwest corner of the site in accord with the master street map. Access is proposed via the collector street, Aviator, with a driveway access via Franklin Road, an arterial street, along the southern boundary of the side. The driveway is required to be located along the west property line for shared access with the property to the west. Private streets are proposed for internal access and for addressing purposes. Street buffer landscaping is required along the collector and arterial streets in accord with UDC standards. The Purdam Drain allies off site along the east boundary of the property within a one hundred foot wide easement on land owned by Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. The easement encroaches on this property at the northeast corner of the site. You can see the little easement line right here. A conditional use permit is proposed for a multi- family residential development consisting of 122 dwelling units in the R-15 zoning district. A mix of housing types with one, two and three bedroom units is proposed consisting of single family residential detached, attached duplex and townhomes. Because all units will be on a single lot, rather than individual lots, it is considered a multi-family residential development. All units will be for rent, rather than individually owned. A minimum of 1.85 acres of qualified open space and five site amenities are required to meet the minimum Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 14 of 60 standards. The common open space exhibit submitted with this application included some areas that don't qualify per UDC standards for multi-family residential development. Staff has requested the exhibit be revised prior to the City Council hearing in order to determine compliance with the minimum standards. The applicant has noted in their response letter that they are below the minimum standards for qualified open space and that they intend to request alternative compliance to those standards. So, that will be submitted prior to the Council hearing. Site amenities are proposed as follows from each of the required categories. Quality of life. They are proposing a clubhouse and a dog park. A way station is required to be provided with a dog park. Open space category. They are proposing a community garden. From the recreation category they are proposing a swimming pool and internal walking trails and a children's play structure. And, finally, the multi-modal category and they are providing charging stations for electric vehicles, which meet and exceed UDC standards. Off street parking is proposed for the development that meets and exceeds UDC standards. A minimum of 248 parking spaces are required. A total of 260 are proposed for an extra 12 spaces. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures within the development as shown. Building materials appear to consist of a stucco-like material with wood-like -- wood look lap siding and stone accents with asphalt shingle roofs. Final design should comply with the multi-family design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and the traditional neighborhood design guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan for the medium high density residential future land use designation. Written testimony was submitted from Shannon Ely, Baron Properties, the applicant's representative. She requests the following changes to the conditions in the staff report. Condition A-2-1-C she requests the proposed private streets are allowed to be in an easement, rather in a common lot, due to the nature of the project and the civil complexities associated with it and concerns pertaining to spacing and easements. The city code states the preference is that the private streets is in a common lot if the property is being subdivided. It's also staff's and the Ada County Street Name Committee's preference for clarity and accuracy in determining the street alignment and for approval of the street names that are -- excuse me -- that they are depicted on the final plat and recorded. Condition A-3-6-M she requested the street names be updated in the condition to reflect those on the most recent plans. Staff has made that change. And, then, finally, Condition 2.9 in Section B, they request that condition -- it's a Public Works condition -- be replaced. I can read through this if you would like. Otherwise, I will just let you view it in -- in the staff report and the hearing outline, but they have a proposal for replacement of that condition with alternate language and Public Works has agreed to that alternate language. So, staff is on board with that change. Staff is recommending approval with the requirement of a development agreement per the provisions in the staff report and staff is requesting one condition be added to require a sidewalk along the south side of West Fresh Powder Lane on the north side of the common area where the community center is located for pedestrian connectivity and safety. Staff will stand for any questions. Seal: Thank you, Sonya. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening. We will need your name and address for the record. Koeckeritz: I think Penelope was right. Is it working or no? She was right. Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 15 of 60 Allen: Are the -- the arrows on the keyboard aren't working? Koeckeritz: No. Allen: I can -- I can forward them for you if you like. Koeckeritz: All right. Thank you. Allen: Apologize for that. Koeckeritz: We are good right now. Okay. Good evening, Planning and Zoning Commissioners. My name is Elizabeth Koeckeritz. I am with Givens Pursley. My address is 601 Bannock, Boise, Idaho. With me tonight are Jeff Riggs, Matt Riggs, Greg Hector, as well as members of our local planning development team. I want to start by saying thank you to Sonya and Bill and really everyone in the Planning Department. This project has been a long time coming. We have gone through numerous iterations. We feel like we have worked with every planner, even ones that aren't here now, and we are really excited with where we have landed and how this is going forward and how we comply with the Ten Mile Interchange Special Area Plan. Baron Properties, just by way of background, because they haven't been here for probably a year or two, they were founded in 1983 by Jeff Riggs and they have developed and operated over 125 residential communities in the Mountain West. One of the things that's really unique about their properties is they provide high end amenities in a community. It's owned, operated, maintained by Baron and residents -- and there is a lot of different types of multi-family units within their p rojects, which allow residents to enjoy the community without -- and live really like they are in a single family detached home without worrying about the maintenance or upkeep associated with home ownership. Most recently they have developed two projects in Meridian, including the Black Cat one, which was the first development of its type really in the Treasure Valley area and it provided with its attached and detached residential units, its provided Meridian residents with a living opportunity that was previously unavailable. That one is currently -- it's still partially under construction, but it has started having tenants move in and they are giving it really rave reviews as you can see here. The other one that they have just recently -- it's been entitled, it's under construction, is the Modern Craftsman at Ten Mile. Next one. One thing since Baron came to this community they have become really involved in the Idaho Apartment Association and with the local chapter of the National Apartment Association. They recently had an annual event and Baron brought home four awards for its developments here in Meridian and what's really cool about this is these awards are voted on by the membership, which includes many of our most recognizable multi-family owners and developers in the valley and so their Black Cap project received the Property of Excellence in Meridian Award. Moving on. So, vicinity map. Sonya did a really nice job of covering this. We are right north of Franklin right at sort of the northern end of the Ten Mile Area Specific Plan. We are requesting annexation, zoning, a UPE, and a DA amendment and we are in full agreement with all but two recommended conditions of approval and looking at -- it's not super easy to see, but this R-15 -- we are really looking at offering a mix of housing types. You can kind of see different colored dots on here, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 16 of 60 like you see some lime green ones, some purple ones, some blue ones and each one of those is a different housing type. The lime green ones are townhomes. There are six units together. They are two-story townhomes. The purple are one bedroom, one bath duplexes. So, each side there is one bedroom, one bath. The bright green are two bedroom, two bath bungalows and, then, there are six three bedroom, two bath, bungalows. All the buildings use quality materials, including stone, stucco, wood tone siding. There is a variety of roof lines and facades, some with single slope roofs, some with hip roofs. There is -- some have attached garages, tuck under garages, detached open parking carports. There is just a wide variety for the residents that will be living here, including what's -- actually, let's go back one. I think -- we didn't get these slides for you. Is what's -- one of the things that makes these -- the Baron projects really unique is that they really focus on providing private open space. The Meridian City code requires 80 square feet of private square --private usable open space per unit and what Baron really focuses on is all of these units have their own private usable open space that far exceeds the 80 -- the 80 square feet. The bedrooms have 138 square foot patios and 126 square foot yards, for an average of 264 square feet. The two bedrooms they are combined at 578 square feet. The three bedrooms have 386 square feet. The six bedroom -- the six-plexes, the townhomes, they don't -- we have not included the yards. Their patios are 94 square feet. But as I will show you in a minute, they do also have their own sort of private green grassy area, it's just not individually fenced for them. So, going on -- let's go one more. One of the things we really looked at in trying to get this to comply -- to fit into the neighborhood was with the Ten Mile Plan, which focuses on three primary elements, land use, transportation and design. I will talk about each briefly in turn. Sonya did a really good job of pointing out where this is located and what's right around it. There -- while there is residential in the immediate vicinity, this really takes advantage of the fact that within one mile there is also property designated mixed employment, high density employment, industrial, commercial. We are not very far from the new Paylocity, the Saltzer Health, the Alquist project. There is just a lot going on right in this neighborhood, which makes this ideally situated for a neighborhood where residents can truly live and work within the same area. This is also recommended by the zoning. In the R-15 it talks about single family detached townhomes, two family duplexes, apartments, things of that nature and although ours are all on one lot, they still live and work like detached single family housing. Moving on to transportation. A big issue in the Ten Mile Plan is focusing on traffic and interconnected streets and here we have this unique rather narrow property. So, we worked with staff to create what you see here. We worked -- to start we worked with the property owner to the north. Aviator Street just cuts the very corner of this property and so they worked closely with him, with the Aviation Subdivision, over the last year and a half to make sure that this property would be included to make sure that it would be developed with that street Section C as envisioned in the TMISAP. Also when you look to the south, it was also really important that the properties to the west have also access, because you are getting close to the intersection of Black Cat and they are trying to -- ACHD is trying to minimize connections onto Franklin and so that's why the entrance is pushed so far to the west and, then, it has to curve back around to get into the bulk of it, because we are trying to work and collaborate with the neighbors to the west to make sure they have that access. The street design focusing on the complete streets. Because this is kind of a narrow unique property shape, we really tried Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 17 of 60 to work with staff on creating this main boulevard on drive through the developer -- through the development and you can see on this main street you have townhomes on one side that front up to the street and on the other side you have our duplexes, which also front up to the street. The TMISAP stresses that it's really important to look at the design beyond the edge of the roadway bed and so that's what we did here and we really tried to copy the design standards in the TMISAP with a narrower drive aisle for keeping traffic speeds down. The drive lane is 24 feet, with nine feet of parallel parking on each side, which also parallel parking is encouraged in the TMISAP, followed by eight foot carriage streets, which are wide enough and we do intend to have trees in those. Then five foot sidewalks and, then, it's just another five feet to the home entrances. All of the garages along the street were moved to the rear as it's mentioned multiple times in the TMISAP about sort of hiding the garages behind -- putting them on alleys, making them further back. We also have agreed to incorporate more traffic calming at the crossroads through pavers, bricks, colors, concrete, that sort of thing at ACHD's and staff's recommendations. The design elements -- here is a picture of the townhomes and you can see there is a small grassy area in front of them and the way this is set up it's really not likely that other people are going to be using that and so although we are not calling it their private usable open space, it really is. They do have a nice little grassy area that they can sit on fronting onto this main boulevard street. Our building details are really high quality lap siding, cultured stone, stucco. We have three separate color schemes that are all different, but really cohesive when you view them as a whole. All the units they are only -- most of them are one story. The townhomes are two story. There is a variety of roof lines for diversity and all the mechanical units are screened, as also recommended in the TMISAP. We have usable porches on the front. We have our walkways entering to the front. Let's see. This diversity of residential type, styles and densities we think does appeal to a wide range of lifestyles who want this sort of upscale living environment without the responsibility of lawn and other maintenance. Moving on to the one bedroom, one bath. This is what those units look like. They have an open floor plan with an emphasis on natural light. Every unit has a small private fenced backyard. It's desirable, because there is only one shared wall on these. Ample storage. And these are sort of really popular units. All of these are with young professionals sort of starting out who want more than that really multi-family three story walk-up experience who are ready to have more of their own space, but aren't ready for full home ownership and for empty nesters, retirees, who want to just be able to lock it, walk away, and not have to worry about all of the upkeep that comes with home ownership. On our next -- here is a picture -- another picture zoomed in a little bit more on our townhomes. It's 34 percent of the mix. There is --the two car garage is tucked under there and so our parking counts -- what they don't also include is the fact that there is also additional parking available on that driveway apron, but we are not counting that in those. So, that does help with the overall parking. Let's see. They have upper balconies and lower. Both they both have upper balconies and the lower porches and that private green space -- space that I mentioned. Interior amenities. It's really tall ceilings. They are open floor plans. Modern finishes. Stainless steel. Everyone has their own in-unit washers and dryers. They are smart security systems. Smart thermostats. All of those sort of new app enabled amenities that people are really looking for. Within the community there is - - the clubhouse includes a lounge, a coffee bar, conference room, Zoom room, state-of- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 18 of 60 the-art fitness center. As you walk through the pool -- through the clubhouse you end up in the pool area with a pool, a hot tub, and attached grill area. There is the adjacent tot lot that's next to the pool. If you go sort of up towards the northern boundary there is a dog park up there. There is a community garden. We have learned over time that residents really do like having the option to still just dig in the dirt and although it's not listed within code, most of these units do have the private yards. Lots of parking. Lots of connectivity. We will be submitting an application for our common open spaces for alternative compliance for that. We have been working through it. We are going to continue to work with staff and figure out what we can do to make it best work and so that is something that will be coming and we have talked to them about providing that within 15 days -- at least 15 days prior to the City Council meeting. It looks right now like we are about one-third acre short, but we are two-thirds acres over on private open space, if not more, and so we are going to try to figure out if there is just other options for us for that. The clubhouse. Next one. You can see this one I think actually has a super cool looking round swimming pool, something you don't see every day, and it leads out to that swimming pool, hot tub and spa area. These units also include detached garages that have storage. They are not. There are -- so, the garages come in blocks of -- I'm just about done -- six and, then, they also have additional storage units within them that individuals can also use. So, each garage bank has six -- 17 storage units also attached. We have confirmed that all services are available to the site. We are in compliance that Meridian and police --fire and police are both able to serve the site. That we are meeting with all of the requirements for annexation and zoning. We meet all the setbacks. We are in compliance with all of those -- just with all of those standards and, then, finally we are just asking for these two small conditions of approval and it sounds like we are already in agreement -- or that staff supports one of our conditions of approval on the platting and the timing for the platting and that Public Works has signed off on that. The other one is that we are requesting that our public -- our private streets remain in easements. That's how we have worked it on the last two developments. It's worked out really well, because there do become various setback issues there become -- when you have to put the pins in at lot corners, there just become a lot more issues when you put this into separate -- when it has to be individually platted or when the streets have to be in separate lots, then, all of your setbacks and everything kind of gets set off from there and it be creates a lot more issues going forward. So, we are asking for that one change in condition. And the code does allow you to do it either way. It specifically says or. Seal: Okay. Koeckeritz: With these I will stand for any questions. Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Commissioners, do we have questions for the applicant or staff? Smith: Mr. Chair? Seal: Thank you. Question for the applicant regarding the alternate conditions of approval -- or -- around the open space. Yeah. You mentioned you are looking for additional options and things like that. Are -- are they -- I guess what I'm trying to make Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 19 of 60 sure I'm on the right page around this is are you trying to come into compliance or are you looking to find an alternate condition or somewhere in between? You know, the -- the staff reports says, yeah, you are looking for -- you know, alternate condition, but it sounds like you are trying to work on something. I'm just trying to -- to make sure it's not something like, hey, you know, we are -- we are close enough, you know, if you round up we are almost there or in the open space, especially considering the closeness to the school -- the other -- other development projects in -- in, you know, in the area. There are certain things that I think it's important to ensure that there -- there is adequate open space in this neighborhood. So, I just want to ensure that that's something that's being taken into account. Koeckeritz: Good question, Commission -- Commissioner Smith. We actually are looking at probably a both and -- in that we are going back, we are looking at what our open space is. Are there different areas where we could include more. Just really working through the open space really closely and carefully to see other places where we can add more open space where we already have it and maybe we are not counting it right or we are not looking at it quite right. But, then, I do think that we will also be looking at applying for alternative compliance for a portion of the number. Smith: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Go right ahead. Grace: Mr. Chairman. Can you help me understand -- I was trying to follow your description of why you prefer the easement over the common lots, but it may -- it may be me. I'm just not tracking with you. Koeckeritz: All right, Commissioner Grace. So, within the R-15 zoning district there are certain setbacks for every single lot and once you put this -- and so right now everything -- we only have -- I believe it's two lots. But if everything -- yes. Two lots. But if we were to have a third lot and that lot comes down as a road, then, we have to also count setbacks off of that road and right now we have things that are closer and so we would be having to look for waivers of distances and things of that nature and off the top of my head I can't tell you what -- which ones create an issue and which ones don't or what those exact setbacks are. Grace: That helps. Thank you. Seal: Anybody else? I have got a couple here. So -- and -- so some of the things that you have done in your other developments I don't see here is live-work. Will there be any kind of live-work arrangement here or commercial? Koeckeritz: There will not be, because this site was zoned -- has a future land use map designation of straight medium density residential -- medium high density residential. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 20 of 60 Seal: Okay. In the backyards is that for the -- is that going to be like your other developments where it's going to be kind of an indoor-outdoor type grass, where it doesn't have to be mowed or cared for? Koeckeritz: I believe so. Yes, it will be. Seal: Okay. So, the storage that's provided that is -- that is going to be for the residents only and it will be allocated by a resident or is it something they have to rent or -- Koeckeritz: it's something that you can -- there is not quite enough storage for everyone and so it's something where you can lease an extra storage unit. Seal: Okay. And it will be for the residents of-- Koeckeritz: It's for the residents. Yes. Seal: Okay. Yeah. And, then, I had a similar question on the open space part, because you are calling it private open space. Generally we just call that a yard. So, I'm kind of - - that might have missed a little bit for me. So, I mean generally speaking you have a yard and, then, you have common open space. So, the two of them don't really interact very well. Common open space serves a different purpose. Koeckeritz: Yes. Seal: With that does anybody else -- Commissioner Wheeler? Wheeler: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, yeah, that was one of my questions, too, was about the real grass. So, on the -- it looked like there might be in the front of the house, too. Not just the back, but in the front. Those little grassy spaces I'm assuming that's going to be like artificial grass, too? Koeckeritz: Commissioner Wheeler, we have some members of the development team here who could answer that for certain. Wheeler: Okay. Perfect. Okay. Yeah. That was it. And then -- Koeckeritz: Okay. I can repeat it. Put it on the record. It is actual turf in the front yards. The only -- the only not real grass is in the fenced backyard areas. Wheeler: Fenced backyard. Okay. Great. And, then, similarly -- I mean looking at this development you can tell that there is a lot of thought and a lot of craftsmanship for sure and a lot of pride in this development in the way that it's moving that -- the way that's developed and that's really good, because, you know, that the -- the development carries that developer's name and he is -- and --or they are making sure that this is a high quality, nice development for sure. One of the questions, though, too, is on the -- on the open space use. It seems like it's -- it's below that. Usually in multi-family it's -- it's good to try Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 21 of 60 to at least hit that as a benchmark as at least the minimum requirements, if not more, and so have you thought about ways to re-adjust the -- the layout on this to allow for some more open space? Koeckeritz: Commissioner -- Commissioner Wheeler, great question. Yes, those discussions are ongoing right now and so we are trying to -- that's where we are at, we are trying to figure things out. Can we make small adjustments here or there to really come up with more of that open space. Wheeler: Okay. Seal: Okay. Any further questions? None? All right. Thank you very much. Koeckeritz: Thank you. Seal: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify for this application? Hall: There is no one signed up online, but we do have a David Bailey that signed up to speak. Bailey: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. My name is David Bailey. I'm with Bailey Engineering. My office address is 1119 East State Street in Eagle. And I am the engineer and the -- and -- and worked on this project for the developer, so I'm, obviously, in favor of it. But I have some insight that can -- that can talk about the -- the two issues that you are talking about here -- is -- the first one is on the private road, we do these often, you know, in the -- in the City of Meridian and we have worked on them for some time and we have done them in easements and we have done them in common lots. When we have -- where we are going to subdivide the individual lots, buildings, within the property for separate ownership we need to have that frontage on a private road and we need to have pins and those people to be able to locate their properties when they own them individually. But when they are -- when they are rental units it really doesn't add any value to the -- to the tenants within the property. So, it becomes an administrative requirement. The bottom line is if -- if the city decides they are going to make that happen I can make it work; right? It's -- it just doesn't add anything to it. We agreed to put these drive aisles as -- as private roads mostly for the condition of Joe Bongiorno, the fire department, so we could provide much better addressing for emergency services within the site, because if we just have a Franklin Road address for 122 units it makes -- it's a big problem for -- for them and so the only reason they are private roads is -- is really to provide that addressing for them and not to provide frontage. We do also have, in the same area, easements for the city utilities, sewer and water services that go in there, and we have worked extensively with your department as you might imagine getting all those services stuck in between the buildings and making them all work right. Meeting your -- your Public Works Department requirements are -- are -- are pretty tricky. Luckily I have got some really good engineers working on that piece and we figured it out. So, I don't think it's necessary for that to be in a common lot, you know, to provide any -- anything more than what we are providing for the project already. That Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 22 of 60 said, if the city decides that's what you want, I can make it work and wouldn't affect anything. The second issue is on the open space for this and the -- the issue on it is is that -- for example, all of the green space we show on both sides of our boulevard in the center and the islands in the middle and the landscape that goes with that and those sidewalks, that has a boulevard on this that looks exactly like what you have in your Ten Mile specific plan; right? We really wanted to copy that look and -- and follow that look within there. All of that open space up through there and those boulevard strips and all that doesn't technically qualify as open space under your code. So, we have plenty of open space in this project. It's just how we measure it, whether it's wide enough in order to qualify for -- for that -- that position there. On the other hand, we do have probably -- think it's over four times as much private open space within the project as required by the code. So, we could take those yards away from people and put that into common open space and we could actually do that -- I can't say I can trade it all one for one, because of configuration, but I could probably get most of it back just by taking away these private yards, which are a significant amount of amenity to the project. So, as far as the quality of the total open space for the project, we are going to ask for alternative compliance -- compliance, because we think we are -- we are way over that, what's -- what's required in that end. So, at that point I would -- I would -- I would stand for any questions you might have. Seal: Any questions from the Commissioners? Commissioner Lorcher? Lorcher: I have a question for staff. In regard to the private roads being either on a common lot or easement when it comes to a full rental property, has there been a precedent set for this -- the City of Meridian? Seal: I think -- hi, guys. That's okay. Allen: Apologize. Sorry. Can you, please, repeat that? Lorcher: That was absolutely fine. And so the conversations been going around this common lot for the private roads -- or the easement. Allen: Yes. Lorcher: So, these are all rentals, so there is no home ownership like the engineer had just -- what David had just said. Has there been a precedent set in the City of Meridian for easements on rental properties versus the other or is it just a case-by-case basis? And I mean, obviously, it's already been approved on occasion, but -- Allen: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Lorcher, so two things. This property is being subdivided and that's -- that's where our code specifically says if it's part of a subdivision the preference is that it be in a common lot. Lorcher: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 23 of 60 Allen: Or another lot. Whatever. Not a buildable lot and not an easement, so -- and the other thing is -- since some of the previous approvals the Ada County Street Name Committee has requested that these be in a separate lot recorded on the plat. Lorcher: Did they say why? Allen: Yeah. Excuse me. I will refer to my notes here. I ran through it in my intro, but let me reference that again here. Just a second. Yeah. So, their preference was for clarity and accuracy in determining the street alignment and for approval of the street names that they are depicted on the plat and recorded. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Starman: Mr. Chairman, can I inject some procedural or -- Seal: You bet. Starman: Yeah, I guess that's a process question or topic and I will ask my planning colleagues to help me out here, but we have kind of an odd -- this is an odd topic in the sense that in the UDC decisions relative to private streets are delegated to the director of the department. So, those are director decisions and an applicant can ask for City Council review, but absent that those are the decisions of the director. So, that's topic one. But topic two is it a kind of gets blurred, because now we have some proposed conditions that are attached to the preliminary plat that reference the private streets and, hence, we have a discussion tonight about that. But the odd issue from a process perspective is that technically issues relative to private streets are delegated to the department director and if the applicant isn't satisfied with that answer, the recourse is to ask for City Council review. So, I don't -- we can talk about that more as you deliberate, but I think, really, if the applicant is not satisfied with the director's decision they probably ought to consider asking for Council review between now and the time this reaches the City Council and they should take that up concurrently. But I'm going to look at Bill and see if you have any additional thoughts on that. Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, we have -- we have talked about this before as staff and, yes, we have had instances where the director has made a determination and, then, the applicant has submitted a companion City Council review application to catch up with it, just like you would with the alternative compliance that you are working. Now, I don't -- I'm going to punt it back to you a little bit, Kurt, because in this instance technically this application is going before City Council. So, is it really necessary to do that City Council review when it's already going to be in front of the City Council, because they are -- they are actually the ones that are acting on the annexation and the CUP and the plat. So, that's where we have had those internal debates about whether or not a City Council review application is necessary, because this is landing in their court and at that point the applicant has that ability to address the Council and say we think the director has erred and we think it should be in an easement and not a common lot. But that's typically how we have handled it. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 24 of 60 Starman: So, Mr. Chair, with your indulgence I will make one additional comment or respond to Bill's thought there, but I don't want to get too far into the weeds tonight. That's kind of a technical esoteric issue and I would like you to deliberate first, because it may be academic. But what I would say with regard to what Bill was inquiring about is my view is that the code is pretty specific that decisions relative to private streets are the director's determination and there is a very specific process in code that says if an applicant doesn't agree this is what you do and that -- what you do is not talking about preliminary plats and things of that nature, you ask the Council to review the director's decision and that is a discrete action. There is a separate processing code. And I think for the integrity of the process and to adhere to the code we should probably follow that sort of a parallel concurrent process. So, I will leave it at that, because that's really more than you need to know right now and it may be academic depending on your deliberations this evening regardless. So, I will be happy to answer questions, but I will leave it at that for now. Seal: Okay. Question on that. I mean that leads us to the -- to the -- sir, you can sit down. I think we are -- I think we are through this part of it. If you want -- Bailey: I had one more question, since I'm here, in the middle of it. Seal: Absolutely. You filled us in on a lot, so I will allow that. Go right ahead. Bailey: Okay. In -- in regard to that, I see his point on that end and, as I have said, it can go either way and we can live with it. It's just our preference compared to the city's preference on that. So, I would appreciate that if -- if you think that the easement's okay that you forward that recommendation to the Council and we will take it up with them. Seal: Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Starman: I -- I think that's -- that's a -- that's a fair comment and I would say -- I don't have a dog in the hunt either. I don't have a strong preference either. I'm just saying from a process perspective the code's pretty specific about here is how it works and so, you know, part of my job is to make sure we play by the rules, right, and so I just want to bring that to the -- to the Commission's attention. Seal: Okay. And so for -- for our choices on this -- I mean as -- as we go down the road is that essentially takes it out of our purview is -- is what you are speaking about; correct? Starman: I think it's out of your purview in the sense that the decision about the private street and whether it's an easement or a -- a common lot, that -- that decision either has been made by the director or it's going to be made and, then, if the applicant doesn't agree that wouldn't be something before this body, it would be reviewed by the City Council. So, I think the answer -- I would frame it that way. I do think the applicant -- or the applicant's engineer makes a good point. I certainly would not object. I think it's fine if you want to make a recommendation to the Council that if you go in this direction or we Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 25 of 60 think this might make sense, I think that's fair game, but it really is not a decision point for the Commission. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the clarification on those -- on that item. Where -- where are we again? Was there any -- that's right. Was there anybody else that would like to testify? Please indicate by raising your hand. I see no one. If we have no further questions for the staff or applicant, I will take a motion to close the public hearing for File No. H-2022-0079. Come on up. Sorry. I'm -- I'm flustered at this point, so -- Grace: Mr. Chairman, though, I think we would close public comment and, then, you would let the applicant come up; right? Seal: Beforehand? Grace: Beforehand? Now I'm flustered. Starman: As the Commissioner recalls, our typical process we ask -- we have the staff presentation first, then, we ask the applicant to present. We hear from the public and, then, we always provide opportunity for the applicant to sort of close the argument, so to speak, and answer questions. So, that's very appropriate before we close the public hearing. We will get all that on the record. Seal: Okay. I'm sorry about that. Generally when another member of the staff comes up, then, there is not much more to add, but the floor is yours. Koeckeritz: I will be very brief. Elizabeth Koeckeritz once again. Givens Pursley. I guess -- and I just want to reiterate one of the points about putting these streets into private roads, which I understand, there is a question as to process wise whether or not that's in front of you today or not, which I don't necessarily know is something to get into, but it is a recommended condition of approval within the staff report and so it's important from our perspective to make sure we address everything that's in that recommended conditions of approval. However, the one thing that I just wanted to close with is that what makes this also unique and different when it comes to these private roads -- when it comes to this development as a whole, compared to almost all the other multi-family development complexes that are ever going to come before you, is that this is owned by the same family team, Baron Properties, from now through the construction, through to the operation, to the management, through to the very end and so a lot of the concerns that come with putting things in private -- in public roads versus private roads and a lot of these other concerns, they just simply don't exist in developments like this where it really is one cohesive unit and they are really looking at taking care of their own property for the long term. Thank you. And with that we would ask for a recommendation of approval for our applications. Seal: Thank you very much. Okay. Now, if nobody has any further questions for the applicant or staff, I will ask for a motion to close the public hearing for File No. H-2022- 0079. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 26 of 60 Wheeler: So moved. Rivera: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded that we close the public hearing for File No. H-2022-0079. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Seal: Who would like to go first? Everybody -- Commissioner Grace, go right ahead. Grace: Sure. Mr. Chairman, I -- I really like the -- the design elements and the design concept. I like the variety of housing types. I think it fits the area, the proximity to other - - other activities in terms of jobs and schools. I really like the external site amenities. So, I'm --you know, I'm -- I'm -- I'm in favor of the project. I -- I hesitate to wander off, because we probably don't need to based on counsel's -- well, I'm not going to then. Based on counsel's recommendation that it might not be before us. But if we do -- it turns out that we do want to make a recommendation as a group, then, yeah, I guess I have some thoughts on that. Seal: Okay. Anybody else? Smith: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Smith. Smith: Yeah. I just wanted to -- to come back on the open space question. I know there is -- you know, there is not a ton for us to look at right now in terms of what that -- what that looks like, but, you know, that -- I'm struggling a little bit with -- with some comments, as I think you kind of referred to, of private open space being equated to similar statuses as public open space. I don't think that makes sense. I don't think it's reasonable. Theoretically you could give a handful of people massive backyards and -- and make the same argument. I just don't think it tracks, because, like you said, they are different purposes. I think that also f ollows suit with the strips on different part -- on sides of -- of streets. I think that the purpose of open space is pretty clear and there is a reason that the code is set out as it is, so I don't know if this looks like it -- a condition, since it's something that's going to come before the Council and we -- we haven't really looked at it, but I -- I sincerely would hope that the developer would make as much of an effort as possible to get into compliance. I understand that alternative compliance might be necessary regardless, but I think I personally would like to see a whole lot of the former than the latter is -- is my main kind of consideration. It just -- especially given just the general density in this area. The denser you get I think the -- the more important open space becomes, you know, in -- in -- in the long run -- in long term planning. So, those are some comments -- I don't know if that -- if-- if I would want that as a condition. I don't Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 27 of 60 know if that really can be a condition, since it's still TBD regarding what the -- what the ultimate proposal to City Council looks like, but those are just some thoughts. Seal: Okay. And -- and I -- I agree with what you are saying and I mean the open space private space doesn't necessarily track with me. However, I -- I will say that I'm glad to see -- and -- and -- and I do like the design of these. I -- I have toured the one that's up on Black Cat and it's -- it's pretty impressive and it's not a whole bunch of four-plexes and it's not a massive apartment complex. So, personally I really, really appreciate that, that this is still considered multi-family, that it's livable. So, I would like to see the applicant come to at least the minimum. So, I know that might be a stretch, but I -- I think the minimum is -- is something that can be accomplished here. So, with -- without, you know, degrading the design or -- or the atmosphere of the -- of the subdivision that's -- that's -- or the development here. So, that is something that I would like to see happen with it personally. But I do appreciate the design of it for sure. Anybody else? Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go ahead. Wheeler: Yeah. So, I'm just going to mimic those same comments there. For me I -- like I said, there is a high quality here. There is a lot of pride in what's going on in the development on here. Good quality. It's a place that doesn't -- you know, just seem like they are trying to pack it in as deeply as they can. They have wider drive aisles. It's a -- it's -- it's a beautiful community concept. It really is. And -- and the -- the fact, though, that it's on -- I believe it's on one parcel -- is that what I heard correctly was that it was on one parcel? Seal: I believe it's three different parcels. Wheeler: Is it three parcels? Okay. So, it's on three parcels there, but it allows them to kind of combine a little bit of those open spaces without the -- without the lot lines there as being used for some of the -- some of the yards are being counted for as open space. So -- and even the buffer up there -- I look at more like open space, like where are the kids going to go play where somebody can throw a soccer ball -- or kick a soccer ball, you know, throw a ball around that and -- and while there are some of those spaces there that are for some of the duplexes and there is some down on the south end, it would make some of the utilization of where that can go, so that the community can -- can enjoy, that might be -- that's more of what I'm hoping that can be hit and, once again, just the minimum would be nice to see in some way or another. But this is a -- this is a great -- great concept in a -- in a great spot. Seal: Okay. Thank you. As far as the -- kind of what -- what's not agreed upon, it -- I mean if -- whoever is going to make the motion it sounds like the staff and applicant are in agreement on the -- the last two, the A-3-6-M and the B-2-9. As far as the A-2-1-C, what I have seen in the past when it comes down to decisions like this when it's somewhat Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 28 of 60 not necessarily in our purview and we make a recommendation generally speaking I have supported what staff has down and, then, I leave that to Council to deliberate, you know, or a decision to come in from somewhere else. So, if somebody else accepts that, then, that's something that, you know, again, it's basically out of our purview. But if you do have designs on whether or not you do support it or not, feel free to voice that in a -- in a motion. And with that I will take a motion. If anybody would like to throw one in. Commissioner Grace, I see you are reaching for the microphone. Grace: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony move to recommend approval to the City Council of File No. H-2022-0079 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6th, 2023, with the following additional recommendation: That with regard to the applicant's requested modification regarding A- 2-1-C, that the --that the private streets --well, that we follow the director's initial, I guess, decision on that to call those common lot in lieu of -- of an easement. Seal: Do you have any comment on the other two? Grace: Oh. Well, I -- I would be in favor of the -- of the other two requested and that would be part of my motion as well. It sounds like those were already agreed upon. Seal: Okay. I think they wanted those stricken, unless I'm -- Grace: Say again, Mr. Chairman. Seal: I believe they want those stricken. They are -- they are conditions right now, so they would need to be stricken. Grace: Right. And I would be in favor of-- and make in my motion to strike those -- those other two. Seal: Okay. Can you list those out? And, then, there is one other one that Sonya has listed at the very end. Grace: So, I'm looking at modification A.3.6M and, then, B.2.9; is that accurate? Seal: That is correct. And, then, I believe Sonya wanted an additional one that's listed at the bottom. Allen: Chairman Seal? Seal: Go ahead. Allen: May I interrupt? Condition B.2.9, the request was to strike it, but to replace it with new language as contained in the hearing outline and the applicant's response to the staff report. Thank you. Grace: Did I do it? This got awfully complicated. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 29 of 60 Seal: It does sometimes, so -- yeah. Essentially to -- Grace: Oh, the additional request. Okay. Okay. We didn't -- we didn't talk about that, necessarily, but I, too, would be in favor of it, if that's what staff has determined in their infinite wisdom. Seal: You want to go ahead and read it out loud? Grace: So, Mr. Chairman, I -- I -- I make the same motion with the same comments regarding the applicant's requested modifications and I would add the additional -- the additional recommendation of a condition to add a --the required sidewalk along the south side of West Fresh Powder Lane. Oh. On the north side of the common area where the community center is located for pedestrian connectivity and safety. Seal: Okay. Do I have a second? Wheeler: Second. Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of File No. H-2022- 0079 with the aforementioned modifications. All in favor, please, say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 8. Public Hearing for Artisan Victory Market (H-2022-0066) by Kindi Moosman, Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 2820, 2910, 2960, 2990 and 3020 S. Eagle Rd. A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 14.47 acres of land with the R- 15 (12.45 acres) and C-C (2.03 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 building lots and 1 common lot on approximately 13.6 acres in the requested zoning district. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 132 units on approximately 12.45 acres in the R-15 zoning district. Seal: All right. With that I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2022-0066 and we will begin the staff report. Parsons: Not making that transition easy on you tonight. Apologize. Thank you, Chair, Members of the Commission. Next item on the agenda this evening is the Artisan Victory Market. The applicant is here to discuss with you annexation, preliminary plat, conditional Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 30 of 60 use permit and, again, a private street. As you looked at the two -- the previous project and this project, you will see there is some similarities between both of them and it's the same applicant. So, their request was to have you act on their -- their Modern Craftsman project on Franklin first and that way we can maybe go through this last one a little bit quicker and get to some of the public testimony. It looks like we have a full audience wanting to testify in this particular project. As you know, this has been continued multiple times and, again, as you heard from the applicant this evening, due to staff changes they were also passed around to different planners and -- and it landed up on my plate and I told them that I would commit to getting them to the finish line on this project, because the last thing we want to do is have applicants waiting in the wings and taking a long time to get through our process. So, I felt it prudent to take over the project and, then, help them get through the finish line and make sure that whatever we are doing tonight it's consistent with the other approvals that they had throughout the city. I, too, had the opportunity of touring their Black Cat facility as well and -- and I agree with all the Commission's comments this evening. It is a quality development. Now, where this project differs from the other project is it's -- it's actually located -- so, this is -- sorry. Let me back up here. So, the -- this project consists of 13.6 acres of land, currently zoned RUT in Ada county and there is seven properties associated with the annexation request. As you know, annexation requests -- their boundaries are larger than the preliminary plat, so the annexation itself is 14.47 acres, where the plat is 13.6 and that's just because we have applicants annex the property to the center line roadway, so we know who has jurisdiction if there is an accident on Eagle Road. It's more of a public safety issue than anything and just making sure zoning goes through the center line of the adjacent right of ways. But you can see here that this subject property is completely surrounded by city zoned property -- annexed property and there has been some history on this site. In the early 2000 -- in 2005, 2006, this property did come before the city for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. At the time it was part of a larger area and the applicant was requesting mixed-use regional on the site. At that time the Council didn't feel comfortable with that designation and it got downgraded to mixed-use community. Later they came forward with annexation and Council did not support the annexation or the concept plan, so they denied the annexation, but approved the -- the Comprehensive Plan map amendment and that's why we have mixed-use community on this -- this property tonight. You can also look at the future land use map and see that this area is part of a larger mixed-use community area. In the staff report we -- we shared with you that starting at the north boundary of the mixed-use community area the site has storage and, then, as you transition to the south it transitions to the office part and, then, some more single family and, then, we have this property, which has that multi-family component and a commercial component and, then, as you translate to -- transition even farther south at the intersection, which is Inglewood Subdivision -- Inglewood Place Subdivision, there will be an assisted living care facility and there is some independent units across on the other side of Titanium, just like this particular project. But on the corner there is a daycare and a Starbucks with a drive through on it and, then, even across the other side, east -- the south side of Victory we have the Rite-Aid, another coffee shop with a drive through, and another daycare. So, when you look at all of what's occurring in this mixed-use area we found that the project was consistent with the mixed-use community designation based on what's occurring and that's why we did support just the two land use types on this Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 31 of 60 particular site, given the size of it and not all -- and looking at the entire area as a whole. So, I just want to at least put that out there for you as well. See if this will advance here. No. There we go. Now, I'm locked up. So, as I mentioned to you, the applicant is here to annex in 14.47 acres of land. A majority of it will be zoned R-15. You can see in the right-hand exhibit that the R-15 zoning area is approximately 12.38 acres and the C-C zone or the commercial zone is approximately 2.09 acres, which is consistent with the development to the south of this as well. Here is the preliminary plat that the applicant is proposing. This is just -- basically show you the lot layout. So, the applicant is proposing to subdivide three multi-family lots, which would be located here to the north, the east, and internal to the development and also a portion of the south here and the two commercial lots are adjacent to Eagle Road in this general location here and, again, the purpose of that was so that it would align with the commercial zoning that's currently approved in the Englewood Subdivision and it also helps facilitate cross-access with that adjacent subdivision, which was a condition of that project as well. Now, what I have tried to describe on this exhibit before you is the road connectivity for the development and I will go through that briefly and the reason why I thought it was important to highlight that, because if you had a chance to look at the public record, the public comments for this particular project, a lot of the public testimony had to do with concerns with traffic, density, and, then, extending these stub streets and I thought based on just the amount of public testimony we had it's important to stress and at least explain how we analyze projects and -- and what this -- this project entails as far as connectivity. So, starting with the cross-access, I have highlighted that in a rectangular -- in a rectangle. It's actually highlighted in blue, but it doesn't show up well in this graph, but -- so the access to Eagle Road will -- will be very similar to the previous project. It is a driveway connection. It is not a private street connection. If you had a chance to look at the staff report, both mine and Sonya's staff report for both projects, our code does not support private streets connecting into arterial roadways. That would require alternative compliance. In pre- application meetings with the applicant we made them aware of that requirement and so they have adjusted their plan accordingly and made sure that this is only a driveway connection, along with a driveway connection, a cross-access driveway with the property, to the south and this is also consistent with ACHD's approval as well. Now, the private street network that's being proposed with this subdivision is actually this looped road here and similar to the staff recommendation on the previous staff report, we are recommending that this easement be converted over to a common driveway based on the same testimony you heard on the previous application. The -- the areas that I have highlighted with a red circle are -- those are the public right of ways or the stub streets controlled by Ada County Highway District that are extended to this particular property. I would let you know that the applicant has been working with staff over a year on this on making sure they get the layout right and every time that they met with staff they were informed that these roads need to be extended with this development, particularly if they were going to propose an internal private street network, because the last thing we want to do -- if you look at the mixed-use community standards, connectivity is important, not only vehicular, but also pedestrian connectivity and that's why it's important that not only does the applicant plat the property and dedicate additional right of way, but extend those stub streets for not only the benefit for this development, but also for the surrounding developments. So, that's very -- very critical. And if you had -- as you are aware when Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 32 of 60 there is -- there is a stub street adjacent to a property, ACHD requires a road that says this is a public right of way. This road is to be extended in the future and that's what today is. It's us talking about the extension of these roadways, because we are here subdividing the project. The other important factor for having this road is we don't want to funnel everyone out to Eagle Road or that -- it will happen that way, but that shouldn't be the primary access for the subdivision to cut through this multi-family development and try to get to Eagle Road. We want to make sure that both -- both Victory and Eagle Road are arterial roadways, so we would like to have a backage road or some kind of local street or collector street network to funnel traffic to those roadways and that's why it's critical to have this local street network and get these roads connected, so that all of these residents don't necessarily need to cut through this development to get to Eagle Road. At least use the main -- use this Eagle Road access as it's currently designed. So, thought I would give you a little bit more on that and let you know that's -- that's why it's important. We have --we have --we have got a -- both ACHD's policies and city's code and city's policies require the extension of roadways. Also mention to you, if you had a chance to look at the ACHD staff report, and -- and staff's recommended conditions of approval, because of the length of this roadway it does exceed code requirements. Not necessarily our requirements, because the applicant has many different intersections here, but ACHD noted that this roadway will exceed over 750 linear feet and in keeping in spirit with ACHD's conditions of approval and with our mixed-use guidelines, staff has recommended not to redesign the road as -- as ACHD has suggested, but we -- we have recommended that the applicant work with AC -- us and ACHD to implement traffic calming at this intersection and create decorative crossings per our recommendation. Of course, ACHD and applicant is in agreement with that. They think that's an important as well. Just like the last application, integration and integrating all of these uses together is just as important in the Ten Mile area as it is a mixed use areas and so this -- that will be an important design element moving forward. So, the applicant -- oh, I wanted to step back here. So, the height -- the areas that I have highlighted in -- in the tan are things the applicant can remove for the plan. It's -- it's not necessary to have these as private streets or dedicated easements for access. As you have heard, this is all going to be held under one ownership. The applicant is going to maintain an owner -- it's not necessary to do that. They will -- we will treat it just like any other multi-family development and they will just build driveways and shared parking lots for the -- the residents to use. And as Mr. Bailey mentioned in the previous presentation, again, the private street is -- is important for addressing as well. So, that's really one of the major purpose of why we are platting the --the privacy street, is because, again, for emergency services. The other thing that I would note, too, is -- are the units on the east boundary of the site, they do have accesses to share driveways. Typically in a -- in a single family residential development we would classify those as common driveways, but in this instance they -- they function more like a commercial drive aisle, but the applicant has been notified that those driveways should at least be 20 feet wide minimum, so that residents can get in and out of there and get access to the garages. And that has been conditioned accordingly. So, that's -- that kind of highlights all of the access points proposed for this particular subdivision. So, here is the site plan for the conditional use permit. The CUP is a request to develop 131 single -- or 131 dwelling units on this site. I don't -- I -- I want to steer away from multi-family, but that's what it is technically in our definition as you -- Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 33 of 60 as you noted. The applicant tries to have these live like a single family development and the mix of residential types in here will be the same as you heard before, so you have some townhome units, some duplex units and, then, some single family detached units and the applicant has highlighted that on the proposed CUP site plan here for you to take under consideration. If -- in the staff report I did note that the applicant did align the townhomes along the south boundary to provide that transition to the larger assisted living facility on the south boundary and, then, was very cognitive of the adjacent single -- single family on the east and also the north boundary and so they have provided all single stories along those boundaries as well. Also per -- for multi-family developments you have to have a minimum ten foot setback along the perimeter, unless the code requires a greater separation. In this particular case the applicant is providing a 15 foot setback -- in some cases a 20 foot setback along that perimeter. Now, I did note in the open space section of the staff report that some of those areas would not count towards their open space requirements, because the code requires those to be a minimum 20 feet wide. So, there are specific dimensional standards that you have to use in order to count qualified open space and I will get into that a little bit more as well. So, parking for the site -- this -- this application actually came in prior to the adoption of our current standards. So, this particular application before you is really a hybrid of -- of what the current code is and what the previous code is. I think the applicant really was trying to meet the spirit of the code and try to get more open space and provide a higher parking ratio than what was required under the previous code. So, in the staff report I did analyze the parking and let you know that there is really 191 parking stalls required for this site based under the previous code and as proposed by the applicant there is 236 on this particular site plan and that's a mixture of garage spaces and surface parking and covered parking. Also note the Commission -- let the Commission know that the applicant also noted that there is some on-street parking available here, too. So, there is 50 plus additional parking spaces on the street and the applicant has been very mindful in their design to have parkways between the curb and the sidewalk to also provide that traditional neighborhood feel, which I think is important again to those mixed-use standards. So, here was the color rendering that the applicant provided in their open space exhibit. As I mentioned to you, along the perimeter some of the -- the -- what I appreciated the applicant doing on this particular project was they didn't highlight what areas were counted towards the baseline open space and the multi-family versus what the open spaces required per the square footage of each multi-family unit, plus the private open space required by the multi- family standards. So, the light green itself is what the applicant classified as the ten percent baseline that's required by code. The darker green is the area -- are the areas that represent the amount of common open space that is required per the square footage of each residential unit. In this particular case all the units do exceed 500 square feet, so it's -- it's -- it's anywhere between 250 square feet and 350 square feet per residential unit in addition to that baseline. So, technically, if the applicant is using the new standards, which they committed to doing, they have to provide a minimum of 1.93 acres of open space on this site. And so just like the previous application, staff has recommended that the applicant provide a revised open space exhibit, either removing those areas from the calculation, so we can confirm that they still meet the minimums, or enhancing those areas, so they can be counted towards open space and what I mean by that is I had a conversation with the applicant on Tuesday and they were toying with the idea of adding Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 34 of 60 some more pedestrian walkways through some of those areas to create this nice looping path through the development. So, they cannot only enhance the open space, but also add to the amenity or the experience in -- in the development and I thought that was a -- a great idea to do that. So, I'm -- I'm sure they are going to work with me as we transition from this body to City Council, but just wanted to let you know that, again, same issue here, we need to make sure -- we need a revised open space exhibit, make sure that we are hitting at least those -- those minimums and I know the applicant is committed to potentially adding more. I would also mention to you that we have recommended some changes to the site plan that's before you, too, or -- and I'm going to use the landscape plan, because it's a lot less busy and a lot easier to read for discussion purposes. So, essentially, staff had raised some concerns that a lot of this site is amenity and open space heavy on the west side of Titanium and not necessarily east side. But you can see here, based on the schematic that you see here, there is really not a lot of integration between the two developments. It's a road separating the two. Hence the importance of why we need that -- the traffic calming and they enhanced -- the decorative crosswalks at that intersection to help promote some of that connectivity and integrate this site a little bit better. But I also wanted to bring to your attention that the applicant is proposing a trash enclosure in this particular location and you can see here there is not -- if someone wants to get over to the tot lot and the -- the clubhouse, you are going out of route to get there or you are walking through the parking lot. So, staff had recommended that they either shift this trash enclosure or relocate it and, then, provide a more direct connection in this location, so that when you do cross the street and come in here you can just take a -- stay on sidewalk and get to those essential amenities for the proposed development. The other thing as I -- what I wanted to talk about is the concept plan for the commercial development. So, the applicant is proposing up to 18,100 square feet of commercial on this site. So, here is a multi-tenant building here and, then, a potential retail tenant here with -- with a drive through and with the mixed-use developments, again, we try to integrate all the uses and so the applicant was made aware -- at least I shared with them that we were going to be asking for some type of plaza and integrating a pathway connection through the commercial to tie in with this open space as well. We thought this was a good linkage between the two here. So, this will have to get redesigned slightly to include a plaza area and, then, provide a pedestrian connectivity. Again, another decorative crossing through the private street linking this open space with the plaza area that's going to be planned or required as part of the commercial component and, then, ultimately get people out to the seven foot sidewalk along Eagle Road. So, the applicant will work that into their plans as well, but that's -- that's another component of that mixed- use element that needs to be addressed with this particular project. But, again, it has been conditioned accordingly in the staff report. You can also see here that with this application the applicant has provided a fencing plan and I have highlighted what all the different colors mean for you, so you can see how that lays out. But, generally, this is consistent to what the code would require or allow as part of the development. So, really, no real issues with the fencing. The only thing that I called out in the staff report, it -- it appeared that some of the fencing was a little close to -- to the roadway and the code requires that fencing be set back ten feet from the property line. So, applicant Assured me that they could probably accommodate that and make that work. Here is the amenity plan. As I mentioned to you. Similar amenities as the previous project. Staff did condition Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 35 of 60 the applicant to add an additional amenity from the multi-modal category. They did confirm that they do plan on putting vehicle charging stations in this development just like the one -- all their other developments that they have going on in Meridian and so with that addition staff finds that they do meet the amenity requirements of the UDC. Again, similar building elevations. Same building materials. Pretty consistent theme tonight. Again, just like Sonya mentioned, I really appreciate the fact that the applicant is trying to integrate the commercial design in with the residential. Again, that is another essential component of mixed-use developments and, of course, the applicant will have to require with the --all the architectural standards manual guidelines in the ASM as well. So, again, generally speaking staff is supportive of this particular project and the design as proposed by the applicant and, again, that -- that second check will be done at the staff level when we do the administrative design review. As I noted previous -- earlier in my presentation, a lot of -- a lot of public comments on this particular one and I can -- you can tell by -- by the audience here tonight that -- I think a lot of it is really the concern of the extension of Titanium. It's what I saw in the -- in that hearing outline. So, I just wanted -- I know you guys had asked me to send over the staff report for the Inglewood development, including ACHD's staff report, which I did, and I think you are very well aware of -- that it was required as a public stub street and stubbed to this property and was required to put a sign up in -- in front of that street that said this is a -- this right of way will be extended in the future. I also want to mention to you that I did receive written comments from the applicant similar to the same information that you had on the previous application. Applicant wants to modify DA provision C in the staff report. Staff is amenable to this. Again, it's the same reasons. The only thing I -- I don't think we need to make the condition as lengthy as the applicant has proposed. The -- the -- the language that they are proposing -- it's -- it's in your hearing outline in front of you, but it does coincide with the Public Works condition that they want modified and has Sonya mentioned to you we have coordinated and we are supportive of that. So, I don't think we need a paragraph of a condition in DA. I simply just want to modify that particular condition as it's currently written to change it from prior to -- final plat shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for any structure within this development. That would allow the applicant to still meet their--get things under construction, bond, and do those subdivision improvements at the same time as their -- they are working through all the other Public Works issues and items that they need to as part of the final plat process. Item number two is the common lot versus the easement for the private street. I think I'm going to stand with how that decision went on the last one. I think it really needs to stay in a common lot. We want to support Ada county as we can. As -- as mentioned in the previous project, this just came about a few months ago from Ada county. What was happening is they were getting quite a few requests for private streets, but they had no subdivision or plat in front of them to even understand how to name them or what was even good. People were just trying to name commercial drive aisles and didn't even have a private street application with the city and so as part of their process they just feel it's - - it's easier to process -- treat private streets almost like public dedication. It's on a plat when you record a plat you show the public right of way on it and this would be no different. It would be a common lot with a street name showing how it aligns with all the adjacent streets and typically this -- the street naming committee -- if that private street aligns with any other public street, it gets named pretty similar to what the public street is. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 36 of 60 It would just have a lane at the end of it versus a street, avenue, or road on it. That's really the difference here. So, I -- again, I think -- I think we have kind of beat that one to death tonight and I -- I think you guys are clear on -- on what your purview is on that tonight. And, then, second -- the last item that the applicant shared with -- has to do with that Public Works condition. It's the same 2.9 and staff is -- is agreeable to that. So, we are good with that language as written in that hearing outline. Again, staff is -- finds that this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It does --with the conditions and the staff report we are recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you may have. Seal: Okay. Thank you very much, Bill. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening again. Koeckeritz: Good evening. I am still Elizabeth Koeckeritz. Still with Givens Pursley at 601 Bannock and I am still here with the Baron Development team. All right. All right. Good evening again, Planning and Zoning Commissioners. Elizabeth Koeckertiz with Givens Parsley. 601 Bannock. I am here on another Baron Properties project and once again just -- I won't go over everything over again, but we do have Jeff and Matt Riggs here, as well as Greg Hector with Baron Properties, as well as the entire -- most of the development team who will be able to answer questions that I'm unable to. Thank you so much, Bill, for that presentation. We have been working for a long time on this one as well. We have gone through several iterations and we finally landed in what we think is a really good place and this one does have the commercial. Once we have incorporated the variety of mixed-use housing, we have one large -- we have two commercial pads. They are about the same size. One we anticipate being one larger sort of development - - one larger sort of building on it and the other is being built more to be able to divide and have several -- five or six smaller businesses located on it and I will talk more about that in a few minutes. We agree with Bill with all of the conditions, with putting in a better plaza in the commercial area, improving some of our connections, the pathways, the traffic calming that ACHD is requesting. We are agreeable to all of that, except for still it -- it also sounds like we are likely in agreement on all, but one can condition and rather I think than rehashing all of that at this point, I would actually, with your leave, Mr. Starman, the attorney, just ask that the record reflect if this were to ever go up on some sort of appeal, let the record reflect that full discussion that was had concerning it, rather than redo all of that at this point. Starman: Just -- just for the record I will -- I will say that I think that's a good approach and I would support that and that sounds fine. Koeckeritz: All right. Thank you. All right. So, here we have -- just skipping through a bunch of our first slides -- the surrounding here is -- as Bill just talked about is our site plan. It's -- to the south there is the R-15 and C-C zoning. There is R-8 to the north and there is R-4 to the east. Properties to the north and east -- the surrounding single family detached residential, those are all one and two story single family homes and so in looking at that the development team very purposely placed one story buildings up adjacent to that fence line and purposely moved all of the two-story townhomes down to the south and down along Eagle Road. We have all been in many of these hearings and we have Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 37 of 60 all heard neighbors talk about the multi-family apartments coming and looking down into their backyards and so that's the one thing that we don't want to have that complaint ever with these developments. This really is meant to live and work like single family -- standalone detached single family residential housing and all of these houses are very purposely one story in this location. Bill, can go to the next one. The future land use map. It's about a 40 acre area within this mixed-use community area and it really has fully developed with the -- with sort of the vision of the city. From the top to the bottom you have storage. You have an office park. There is some higher density single family residential. There is our development where we are proposing multi-family and commercial. There is the daycare. The over 55 community. And across the street as a Rite-Aid. Notably missing from this is -- without this any sort of multi-family development, which is actually often a -- typically a component in these mixed-use community areas and one thing that has come up is if you also notice the properties to the east -- there were initially some concerns with the neighbors. They are designated medium density residential, which is a completely different type of FLUM designation, which has its own set of requirements and so this property could not be developed in that way, even if we were to come here and want to do that, it really is meant for a mix of some sort of commercial residential development on it, like what we are proposing. Again, there -- I'm not going to go through this as -- in much detail this time. There is the big variety -- the product variety and mix here. Get two story -- I looking for. I apologize. This slide -- so, one of the things that's a little bit just slightly different than the other ones -- the top picture is a picture of our two story -- of our two bedroom, two bath, standalone units. Those all come with -- you can see sort of as you are going into it and we have agreed to widen the drive aisle to the 20 feet -- we have agreed to widen the drive aisles to the 20 feet. I apologize. And so that's one. That's the same similar sort of building, a little bit different setup of how it is here. Then you can also see our townhome units, which turn out to be some of the most popular, most desirable units. There is the three bedroom units. The two end units. And, then, the four in the middle are all two bedroom units and they still have that in -- under -- that tuck under two car garage. I think we can keep moving forward. This is our one bedroom, one bath, duplex again. And the townhomes. The clubhouse here -- it's -- let's go -- so, here we have the clubhouse. Once again, it's laid out very similarly. You walk in, it has all of the same sort of high end amenities. A coffee bar. A Zoom room. App enabled fitness equipment. There will also be the leasing office here. You walk through it out into the pool area, which also includes -- it's a resort style pool with the really nice furniture, hot tub, and also adjacent -- here again is the tot lot. The detached garages with storage -- once again as we talked -- and I actually have a parking exhibit here -- there are -- there is both these garages. We now have more of the two bedroom with attached garage and all of those townhomes that also include attached garages, which is something that the residents really do appreciate actually having the real garage space. The community amenities are close to the same as last time, including it does have the dog park with the walking path on the north side. Inside the clubhouse -- it's a 2,780 square foot clubhouse with the pool, large pool deck, hot tub, the tot lot. There is also the community garden at the corner of Publisher and Titanium and we will be providing those additional pathway connections that we talked about and one of the other things -- since trash did come up -- is there is also a trash valet service where they mention that every day if you leave your trash on the front step someone will come along Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 38 of 60 and pick it up and take it to the dumpster for you and this seems -- I did not know this happens--that this could happen. This is a really nice -- I'm also considering it in amenity. They also -- they do include the EV charging stations. One thing that Baron does is -- they are currently going to put in four right now, but they do install the infrastructure throughout. So, as EV vehicles become -- electric vehicles become more and more prevalent, it's easy just to, then, pull it up, instead of having to go back and lay all that infrastructure again for those charging stations. The interior amenities are the same as before. They really pride themselves on the high end amenities. They are really nice finishes. We actually have a parking exhibit on this one that really helps lay out the different types of parking. As mentioned there is 274 parking spaces for the multi-family portion and that doesn't include any parking on Townhome Drive or on- street parking on Titanium or Publisher Streets. If you look, the open parking is the aqua blue and that's just more of the standard parking lot parking. The covered parking carports are in green. The standalone garage buildings with the storage attached, those are in red and, then, any building with an internal garage is shown in royal blue and this also does not include the commercial parking, which is an additional 55 spaces. Okay. Moving on to open space. We -- let's see. Per the two kinds of open space in the development code, we need to provide about 1.95 acres. We were providing approximately 2.25 acres, but now we are -- backed off on that a little bit. On this development -- so, we -- also we will be submitting an updated open space plan. However, on this development we are confident that we are going to hit the open space requirements. We don't think that alternative compliance is going to be required. We know a couple places where we can put it, where we can look at things, where we can really make sure that this is inclusive and it does check all those boxes. Once again each unit does also have its own private open space, ranging from -- for a one bedroom 509 square feet between the patio and the yard, up to the three bedroom units have a total of 681 square feet. Once again, the townhomes do not have that private fenced area, but -- so, they have their patios, which are 92 to 94 square feet, but they still do have that smaller grassy area, it's just not a private fenced area. Pathways. You can see here that there are a lot of connections and we are working with staff on making sure that we incorporate all of them that they are looking for. There is going to be one near a trash enclosure to make it easier to go straight out sort of from the clubhouse area across the parking lot to get to Titanium Street. We are going to look at more decorative crosswalks and different traffic calming devices, things that -- that -- what the city and ACHD will sign off on. And really -- yeah. Services and utilities -- we are -- sewer and water are adjacent to the property. Police and fire can serve the site. One question that came up in comments was what about the irrigation water and in this case there was enough allotment from purchasing the property for -- that we have sufficient irrigation water on the property and will not have to go and use any other second source or find a second source, that there is enough water for irrigation with the property, of course, as it works, if we are really low on water everyone gets their pro rata decrease. But there was enough water with the property purchase in order to fully supply their irrigation. And, then, ACHD has reviewed and approved the traffic study and all of the conditions of approval are acceptable. Just the roadway connectivity. Bill went into it quite a bit in his discussion, but what we also went back -- because we do understand there is the concerns with the extension of Publisher and Titanium. This is recommended by both ACHD and the city and it complies with ACHD's continuation of streets policy. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 39 of 60 So, I did go back into the traffic impact study and looked at what is actually going to be coming from this development onto Victory Road at the access where Titanium will hit Victory Road and going out -- the estimates are going out in the a.m. peak hours there will be 20 trips, coming in will be seven in the a.m. and in the p.m. there will be 17 and -- 17 going out and 17 coming in and so while there is -- there -- I mean there -- you can't deny that is somewhat of an impact. That's not -- I hope that gives some relief to people that this is not -- that although there is traffic there will be some increased traffic. Any development has traffic. That these are not huge numbers really super negatively affecting this one intersection. And finally -- so, for commercial, there will be a maximum of up to 18,100 square feet of commercial and it fronts Eagle Road, which makes it pretty desirable commercial area. We exceed the required parking. Because the tenants are not yet known and this does have to go through design review, these are illustrative drawings only. However, we anticipate having one larger tenant and the smaller tenants that you can see on the bottom. We understand Bill's comments about the plaza and making sure this all connects better and so we will be working with him on that. Finally, the conditions of approval -- you can't really read them here and I don't want to say that we are one hundred percent in agreement with Bill's conditions, because we want to have the opportunity just to think through it and digest it, but we are certain that we can reach something that would work for that particular condition. And with that we would ask for a recommendation of approval to the City Council and I will stand for any questions. Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Commissioners, do we have questions for the applicant or staff? Smith: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead. Smith: Just a question on one of the last points around that commercial space. I know some of the -- some of the -- the public comments were -- were desiring, you know, more kind of public facing retail, things like that in the area, rather than residential. I'm just curious, are you -- did you design those spaces or are you kind of conceiving of these spaces with a certain type of commercial inhabitant or is it kind of TBD? Koeckeritz: It's --well, the thought is is that there will be one that will be something a little bit bigger, something like a pharmacy or a bank or it could be a restaurant, maybe a G&C, a specialty retail, something like that on the bigger pad and, then, on the smaller -- well, I guess the pads are about the same size. But on the one where we are depicting a larger building. And, then, on the other lot we see more of like -- because it is able to be divided into smaller units, something like tutoring, an accountant, and maybe a salon. But just some smaller more locally serving businesses there. Smith: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Will those commercial units be available for live-work or not? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 40 of 60 Koeckeritz: There are no live-work units, Commissioner Seal, on this one. Seal: Can you tell I really like those? Sorry. Wheeler; Mr. Chair? Seal: Go right ahead. Wheeler: Thank you. So, you mentioned what the -- or Elizabeth; right? Koeckeritz: Yes. Wheeler: Did I get it right? Still. Like you said just still; right? Koeckeritz: Yes. Wheeler: Had a question --you mentioned about Titanium --and this is -- if you can leave it right here, Bill, this is a great spot here for just some of my questions. You mentioned that on Titanium as it goes southbound and it intersects with Victory Road, that -- the traffic counts on that; right? But we know that there is 133 doors, I believe, in this -- in here. So, with 17 going in and 17 going out, that leaves unaccounted a lot more traffic. So, what did the traffic study say about will be entering onto Eagle Road? Koeckeritz: Okay. So, the traffic study breaks it down at -- you know what, I think I did a slide for this. Let's -- go to the far end. I think it's the very last one. Oh, no. We didn't include the slides. That's the mitigation. So, if you look at -- ultimately 65 percent of the traffic heads north on Eagle, 25 -- let me -- let me just confirm. I have this all flagged here. Wheeler: And just for the record just make sure you can speak into the mic, too, please. Koeckeritz: I thought I had this -- I apologize. I thought I had this one flagged, but I will find it quickly. Wheeler: You are fine. Koeckeritz: Okay. Twenty-five percent of the traffic overall will go south out onto Victory Road. South down Titanium. Forty percent of the traffic is estimated that it will go up to EasyJet and, then, jog over to Eagle and 35 percent of the traffic will go in and out -- 25. Yeah. Thirty-five percent total will go in and out on the Eagle Road access. So, then, ultimately 65 percent of the traffic ends up heading north on Eagle and seven percent of the traffic ends up heading -- no. Thirteen percent ends up heading east on Victory, 20 ends up going south on Eagle and it looks like eight ends up going west on Victory. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 41 of 60 Wheeler: So, on peak hours, then -- so, let's go like a.m. peak. What are we looking at for like northbound, southbound traffic? Mainly it's going to be northbound traffic on Eagle Road at that entry point. Koeckeritz: So, northbound traffic at EasyJet? Wheeler: No. At the entry point at A. Koeckeritz: At the entry point at A. So, that is -- the entry point at A is from this development -- and I can dig into here and eventually find the total traffic numbers on Eagle, but from this development there will be 21 going out and heading north and nine going out and heading south and nine coming in from the north and four coming in from the south. Wheeler: Okay. And, then, on EasyJet you are saying that the traffic was -- that's where the -- Koeckeritz: Yeah. EasyJet is the big inter -- is -- Wheeler: Yeah. The one. Koeckeritz: One. And that one is showing -- and this is -- if you have -- and I can provide you this information later. I believe it's probably attached somewhere. Is that going on EasyJet, which is number one, 32 cars at that intersection will be turning north out of EasyJet in the morning, 21 cars are going to be -- from this development will be going north through the intersection. Ten cars will be coming down through the intersection to get to the turn in and 15 cars will turn on to EasyJet. Wheeler: Okay. Seal: That is the most thorough traffic demonstration I think I have ever seen. Wheeler: Ditto. Seal: Can you do that with bikes now? Koeckeritz: I would love to. Seal: Just kidding. Koeckeritz: Right about now I'm really wishing we had -- wish the traffic engineer was here. Wheeler: And I do appreciate you digging for the questions, instead of what we normally get, which is, I don't know, I will get back with you. So, I do appreciate you digging that up. I honestly do. Somehow there is -- something's not getting accounted for, because there is 133 doors. I'm not saying that you -- not at all. Okay? I'm just saying that there Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 42 of 60 is going to be more traffic than I think what's getting projected coming out on that side of things and especially on that -- on that road itself, so -- no. No. None of that. None of that, please. Koeckeritz: I can get -- I -- I got more numbers. Wheeler: No. No. No. I know you do. And I trust you on that. Koeckeritz: I can -- Wheeler: And you are -- Koeckeritz: -- anything else? Wheeler: No. This is -- this is good. Thank you. I do appreciate it. And I'm and I'm done I think I put took way more time Mr. Chair by asking that but thank you. Seal: And -- and I will -- I will ask you to address the -- kind of the -- the traffic calming and traffic mitigation that's going to happen there, excuse me, on that road, specifically as it relates to the -- the property to the south. So, just -- can you explain that? Because that is a long run of road and I completely understand that -- I mean that -- that is a connection that was going to be there when, you know, the application was put in in 2019 and approved to have the -- to -- to have the development to the south. But I would like you to speak to how the traffic -- traffic calming measures are going to be put in and what that amounts to. Koeckeritz: And so at this point in time, Commissioner Seal, it is still being discussed. There are different sorts of things. ACHD doesn't -- some things that you think would be no brainers are more difficult to convince ACHD to bite off on, like doing speed bumps, things of that nature. That's not saying they can't be done. You can sometimes talk them into sort of the decorative crosswalks, the colored crosswalks. Just having it striped helps a lot there. There can be traffic bulb outs. These are all issues that are still being discussed, because it is something that we do know is important and it's looking at it there and up a little higher just to make sure that we have as much as possible to slow people down through here. Seal: Okay. Commissioner Grace, go ahead. Grace: Mr. Chairman and Elizabeth, just-- based on the traffic study information you just gave us, can I put that into context -- to your -- in your experience and history with this project is the EasyJet Drive the -- the issue that's being kind of -- that's causing the concern from citizens? Koeckeritz: The concern from -- Chair, Commissioner Grace, the concern from citizens in the file is from where it goes south on Titanium out to Victory has been the primary concern, because we actually held -- the development team did hold a second public Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 43 of 60 meeting on this to meet with the neighbors. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like there were representatives or really the people in that retirement community knew much about it so they could talk about it, but there have been ongoing discussion. So, the big -- the lion's share of the comments in the staff report are about it going south. There have, of course, been comments from other people, but most of them are going south. Grace: So, then, is there something developed there that's not reflected on this map that I'm looking at? Koeckeritz: Yes. Grace: Okay. Koeckeritz; There is. And it's really new, which is --the whole area is under development. I don't know if Bill has a better map of it. I don't think I do. This shows that there is a -- Grace: Yeah. Okay. Koeckeritz: Yes. That there is a retirement community there. Senior living community. Grace: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Any other questions? Seal: Anymore questions from the Commission? All right. Thank you very much. Koeckeritz: Thank you. Seal: Madam Clerk, shall we start? Hall: We shall. We have no one signed up online. Seal: Real quick. Can -- can we start with -- I know this is out of order and we generally don't do this. Hall: Uh-huh. Seal: Can we start with the person that is going to be the spokesman for the senior living center? Sorry if that takes things out of order, but I figured -- Delaney: Hi. I'm Lorie Delaney. I am the assistant manager over at the The Point and am here to represent The Point at 3123 South Titanium Avenue. Seal: Thank you. Delaney: I'm just going to read this. I have not done this before, so I am an extreme novice. We are here to oppose the opening of 3123 South Titanium Avenue as a go Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 44 of 60 through thoroughfare. This road has been a destination only road. There is no traffic, except for those going to their homes or families coming to visit their loved ones. Opening this street to allow access to a huge residential and business area is going to be detrimental for the safety of our residents. We have the -- the community is divided into -- we have a main building -- I can't see this -- we have a main -- oops. Excuse me. We have a main building and we have 80 -- 86 residents that live inside the main building and, then, Titanium divides the main building from some independent cottages out there. So, it -- it -- literally it goes right down through the middle of the building. The residents that live here come over to the community three times a day for meals. They also have to pick up their mail in the main building and also have to come to the building for activities throughout the day and they are provided seven days a week pretty much one every hour, hour and a half. Having cars zooming up and down this road is extremely unsafe for these elderly residents. Some have walkers, they are on oxygen and have very poor hearing. To have a large volume of traffic driving through this area is very unsafe. We also have a dog park that's located across from the main building and many of the residents that live inside also have small pets that they take over there multiple times during the day. In the morning -- and just to elaborate a little bit. I literally live in the Sutherland Farm Subdivision and I live -- I -- I live on the other side of the fence, so I drive to this building every single morning between 7:30 and -- 7:15, 7:30 In. The morning it's dark outside. When breakfast is served these residents will be walking across a busy road in the dark for their first meal of the day or going back home to their homes at night in the dark. The chance of someone getting hit by a car or not hearing a horn honk is a huge safety concern. These people moved here to live in a safe, quiet environment. Opening this road will leave not only people using it to access their homes, but also as a shortcut to avoid the intersection of Victory and Eagle and all due respect, ma'am, I totally disagree with your numbers, because I live there and I see the -- the traffic. It's nuts. There will also be -- this will also be used as a shortcut through this area to cut through the new area and pop out on Eagle Road, avoiding the light at the intersection. Also because of all the traffic in the morning and at 5:00 o'clock the lines of traffic are so long that if-- that you -- you can't hardly even get into the main entrance. There is a turn lane that goes west on Victory and then -- it goes west and, then, it turns to go south on Eagle Road. That gets so blocked up that you can't -- literally I cannot even get out of Titanium myself to go home, because I turn and go east. In the mornings using this area to drive through to get out onto Victory Road will cause cars waiting to turn east out onto Victory to be stacked up inside our community, because they can't get out. This is also unsafe for our residents. I have worked in this area for over 28 years and have driven all over this valley. There is not one senior living community in this whole valley that has a major thoroughfare going right through the middle of it. I ask the city leaders -- the Commissioners and the Chairman, would you feel comfortable placing your parent or a loved one in this area knowing that the street is going to be like a highway? I also challenge all of you involved in this project to come and see the volume of cars that are at this intersection between 7:00 a.m. and 7.30 and 4:30 to 5.30 p.m. each day. There are other alternate routes to get into this new area. There a fire road out behind us that has access to come into this new area. There are also areas where the homes were removed, that have entrances that could be made in and out of the new development. With the two stop lights, the one on Victory and the one on EasyJet in this area, which Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 45 of 60 would make easy access in and out of that new area, because when those lights are red you can just turn and you can go in and out, it would be very easy. A road could also be put in behind the garage area of our community which would keep the traffic from blasting through the middle of our residents' homes. We are here and thank you and we just, please, ask that you will consider these -- these other options. Thank you. Seal: Real quick I got some questions for you and -- and -- and I will ask this for the benefit of others that have the same -- that are going to have the same concerns. So, earlier Bill had a graphic up there and -- and it actually showed the posting for this and - - and on that there is a big sign that's up against the road and what does that sign say? Delaney: It says that this is a go through road. But I can tell you right now I have been working at this building since it was a shell and that sign has not always been up there. Seal: But the sign is just a sign. So, when -- when the road goes through the road is supposed to go through. Delaney: Right. Seal: You do realize that ACHD controls the road, not the City of Meridian, too? Delaney: Right. Seal: Correct? Delaney: Yeah. I do. Seal: And so when -- when the application come through it came through and I read through the application for the development for the senior living community and there were several concerns raised by staff, by the Council, and by the Commission at that point in time about this very thing and about the layout of the property. Part of that was the applicant, which is this business -- was supposed to -- was supposed to work with ACHD for traffic calming measures and for any kind of traffic mitigation. Did any of that happen? Delaney: I have no idea. Seal: Okay. Are there any crosswalks? Delaney: No. Well, we have crosswalks -- we have a designated area for wheelchairs, but there are no crosswalks. Seal: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 46 of 60 Delaney: We were told there would be no speed bumps put in, no traffic lights, nothing to help our residents get across the street safely. Seal: Okay. So, that's -- that's my questions and concerns about this is -- is in 2019 these -- these concerns were brought up and nothing has been done to address them and -- and now this street. Okay. And now this street that has to go through, because it is an ACHD road -- we are at this impasse. Delaney: Yeah. Well, it's -- it is what's going to be. I can -- I can assure you that somebody is going to get ran over and that's really sad. Seal: It is unfortunate, but I -- I'm -- I'm reluctant to say that it's the city's fault or ACHD's fault. Delaney: I don't know whose fault it is. Seal: Okay. Delaney: All I know is it's -- it's been very upsetting, because we just in the last few months found out that the road was for sure going through, because the sign got put up, because there wasn't a sign on that road for a long time. Seal: But, again, during the application that was made very apparent to the owners. Delaney: Well -- and shame on them. Seal: Okay. Delaney: Yeah. Just -- just wanted to make that point for the record, that -- because there -- there is a lot of people on record -- on the public record. We read every piece of public testimony that comes in and -- and this is the main concern. But I just wanted to make sure that this is something that -- Delaney: Yeah. Seal: -- people understand. This is not -- this is not something that the city can control. This is something that ACHD controls and there is not much that we can do about it. Delaney: Well, maybe the owners need to get with them and see if there is something they can change. Seal: I completely agree. Delaney: Because it's going to be unsafe. Thank you. Seal: Uh-huh. Madam Clerk? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 47 of 60 Hall: David Bailey. Bailey: Again David Bailey. Bailey Engineering. 11198 East State Street in Eagle. And -- and representing the --the owner for some questions. I won't go through the other stuff we had before, but I would stand for any questions you have. I -- I do have one comment relating to the road there and the developer who developed those houses and the -- the -- the -- the apartments that are across the street from them where their facility is was responsible to do those improvements on that road and was required to make that a public street and that is noted on the plat that that street will be extended in the future that's on the thing there. What I would suggest is that -- and I would be glad to help if we can -- or I'm sure your staff would be glad to help as well -- is that the residents there talked to the owner of the -- of the facility about improving the conditions for crossing -- crossing Titanium. I think there is -- there is options to do there; right? You can paint a crosswalk at least, right, and you can -- you can put in some narrowing in the road in there. There is -- there is some things that can be do -- that can be done to help you with this situation. And just to point out, we originally, way back when we first started working on this, we -- we took that street and turned the corner directly into the subdivision to the east and were going to leave Titanium out with a -- with a cul-de-sac at the north, just so we wouldn't have the -- the through traffic through the site. Your staff and ACHD said absolutely not, you are connecting all those roads. That's going to happen. So, just this -- the -- the -- the point on that, that -- that -- to follow through on that. So, other than that I would be glad to answer any questions you have about the -- about the development from the engineering perspective. Seal: I -- I would ask you the same question that I asked previously to see if there is a more robust answer to kind of the Titanium Way and -- I can't remember the name of this little road here, but as far as the traffic calming measures are going to be put in there, can you comment on that or is really that just -- Bailey: Yeah. We will -- Seal: And -- and I understand -- yeah. And I understand that ACHD is like no stop signs, no speed bumps. To me that's kind of common sense mitigation, but how do you work around that. Bailey: You do a couple that are common and we have looked at a couple of things on the -- two of them -- the one that we do the most common are called chicanes where we narrow the street into 24 feet back -- back of curb and we will probably do that in two locations. We can do that at the intersection of the road to the east and of our entrance at the south end and you just bulb out the corners where the sidewalks come, it makes that great place to walk across the street there. They are really close and you can mark that well and so that's probably what we will do is -- is bump out the corners of that intersection between Titanium and -- I don't know -- oh. Publisher to the east there for the first piece and, then, to north we will probably put a chicane in that curve at the -- at Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 48 of 60 the north end of the property to do that. It should be -- it should really slow down traffic there -- would be the most convenient way. And, then, we will mark those crosswalks -- Seal: Okay. Bailey: -- that come across there. Seal: Thank you. Commissioners? Okay. Thank you so much. Madam Clerk? Hall: Mr. Chairman, there is no one. No one else has signed up. I'm sorry. Seal: Anybody else like to come out and testify? Go right ahead, sir. Riggs: Yeah. Hi. My name is Matthew Riggs. 529 West Fordham in Eagle and just want to reiterate -- you know, I think a lot of the concerns relative to Titanium and traffic are really concerns of ours as well and why we are talking about these mitigations. You know, there is going to be senior citizens in this community and, then, there is going to be a lot of families with young kids. So, you know, I think that the way that Titanium has been drawn and shown here, you know, gives it a little mitigation, making -- making people, you know, not go straight down north-south, it does have a little turn in there, but we are, you know, working hard with staff and will continue to do so to -- to try to find anything we can to -- to mitigate, you know, that -- that rush through traffic risk, because as dangerous as that is, you know, at 7:00 a.m. going to breakfast, you know, last thing we want is a four year old living on our site chasing a soccer ball and -- and having the same thing. So, just wanted to note, you know, for the record that we really are I think aligned in a lot of ways about how can we go about mitigating this traffic risk and, you know, for the record we would be more than willing to meet with the property owner to the south and try to coordinate those efforts, so at least it's, you know, the same, you know, picture through and through. I mean, you know, we will throw things out there, but I just wanted to note, you know, that really is -- as a focal point of ours. I mean life safety is number one. Last thing we need is -- is anything on our side or from the neighborhood that's -- that's an issue. So, you know, traffic will increase with -- with our -- with our development here if it moves forward, but, you know, we are really standing by to mitigate the risks associated with that and we are not unfamiliar with ACHD and, you know, we are quite accustomed to working through these type of things with them and -- and are standing by to do so. So, thank you. Seal: Thank you very much. Lorcher: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Lorcher. Lorcher: Ms. Delaney, do you think the owners would work -- work with the developer to come up with a solution that is safe for your community, as well as the new? Are they here tonight or no? Do they -- are they in state? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 49 of 60 Seal: Hold on a minute. Why don't you come back up if we are going to go ahead and ask a bunch of questions. Thank you. That's okay. Lorcher: It was just going to be one. Seal: Let's -- let's -- let's go ahead and have -- have that repeated so it's on the record. Delaney: They are in Utah. Lorcher: Oh, they are in Utah. Delaney: Yeah. Lorcher: Do they own other senior centers, too, or is this the only -- Delaney: This is the -- this is the -- a pilot. So, they are building others, but this was the first one. So, obviously, mistakes were made. Lorcher: Okay. All right. Well, thank you for coming up. My questions are now done. Delaney: Is that it? Seal: All right. Thank you. Ma'am, you want to -- come on up and testify. We will need your name and address for the record, please. Montgomery: My name is Bev Montgomery. I live at 2560 South Teddy Avenue, which is in the Sutherland Farm Subdivision. I did not plan to speak tonight, but I feel great concern for my neighbors here and I know that in the morning I don't have to, because I'm retired, get up and get down EasyJet to get out to Eagle Road, but the folks who live across the street in the subdivision across the way that time -- and my children who do have to go there and get kids to school, have a very difficult time getting out and just recently I had to get to -- down to St. Luke's Hospital. I did not know that from my place, which is really two miles, but it was going to take me 35 minutes. So, all of this adds to the congestion that for us is really really difficult and we have many children that need to get to school and we have many young families in Sutherland Farm that need to get to work and to add this many more people to that mix and just -- my concern about the crowded schools that we have, I just -- I just want to be noted that it's -- the quality of life, if you have to go out and get on Eagle Road, is jeopardized. Thank you. Thank you for spending your time here listening to our concerns and we are greatly concerned. Thank you. Seal: Thank you. Is there somebody else? Come on -- go ahead and come on up. Good evening, ma'am. I will need your name and address for the record, please. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 50 of 60 Jenks: Okay. I'm Jennifer Jenks. J-e-n-k-s. I live at 3532 East Beamer Court. I am actually on this -- can I use this map? Maybe. So, if you have Titanium Way that they are proposing, if you will go over two streets, I am the street called -- I'm on the corner of Baystar, which is actually the street that comes from EasyJet -- it goes out to EasyJet and out to Victory. So, I'm the one that everybody's using right now. Yeah, I would have to side with the residents here. We can't do anything now about our streets, but certainly if we could keep them safer I would definitely side with that. Having said that, definitely Easy-- Eagle Road, Victory, EasyJet at 7:30, all of those traffic numbers are highly --they are way low. I go out there all the time to get my daughter to high school, to get my elementary kids to where they need to go. It takes me -- where the schools are maybe five minutes away, it takes me at least 20 to 30 minutes. Let's see. What else? You have got all the high schoolers, first of all, that in those early morning hours they have to get to high school, they are going down Victory, EasyJet, Eagle Road. So, again, all of those numbers are very low and we have lots of -- not necessarily cognizant drivers who are going to go slow and so that might be something else to consider. Obviously, ACHD -- we have been through this before with our subdivision, with the complexes there on Overland Road and -- that come between Cloverdale and Eagle, we had the same issues with them. ACHD would not put another entrance out to Cloverdale and so all of those residents now come through our subdivision and down my street. So, I guess that would just be my two cents in maybe helping these guys back here. I can't help myself anymore and just more information maybe from a different perspective. Anyway, thank you. Seal: Thank you very much. I can speak for myself on the Commission -- I can't speak for other Commissioners, but I think if you live in any part of Meridian right now we are sympathetic to the fact that traffic is horrible, so -- I mean my-- you know,just this evening I had to wait through three lights southbound on Ten Mile crossing Cherry Lane. That's not normal generally speaking, but it happens. So, I -- I -- I feel your pain for sure. So, with that -- ma'am, you raised your hand, would you like to come up? Good evening. We will need your -- Skinner: Thank you for listening to us. I live in the point also. I have a cottage that's -- Seal: Ma'am, I will need your name and address for the record. Thank you. Skinner. It's Ritis Skinner. It's R-i-t-i-s. And I live at 3123 South Titanium Avenue, but live in a cottage across Titanium. My concern is we have the need for ambulance and fire all the time. If we have another group that densely populated you are going to have a lot of police and fire coming in there also and I say the ambulance and the fire truck always come together. So, there is a -- a dual situation. So, I think what they are saying with their traffic report is way way low. Plus the fact that to get that large of equipment in there is very difficult. So, I think the narrowing in the street is a great idea if it's just passenger traffic, but what about the emergency traffic? You have very limited access to that large group of people. There is the -- Titanium and clear over to EasyJet. So, I see many mornings where the traffic is solid -- all Victory and all up and down Eagle there is absolutely no way that people are not going to see that access and cut off that whole Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 51 of 60 corner, go through Titanium and come out on EasyJet. I -- I just am very concerned for the people that live there. Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Skinner: Thank you. Seal: Sir, come on up. Good evening, sir. We will just need your name and address for the record. Koonz: Carl Koonz is my name. I live at The Point. My address there is Apartment N113. 1 can appreciate the fact that you are not going to be able to do anything about the highway, but at 96 I'm concerned about my welfare, along with all the rest of the older tenants at The Point. So, all I could do is ask you to do everything you possibly can to protect our well-being. Thank you very much. Seal: Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. Okay. Anybody else like to come up? Ma'am, go right ahead. We will need your name and address for the record, please. Richardson: Leann Richardson. Seal: Oh. Please speak into the microphone. Richardson: Sorry. Seal: That's okay. Richardson: Leann Richardson. 2760 South Proud Way. I'm in the Sutherland Farm. Seal: Okay. Can you pull that a little bit closer to you? Richardson: I could stand closer to it. Seal: Okay. It will pull to you, too, there a little bit. Yeah. Thank you. Richardson: Okay. My only question is -- what I have gotten from this is this is a wonderful proposal that they have, probably the best that I see anymore. Usually it's three and four story apartment buildings jammed in. But it's not -- you don't control the roads, but you control the building. So, I hear, well, we can't do anything about the roads. So, where is the standoff here? Do we just continue? I -- I'm -- I'm naive about the whole thing -- that the roads are our issue. We cannot move all of these people, but yet we continue to build these big apartment complexes that impact everybody. So, I don't -- what's -- what's the answer to that? I don't know. Seal: Well -- and -- and the best answer I can give you and -- and a statement that I have made in a few applications that have come through is if you are here to talk about the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 52 of 60 roads you are at the wrong hearing it. ACHD is who owns the roads and for the most part dictate what we can do with them within the city. When it comes to a public road like this. So, the best answer I can give you is contact ACHD. Richardson: Well, it doesn't work too good for you guys, but I will try. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? All right. Nobody else has signed up. Nobody else is online. Would the applicant like to come back up? I won't forget that this time. Koeckeritz: Thank you. Elizabeth Koeckeritz: Givens Pursley. 601 Bannock. As expected we agree there is very little that can be done from the city's perspective about many of these streets, intersections. If we could go to our very last slide. I just wanted to make a couple of points. First there is already a second connection onto the development from Victory Road. That's that access easement that's going to go right next to the daycare. It's closer to Eagle Drive, so there is already some access there. It's not considered a real street. It's not included in traffic count numbers, but it is -- there is that access over there. So, where the manager -- I have missed her name. I believe was Ms. Delaney something. Lori Delaney was speaking about it. We already are using that access, which, then, especially for the commercial traffic, should keep some of that from going through the Titanium area development. I also just wanted to reiterate what Matt Riggs said. He is one of the two owners of Baron Properties and the company is really committed to working with the developer -- with -- with the owner of this senior center to try to come up with the traffic calming measures, both on our property, on theirs, to try to make something work, because it really is a big issue throughout. There was a comment made about EasyJet Drive and that's where if you go to our very -- very last one, the only -- all the intersections and roads are continuing to operate and at an acceptable level, except for eastbound EasyJet in the morning. Eastbound EasyJet coming out at 1:00 o'clock to turn north onto Eagle Road is not operating acceptably now, it's not operating acceptably in the future. Our development doesn't really have anything to do with -- if those numbers don't change and this intersection doesn't get any worse. There were some recommendations in the traffic study on one of the things we could get to make everything work better would just be if ACHD did some restriping of that lane and made a dedicated left turn lane heading north out of EasyJet from the east side heading north. So, there is just a dedicated left turn lane. All of a sudden all the wait times get better, everything improves according to the traffic engineers and I can appreciate we all have sat in traffic and especially right now there is some temporary construction on Eagle, but the traffic engineers that we use they do actually have degrees in traffic engineering, they really spend a lot of time doing this. All of these reports are standardized, they all follow the same national standards that are used both here in Idaho and across the country and for the most part we all know the feeling of -- but this is too long, but they really are out there following these national standards and guidelines when they put these together and so that's what's here was the findings and the mitigations are simply that the only intersection that is really operating at the level F is that EasyJet going east. I think -- and with that we would just stand for any questions -- any last questions and ask that you approve -- recommend approval of these applications. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 53 of 60 Seal: Okay. Do we have any further questions for the applicant? Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Elizabeth, just a question here. So, you are talking about some traffic calming measures and trying to work on some things like that and I'm -- and -- and there was a comment about making the roads narrow a little bit and bringing back up. Are -- I don't know the level of aggressiveness for traffic calming measures. I'm not a -- I'm not a civil engineer, but have -- would -- would your -- would your client look at like -- possibly even like roundabouting or making the -- making the road more serpentine? I know that the roads we don't control, but I'm just saying other sort of more aggressive measures on slowing down traffic there. Koeckeritz: I think that they would consider that, but I think that they would really be more looking at the -- like the more of the traffic bulb outs, because when you do have those going on any street -- like, for instance, if you are in -- and I don't know where there are so many here in Meridian, but in like the north end of Boise it really slows things down. Like you think you are moving along and you really do come to this very -- you really definitely slow down a lot and the crosswalks make it really obvious that there is kids there, there is pedestrians there, there is someone standing there who is trying to cross the street. I can just tell you that -- so just indulge me for a second. I -- my house is almost seen on this map here. So, I live -- I have lived here for six -- 17 years on this area and I have dealt with this here a lot. I'm reading -- I'm reading right here where it says there is 26 crashes, 15, and one fatality and that fatality was a schoolmate of my son's, Mason, whose red marked lines is right there at level one. That's where he died. My -- I have a very very dear friend got hit by a vehicle, broke his scapula. Boy, if there is a nurse in the room you know to break of scapula is near impossible. That's -- that's the traffic issue we are dealing with here. It's at that level and I have avoided I don't know how many accidents by people almost pulling out in front of me, getting me boxed in, up and down this road and I'm just trying to go home and see my kids. It is -- it's that level. And, then, you have got the traffic between 7:30 and 8:00 before school starts. This is -- any opening space it is zipping in and out, so, then, the high schoolers can turn to go to Mountain View using the back roads and, then, it's just a race to get back there to hit their Dutch Bros or Human Bean and, then, go into school. That's -- this is the normal traffic thing. Backs up for ten minutes to get to the Interstate. That's just what it is. That's the concern that's kind of being brought here and the traffic mitigation coming through Titanium is going to -- they are going to funnel that way and they are going to try to cut off the intersection that's right there on the traffic congestion, because it backs up a half a mile to three-quarters of a mile either direction at the peak times and it's just -- there is just a lot of pressure and tension all the whole way. So, anything you guys can do in order to help mitigate that, anything you can do to help any sort of traffic calmingness, with those things in mind to the -- to the strongest amount means a lot on that for everybody that's been living in this area for a -- for a hot minute. Koeckeritz: Thank you, Commissioner Wheeler. We will definitely take that to heart. I know both the owners are here and they are listening and they have been speaking as well Wheeler: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 54 of 60 Seal: Okay. Commissioners, nothing further? All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. And with that I will take a motion to close the public hearing for File No. H-2022-0066. Stoddard: So moved. Grove: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close public hearing for File No. H-2022-0066. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Seal: Who would like to go first? Commissioner Lorcher? Yep. Lorcher: Well, if anything that this hearing has provided is an open dialogue between the owners of the development and the representatives -- the community of the senior living to be able to come up with some solutions so that your community is safe and that they provide a good -- be good neighbors and so as city volunteers, you know, we don't have a voice with ACHD, but-- or we don't have any decision makings with ACHD, but it sounds like between the owners of the sub -- the proposed development and the owners of your community I think efforts have -- can be made to make it work for everyone. Is it perfect? No. Titanium was always planned on being a -- a through street and as Commissioner Seal said in the application for when your community was developed it was addressed at that time. So, as a -- as a body that makes recommendations, it's hard for us to evaluate. We need to evaluate the entire project. Is it in the best interest of the city, but also take care caring of our community at the same time. I worry that this -- this is a very nice development and they are very conscious about how they want it to look and -- and the way it happens. If -- if we went to decline it and the city went to decline it, what happens next? Like would it be three story apartment buildings, because those are approved there, too. The example that came up a couple months ago was off of Chinden. There was a storage facility being proposed on Chinden between I think Black Cat and Ten Mile and, then, Rock Harbor Church came in and it's like this huge three story building. So, you sometimes have to be careful of what we wish for, because if it's not this development it's going to be another one and it may be owners that, you know, aren't as caring that want to work with you. So, in that respect I would be inclined to approve this development, because there is now a mechanism and a conversation between the owners of the development and, hopefully, representatives of your community that you will come to a conclusion and a solution that everybody becomes safe. Thank you. Seal: Very well said. Commissioners? Smith: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 55 of 60 Smith: Thank you. First off I want to say thanks for covering pretty much every question I had. Every time I thought I was about to ask a question you beat me to it. So, thank you for that. As I'm recovering from whatever I have, saving my voice, I appreciate --just a couple of thoughts. I echo pretty much everything that's been said. I also have the -- the privilege to be on the Transportation Commission for the city and so for the developer -- for the applicant, for the community, for the representative of the senior center, just some thoughts about potential, you know, things that they can benefit going forward. ACHD -- they -- they have some -- some really smart people who work there. I think if you talk to a lot of people who serve on the Transportation Commission who might have had a certain opinion about ACHD going in and having worked with ACHD over time, while we have our disagreements, there are some -- some brilliant people working there. They really care about the community and to that end they are -- you know, anytime someone's come to us with complaints about cut-through traffic, about cut-through speeding, and things like that, ACHD is willing to do speed studies and to do cut-through studies and so that's something that, you know -- and they tell us, hey, we don't think this is going to be a lot of cut-through traffic, as much as the residents complain it is and sure enough, you know, we -- I -- I personally tend to doubt them quite a lot and usually it comes back, hey, the cut-through traffic is really hardly a percent of what people think it is. They think it's cut-through traffic. They think it's people trying to get around the intersection and often that's the people living there who --who are -- are -- are speeding, who are cutting through, etcetera. So, I -- I do understand the concern of cut-through traffic, especially at such a busy intersection. I do think that that -- that tends to be a concern that we may rely too much on, but -- but if -- if that does really become an issue you have -- you know, while -- while ACHD controls those things, you do have a voice and an advocate from the city government that are always willing to -- you know, willing to -- to work as -- as a liaison there. So, I think, you know, there are a lot of issues here around transportation. I also want to talk about, you know, the funding mechanisms. There is -- there are some mentions of schools and of roads. The impact fees, unfortunately, in the state of Idaho -- fortunately unfortunately, depending on who you ask, is funded to where you -- you need development to pay for the things that the -- the -- the things that are impacted by that development and we don't keep funding for schools unless we develop the things that are going to necessitate more schools, so --so because of that, you know, there are some things that are -- I have some genuine concerns, but, you know, like you said, Mr. Chair, they are -- they are not necessarily things that this Commission can -- can control or even that the city can control. They -- they belong at ACHD or even with the state legislature. So -- so, I'm -- I'm empathetic to those things, but-- but I genuinely think this -- especially with a developer-owner, you know, with --with -- one with -- with a solid track record, who clearly cares about -- about the community, cares about the area, yeah, I think this is -- for -- for -- for all the -- the -- the splotches and concerns, I -- I think this is a great development. I think this is something that, you know, I -- I would love -- you know, if -- if I -- if I didn't already have a home I would love to live there. You know, I think this is a great place and it looks beautiful and it looks like it's -- it should help foster a sense of community with the -- the commercial aspect on it as well. So, I wholeheartedly support this. I understand the concerns and I hope that there are things that the existing development owners can do to work with ACHD and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 56 of 60 work with the applicant to -- to ameliorate that -- that -- that concern on the southbound traffic, but -- but I think that those -- you know, that's a -- a significant responsibility of the current development of the Inglewood property as kind of neglected it appears. So, with that, yeah, I wholeheartedly support this. I'm not going to make a motion, as I don't have the --the specific-- the ever so helpful specific language, but I -- I wholeheartedly support and would gladly, you know, second when it comes to that. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I'm on the same page with that, so I won't beat it too much to death here. Bill did put a nice graphic on the screen that shows the bulb outs that we have kind of been talking about a little bit. So, that's why that's up on the screen. Hopefully that's why it's on the screen. But that's just a good illustration of -- of what that looks like and how it works for people to take a look at. So, yeah, I --just to get back to talking about the application itself. Again, I do appreciate that this is -- I mean it's classified multi-family, but it's not, you know, three story apartment buildings or a whole bunch of four-plexes all just mashed together with very little character. So, a lot of the things -- this was kind of touched on a little bit earlier, but a lot of the things that we have to kind of go over and over and over with other applicants, like, you know, please, you know limit the height of the -- the buildings on the periphery, you know, things like that, the -- the street signage. There is just a lot of things that are repetitive in other applicants that we don't have to deal with on this. So, it's kind of hard to complain about it. I do like the -- I'm -- I have a son in the valley that I would love if he lived in one of these places. So, I mean it's kind of -- kind of tailored for -- for his lifestyle for sure, so -- but you know -- and I'm glad to see things like that that are kind of coming back into Meridian. So, he lives in Boise now, because Meridian just got too expensive, which is hard to say sometimes. But that's the way it is. So, as far as this development I like it. I like the -- you know, I -- I -- I wish there was something we could do about Titanium, you know, a little bit more, but I think that's going to be taken care of as we move down the road with it. So, glad to see there is a commercial element to it. Kind of wish that they were live- work, because I really like that. I just support the entrepreneurial lifestyle and hope that there is more of that that comes into -- into the Meridian area. We have several businesses in the area that are very very successful that started, you know, literally in somebody's apartment or, you know, in Scentsy's case in a storage container, so -- but I would like to see more of that as it comes in. You know, glad to see the amenities there. I do like the community gardens as well. I wish there were more of those. Hopefully they continue to get used and it's not just something that's a fad. So, it's -- you know, people start to kind of settle into a place and, hopefully, they make more use of that. But -- and with that I'm -- I mean I am in support of this. Wheeler: Mr. Chair? Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead. Wheeler; Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, this density on this parcel could be a lot more and there could be a lot bigger buildings, a lot more industrial looking like buildings all the way around in here for the size of this for sure. I know the one that struggles that have always been with developing this -- this piece of dirt is this cut through with Titanium all the way Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 57 of 60 through, because you couldn't just put in, you know, seven three story, you know, 24 unit -- put in something that could be double the size of this, how many doors that are here. That's something that's always been struggled for why this dirt has never been developed and everything else around it seems to have been. So, to come up with a plan that can work within the confines of everything from right of way takes, to easements, to overhead power lines, to soils, to, you know, neighbors and cut through streets and everything like this and say this is what -- this is what works for me on the risk reward side is -- is actually nice to see something put forward like this. I -- I -- I'm just -- I -- just because of what I experience and maybe it's just too personal, it just seems like there -- there will be just a lot of -- there will be more traffic that will cut -- that -- that will be here from it, but it's a whole lot less than what could be here on other things. I -- I was -- I would hope to see more commercial space to help mitigate some of that traffic at those early morning hour commute times, office spaces, not really incubator spaces, that's a different thing altogether, but some of these little light office spaces, but those are also really hard to lease up. So, I understand that on the developer side. But if we can have some very strong assurances that they will work with the owner to the south and to do everything they can to help out with traffic calming measures, it's something that I could -- I could give a nod for. But that's -- it's just -- it's -- there is just a lot of lot more traffic here and I don't know how that's going to affect everything up and down Eagle Road and I know it's going to back it up even more on Victory. Those are just my concerns and what that happens with impatience on drivers. That's my biggest concern. Seal: Commissioner Rivera, go ahead. Rivera: Yeah. I just want to say that I agree with all my fellow, you know, Commissioners here and all the -- you know, I appreciate everybody that's came up today and testified and -- and thank you for doing that and -- and it's great to see that everybody has the best interest for -- for their community and -- and, you know, for their -- for the right way of life for everybody to be safe. But I also applaud the -- the developer for being sensitive and -- and taking time to -- to try to accommodate as much as possible and work with -- with the community. We don't see that every time and -- and -- in every application, so -- so, that's great to see to -- and -- and I have full faith that, you know, they will have, you know, conversations with the owner. I wish the owner would have been present here today with the -- you know. But I have full faith that something will be worked out for the safety of everybody, so -- but with all that being said I -- you know, I will look forward to, you know, approving this -- this project. But thank you. Seal: Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Motion? I'm open for that. Lorcher: Mr. Chairman? Seal: Yep. And, please, remember that there are other things that Bill covered in here if you are going to do a motion. Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 58 of 60 Seal: Got you. Grace: It's not as easy as it looks. Seal: Right. Yeah. Exactly. Lorcher: Bill, can -- can you refresh me, please? Parsons: Absolutely. Happy to. So, get to my notes here real quick. So, as I mentioned to you, the applicant wants some flexibility to get under construction, get building permits before final plat approval and that was DA provision number -- I called it C. I'm going to call it DA provision C. I had suggested that they change that applicant -- final plat shall be recorded prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit for any structure within this development and striking the building permit. So, replacing building permits with occupancy. Item two on the private streets. I think we probably keep with staff's recommendation, since I am empowered by the UDC to strike some of that condition, I am going to go with the applicant and just to be -- have a clear record and let them know that because there is no private street connection to Eagle Road that alternative compliance is not required for that. So, I did give them an either/or. So, I will be striking that portion of the condition as it's -- it's not really relevant here. And, then, the last condition is Public Works Condition 2.9 and that's, essentially, how it's written on the -- I don't think you have to say a word for word, just say as proposed by the applicant and, then, I can make sure that that gets modified as we transition to City Council. Lorcher: Can we go back to the first one? So, is just striking building permits on the preliminary plat? Parsons: Well, it -- no, it's DA provision C and it says -- it's basically -- the way it's worded now the applicant has to record a final plat prior to getting building permits and with this developer -- and any multi-family development we usually allow them to get under construction and, then, record -- the plat has to be done prior to getting occupancy. So, that's what we are really -- we are changing it -- they can get -- they don't have to record the plat to get building permits, they just need to have it done prior to getting occupancy for the first structure. Lorcher: A DA provision to get -- Parsons: Yeah. To record the plat prior to the first certificate of occupancy. Lorcher: Before. Parsons: Yeah. Lorcher: Okay. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 59 of 60 Seal: And I would -- and I would recommend some good language in there as far as working with the -- the owner of the property to the south, as well as ACHD to implement traffic -- traffic calming and mitigation. If it were me that was making the -- luckily I don't have to do those anymore. Lorcher: One second. Anything else? All right. I think I got it. Seal: Go for it. Lorcher: Okay. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council for File No. H-2022-0066 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6th, with the following recommendations. A DA provision to record before the certificate of occupancy. Alternative compliance is not required. Item No. 2.9, Public Works, as proposed by the applicant and the current developer work with the owner to the property to the south to come up with the best case scenario for the safety of the current community and for -- and future development. Seal: Got a second? Smith: Second. Seal: Okay. It has been moved and seconded to approve File No. H-2022-0066 with the aforementioned modifications. All those in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Wheeler: Nay. Seal: Did we get that? Commissioner Wheeler. Wheeler: Commissioner Wheeler. Seal: Okay. And with that it passes. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE NAY. Seal: And if there is no other business -- Wheeler: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn. Rivera: Second. Seal: It's been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All in favor, please, say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Seal: All. We are adjourned. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 6,2023 Page 60 of 60 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:23 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED ANDREW SEAL - CHAIRMAN 4-20-2023 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the March 16, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission March 16,2023 Page 37 of 38 Parsons: Thank you. Seal: Are we all going to be -- hopefully I get a half a car, because, apparently, I'm missing half a car. I only have one. And with that I will take one more motion. Smith: Mr. Chair? Seal: Go right ahead. Smith: Move to adjourn. Seal: Do I have a second? Rivera: Second. Seal: It's been moved to adjourn. All in favor, please, say aye. No opposed. We are adjourned. Thanks, everyone. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:46 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED ANDREW SEAL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for Chipotle, located at 1737 S. Meridian Rd., by Jeff Likes, ALC Architecture CITY OF MERIDIAN V IDIAN;_-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ! DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-Through Establishment for Chipotle within 300-Feet of another Drive-through Establishment,a Residential Zoning District and Existing Residences on 1.38 Acres of Land in the C-G Zoning District,Located at 1737 S. Meridian Rd.,by Jeff Likes,ALC Architecture. Case No(s).H-2022-0094 For the Planning&Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. March 16,2023 (Findings on April 6, 2023) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2023, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0094 Page 1 upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for a conditional use permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2023, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1. 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 that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)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 Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(d), if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may,within twenty-eight (28)days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52,title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. F. Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-6521(1)(d) and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0094 Page 2 G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2023. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0094 Page 3 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 6th day of April ,2023. COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER NATE WHEELER VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER PATRICK GRACE VOTED COMMISSIONER MANDI STODDARD VOTED Andrew Seal, Chairman 4-6-2023 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 4-6-2023 Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. 4-6-2023 By: Dated: City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0094 Page 4 EXHIBIT A C� E IDIAN�-- STAFF REPORT f D A H 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 3/16/2022 t Legend - DATE: f Iff Project Locator TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ' 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0094 � Chipotle—CUP LOCATION: 1737 S. Meridian Rd., in the NE 1/4 of Section 24,T.3N.,R.1 W. (Parcel #R5652350045) - „,Trr�mm� P ; I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit(CUP) for a drive-through establishment within 300-feet of another drive- through establishment,a residential zoning district and existing residences on 1.38 acres of land in the C-G zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 1.3 8-acre Future Land Use Designation Commercial Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant with a drive-through Current Zoning Jill" General Retail&Service Commercial(C-G) Physical Features(waterways, NA hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 11/15/22 attendees: Page 1 EXHIBIT A History(previous approvals) AZ-04-031 (Ord.#05-1179,DA Inst.#105134293)Meridian Gateway); VAR-05- 027(access to SH-69/Meridian Rd.);MI-07-002 lst Addendum to DA(Inst. #107099630 Medina Subdivision);and MDA-13-007 2nd Addendum to DA(Inst. #2014-095963 Medina Subdivision);Preliminary Plat(PP-07-003)for Medina Subdivision);Final Plat(FP-07-013-Lot 4,Block 1,Medina Subdivision);and PBA-2022-0017(Howell Residuary Trust ROS#13573-tentatively approved and ROS is recorded but has not yet received anal approvalfrom Planning) B. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend a Legend � P Sea- Lacvion lei Lxa=or 'M 0' i �4U Him RSI@I7TI4 ® n- IV A PA Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 1 Legend - t � PPE jeot Loea''or T C-Cx Project Loco Tar -i City Lin- - �-_�—.RUT — Pianned PorcL-is ---- C� - - i �. R1 i d _R1 R` R-8 Rg RUT T K11 r=M PA -n-rrnmmM P Page 2 EXHIBIT A III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Jeff Likes,ALC Architecture— 1119 E. State St., Ste. 120,Eagle,ID 83616 B. Owner: Spencer Smith, Smithy Frazier, LLC 50 Henry St., Cortez, CO 81321 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning Posting Date Newspaper Notification 3/l/2023 Radius notification mailed to 3/16/2023 properties within 300 feet Site Posting Date 3/6/2023 Next Door posting 2/27/2023 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The Applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)to construct a 2,325 square foot (s.f.)restaurant with a drive-through pick-up window for Chipotle on a 1.37-acre property in the C-G zoning district. The proposed development complies with the provisions of the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #105134293 Meridian Gateway) and subsequent addendums [MI-07-002 1"Addendum(Inst. #107099630 and MDA-13-007 2'Addendum(Inst. #2014-095963A for the underlying subdivision. A property boundary adjustment(PBA-2022-0017—Howell Residuary Trust ROS#13573)has been tentatively approved by the Planning Division and the Record of Survey recorded for the proposed configuration of the property but has not yet received final approval—the property owner should finalize this process prior to July 21,2023 in order for the PBA to be recognized by the City in accord with UDC 11-6B-8. A restaurant is listed as a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district per UDC Table I1-2B-2, subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-49. A drive-through requires approval of a conditional use permit when it's within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, an existing residence or a residential district per 11-4-3-IIA.1. In this case,two other drive-through establishments exist within 300 feet of the property—Walgreen's pharmacy on the abutting lot to the north and Carl's Jr.to the south; there are also existing residences and a residential district within 300 feet of the property to the south(Elk Run Subdivision). The proposed drive-through is for pick-up orders only from their app and will not include a menu board or outdoor speakers.Any change to the proposed use will require a modification to the CUP. Page 3 EXHIBIT A Specific Use Standards: Staffs analysis is in italics. 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. The stacking lane and window location is depicted on the site plan; a menu board and speaker are not proposed. The site plan 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 site plan depicts queuing for 7-8 vehicles, which should be sufficient for the proposed use as a pick-up only drive-through. 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 and allows for 7-8 vehicles to stack. 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 length of the drive-through is approximately 145 feet from the point of entry to the drive- through window; therefore, an escape lane is required as depicted on the site plan. 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 SH-69/S. Meridian Rd. and from the driveway into the development adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. 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.Based on 2,325 sf., a minimum of nine (9) off-street parking spaces are required to be provided; a total of 22 spaces are provided in accord with and exceeding this standard. Dimensional Standards: Future development should be consistent with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. Access: Access is proposed from the existing east/west driveway via SH-69/S. Meridian Rd.that runs along the southern boundary of this site and provides access to the lots in Medina Subdivision. A variance(VAR-05-027)was approved by City Council in 2005 for this access. This driveway is required to be extended to the property to the west(Parcel#R5652350065) as a provision of the variance approval. Page 4 EXHIBIT A A right-in only access is proposed to the site from the main driveway from SH-69/S.Meridian Rd.Traffic will exit the site to the north to avoid traffic conflicts at the southeast corner of the site with vehicles turning into the development from the highway. Parking: As noted above,UDC 11-4-3-49 includes specific parking standards for restaurants(i.e. one space per 250 square feet of gross floor area),which the site plan demonstrates compliance with and actually exceeds the minimum standards. A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space is required to be provided based on one(1) space 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. A bicycle rack is proposed on the west end of the north side of the building which should accommodate a minimum of one (1) bicycle. Landscaping: Street buffer landscaping was installed within the street buffer along SH-69/S. Meridian Rd., an entryway corridor,with the Medina subdivision improvements.Note: The aerial view of the property depicted on the site plan that shows parking stalls encroaching within the street buffer is not accurate; the buffer is will remain the same and is not proposed to be modified. Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 8C. A 5-foot wide perimeter buffer is required along the west boundary of the site,landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.1b.The plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should be revised to reflect compliance with this standard.A perimeter buffer is not required along the north or south boundaries of the site as those are shared driveways with the adjacent properties. Sidewalks: A 10-foot wide sidewalk/multi-use pathway exists within the street buffer along SH-69/ S. Meridian Rd. in accord with the Pathways Master Plan and UDC 11-3H-4C.4. A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the perimeter sidewalk/pathway along SH-69/S.Meridian Rd.to the main building entrance in accord with UDC 11-3A-19B.4.Where the pathway crosses vehicular driving surfaces,it's required to be distinguished through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should reflect compliance with this standard. Easements: There are existing easements on this lot as shown on the Medina subdivision plat and ROS#13573. These easements should be depicted and labeled on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. The proposed structure shall not encroach within these easements,except as allowed in the UDC. Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment on the building and outdoor service and equipment should be incorporated into the overall design of the building 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. The Applicant states that all mechanical equipment will be located on top of the roof and will be screened by parapets. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VII.0 for a single-story building that consists of a stucco/EIFS finish with metal canopies and accents and glazing. The trash enclosure is proposed to be constructed of smooth-face CMU and split-face CMU color matched to the building as shown in Section VII.A. The proposed elevations are not approved with this application and will be reviewed with the Design Review application for consistency with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Certificate of Zoning Compliance&Design Review: A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for the proposed use prior to submittal of a Page 5 EXHIBIT A building permit application to ensure consistency with the conditions in Section VIII,UDC standards and design standards. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit with the conditions included in Section VIII per the Findings in Section IX. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on March 16,2023 At the public hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Jeff Likes,ALC Architecture b. In opposition:None C. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: Jeff Likes.ALC Architecture (Applicant's Representative) e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen 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. _Questions and discussion pertaining to the nature of the pick-up only drive-through and human behavior associated with it. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 6 EXHIBIT A VII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 8/24/2022) -Revised SCfE DATA � WALGREENS .. �A � I I KEY NOTES I — - i Mir, �1l� �I --= ttss55.s I il_ CHIPOTLE , - O�e,.�,.e,�, t=gym n.•w� 2,325 SF _ —�J1L 21 PARKING SPA 5 ur�wx��E un�r.�was ------------- ------ ------------- - O um�wc anwm�c s[waa f--- T Q smemm ArtwE wmeinurvE �J (ARLsJR i ` Sr7FAL41V SITE PLAN dlabaatrre.,... `emu Page 7 EXHIBIT A HIKE RACK oEraa �\Pm6TRLW RMP OELAIL ��a PaRIONG OELAIL ��Aph PMIUNG SIGN r S vmec� �ww� mAw MCLO W a� nSmEWNJ( Ml ^fROHi N.EVanoN �iRA41 ErvQO511NE F1EVanory JF cm uz TRAH ENCLOSURE PIAN -- TRASH ENCLOSURE SECITON G4TE SUPPORTS SITE DETAILS dlecorstWe �ia� Page 8 EXHIBIT A B. Proposed Landscape Plan-Revised(dated: 3/10/22) 1 1 1 T I T' L' I'K T6. VE' T I.-T T.T I TT — — 7—1 1- &'T�IIEE ILA�DETAL SHRUB(�)�'"G PLAN-PING F -_7E�LF�U�IE I T T�EEF —E 1 —11 —I cx I-E L, E F-- T�' T— f­ 1 7 1 T 1 1%IE�.I I I !T"L I T�, cE,4 H., I .1 T c c I- 1 1,cxw 1.- -T 44 �7 F 4 -77^-- T, 1-4 we e+xs DEMN REVIEW LANDSCAPE PLAN BAERI ■ E Ej E T ITTQL1.TIE E LIPS. My — E Page 9 EXHIBIT A C. Building Elevations(dated: 9/13/21)-Not Approved MET KY 0 �- 016 ELEVATIONS IeboratAre,,. Taw%� Page 10 EXHIBIT A VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING 1. Future development of this site shall comply with the previous conditions of approval and terms of the existing Development Agreement and the conditions contained herein [AZ-04- 031 (Ord. #05-1179,DA Inst. #105134293)Meridian Gateway); VAR-05-027(access to SH- 69/Meridian Rd.); MI-07-002 1st Addendum to DA(Inst. #107099630 Medina Subdivision); and MDA-13-007 2nd Addendum to DA(Inst. #2014-095963 Medina Subdivision)]. 2. The subject approval is for a drive-through pick-up window only and does not include a menu board or outdoor speaker for ordering; any change(s)to the approved use shall be approved through a conditional use permit modification application. 3. The site plan and landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows: a. Depict and label all easements that exist on the subject lot per the recorded plat(Medina Subdivision)and Record of Survey(#13573).Any encroachments within existing easements should be permitted through the easement holder or as allowed by the UDC. b. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide perimeter buffer along the west boundary of the site, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.A perimeter buffer is not required along the north or south boundaries of the site as those are shared driveways with the adjacent properties. c. Extend the main east/west driveway from SH-69/S. Meridian Rd. along the southern boundary of the site to the property to the west(Parcel#R5652350065)as required by City Council with approval of the variance(VAR-05-027). d. The walkway from the perimeter sidewalk/pathway along SH-69/S. Meridian Rd.to the main building entrance shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A- 19B.4b. 4. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 —Drive-Through Establishment and 11-4-3-49—Restaurant is required. 5. Direct access via SH-69/S. Meridian Rd. other than the right-in/right-out access located at the southeast corner of the site approved with VAR-05-027 is prohibited. 6. The property owner shall obtain final approval of the property boundary adjustment (PBA- 2022-0017 —Howell Residuary Trust ROS #13573) from the Planning Division prior to July 21,2023 in order for the boundary adjustment to be recognized by the City. 7. All mechanical equipment on the building and outdoor service and equipment should be incorporated into the overall design of the building 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. 8. 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. 9. 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 Page 11 EXHIBIT A 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 11-513-617. B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches. 2. Additional 1400 gpd committed to model. WRRF decline balance is 14.58 MGD. 3. Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) are built within the utility easement. 4. Utilities not provided in record. Applicant to provide utilities as part of future submittal for public work review. 5. Existing 8" water main located at the NW corner of the site must be extended to the southern property boundary. There is an existing easement. If the water main is not routed in the easement a new easement will be required. Water line should be located at least 5'from the edge of the existing easement if used. 6. Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) are built within the utility easement. General Conditions of Approval 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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 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. 10. 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. 11. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. Page 12 EXHIBIT A 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 16. 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. 17. 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. 18. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 19. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. 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 httq://www.meridiancity.orglpublic_works.aspx?id=272. 25. 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 Page 13 EXHIBIT A Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 26. 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. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=288131&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC D. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) hgps://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=289642&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv E. NAMPA-MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=289409&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky IX. FINDINGS Conditional Use(UDC 11-5B-6) Findings: The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request 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. The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed development and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the C-G zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds the proposed restaurant with a drive-through will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions noted in Section VIII 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. The Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use will 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. Page 14 EXHIBIT A The Commission finds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VIII of this report. 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. The Commission 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. The Commission 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. The Commission 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) The Commission finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. b. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. Page 15 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the Conditional Use Permit for the Delano Apartments, located at 3850 N. Centrepoint Way, by Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP CITY OF MERIDIAN V IDIAN;_-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ! DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-family Development Consisting of 84 Dwelling Units on 3.49 Acres of Land in the R-40 Zoning District for Delano Apartments,Located at 3850 N. Centrepoint Way,by Becky McKay,Engineering Solutions,LLP. Case No(s).H-2022-0082 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. March 16,2023 (Findings on April 6, 2023) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16,2023,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. It-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0082 Page I upon the applicant,the Planning Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 16,2023, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for a conditional use permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2023, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two(2)Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit,when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-513-6F.1. 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 that also require platting,the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two(2)year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1,the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two (2)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 Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(d), if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may,within twenty-eight (28)days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52,title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. F. Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-6521(1)(d) and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0082 Page 2 G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2023. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0082 Page 3 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 6th day of April ,2023. COMMISSIONER ANDREW SEAL, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER NATE WHEELER VOTED COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER PATRICK GRACE VOTED COMMISSIONER MANDI STODDARD VOTED Andrew Seal, Chairman 4-6-2023 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 4-6-2023 Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 4-6-2023 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2022-0082 Page 4 EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORTC�WE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT f D A H 0 HEARING March 16,2023 Legend DATE: Project Location 0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planneruim;� 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0082 ®® ff Delano Apartments CUP gym®m LOCATION: 3850 N. Centrepoint Way, in the SE 1/4 IF of Section 32,TAN.,R.IE. (Parcel FFM #R1798151400) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 84 dwelling units on 3.49 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 3.49-acres Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R) Existing Land Use Vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Uses Multi-family development Current Zoning R-40(High Density Residential) Proposed Zoning NA Lots(#and type;bldg/common) NA Phasing plan(#of phases) One(1)phase Number of Residential Units(type 84(apartments) of units) Density(gross&net) 24.07 units/acre(gross) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 0.65-acre(19%) buffer/qualified) Amenities Clubhouse with an office,community room,exercise facility,covered patio with a BBQ area,playground and 50'x 100' open space area. Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Page 1 Neighborhood meeting date;#of 10/19/2022 attendees: History(previous approvals) H-2019-0027(Development Agreement(Inst.#2020-131190);FP-2021-0001 B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Traffic Impact Study(yes/no) No Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access is proposed via N. Centerpointe Way.,a collector street,at the west Hwy/Local)(Existing and boundary of the site. Proposed) Traffic Level of Service There are no current average daily traffic counts for N.Centrepointe Way,Eagle Rd. and Jasmine Ln. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross A driveway is proposed to the adjacent property to the east through an existing Access cross-access easement. Existing Road Network N.Centrepoint Way exists along the west boundary of this site. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ TIA Buffers Proposed Road Improvements None Fire Service No comments were submitted. Police Service • Distance to Police Station 4 miles • Police Response Time 3:43 minutes • Calls for Service 2,037 within a mile of the proposed development • %of calls for service split by priority Priority 3(MPD Goof is within 3 to 5 minutes) 3:44 3:43 �7 Priority 2(MPD Goal is within 8 to 10 minutes) 7:04 8:31 Priority 1(MPD Goal is within 15 to 20 minutes) 11:17 10:20 Calls for Service(CFS)occurring in RD'M724'-Total Count Z037 %of Calls for Service split by Priority %ofP3US 1.6% %of P2 US 55.6% %of PI CF5 37.7% %of PO US 5.1% • Accessibility For climate-controlled buildings,MPD requires police access into each building's entry point using a multi-technology keypad. • Specialty/resource needs None—MPD already serves this geographic area. • Crimes 206 within a mile of the proposed development • Crashes 59 within a mile of the proposed development • Other Reports NA West Ada School District • Distance(elem,ms,hs) Page 2 1 1 :11 1 1 it 1 1 1 -: Vi!n■: e: I!!!!qr SRCON ON; J� INIII . { r::e■r i •I lI III.1 4-■IIIIII %.• ., :-�..- GO �innr�L��� Illnun1.11.11.1.�■!11 +r+_::... ■ r - -+III!�� � --Ira: :tl ` r a�,�y •Y+ p _ L �nnmuu■3 - ME Noe Ir p�lq 11111�� ffft �i■I■I f __ - .• �x : JZA : � �•!,IIIIII I111111111 -I j! ' � ;�'+ t� gmNO ��i1 =`-r •aa �uu 'fir, •��r���i1!■!lr�: ::.Ci• f'y'1f71�IY,� ff 1- �\nnn�-\IIIIIII lIu :_ LL:IS�FI�3�J 11 T-'JII-,', �y• - �: !',:^I R IIIII-1 � yyp' I ■�=:■ III■.,IIII!!!!!=1r:_ /I In - '� ' 1 ��'Y��+M1i. Iy�.-�Illllll :��_ -lIII - -- -A; I: I; I �•� ■•R +w��!11!!!� - III � �,'' - - ��' Y r■....� �+ /�1( ..`III - — :. USTI _�.. �,, - 1111IlapIIIII USTICK ' '-� -..� • 'I - 1JI-IIIIII 11tlllll,ll ■ .- � •- Yw' '--I :' - IIII(IIII III III �■ �- = - .'' �1 /� III-_III 111 IIIIII I llllli-1 � _ y Ii w . 11 Ill+��+lhlll 3-.n1■9141 ]w r. -:� •�• ■11I ON - +II II11 y* �•IIIII■■ I (IIIIII , - �liiii 1 NO -Iiillli a - • • • IIIIII: -U11111 - • • • is■■III ■uuu. • nl W 1lnlr n�I IIIIII!►\GnrIIIIII �� Ilulll In■■■■■ ry���� I+Illlllp uuuu�=q "•n I■■ 1lff� .,I��! �. -...+_lul!'.r /�lunnm■"I • ■ '• + n■Igll fff �� CGIr� ��II■IIIII►*, y ��� �' NON ►►...1... - +_a■IIII i '!.f i-� ■ `fi ■rll��F, ill all fFA! ■■ n - I-1 ON I �mm�lNIEMEN •': u I �� •Inwu -1 -_ : r 1.11�1 G nm■■+++ ply t IIII■ .nn =� -1lnl �� ■- - ON ■I � �:uu n.■■■ uu! W �Iu+ �: f 1 ula :ILI:: : fff���' -F'w ���-:���1111111� `I_ - J :■lll �i . nw- 1 nr■ . .► �:.N= �Ian a ,null � r=.� f■ -■���1-�liiiii�,wmulr�'��-- - I � �� � -� �� � is nn INN r ONHann=_ •■+II ! . ' umlll:.11. 1 ■.. !1 (IIIIII I� ! � = ��■■II- ••III 11l1■a illlll.... U.STiCaC ■ - - -■ U S T I C It IIIII!!�i!' I 14, FBI■Y[..1:1' Q � ■.� � ptil �'Illllla 14�iii III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Shari Stiles, Engineering Solutions,LLP— 1029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100,Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owner: Open Door Rentals, LLC— 1977 E. Overland Rd., Meridian, ID 83642 C. Agent/Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning Postin Date Newspaper Notification 3/l/2023 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 3/16/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 2/26/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 2/27/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(HTTPS://WWW.MERIDIANCITY.ORGICOMPPLAN): 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 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. For example, an employment center should have supporting retail uses; a retail center should have supporting residential uses as well as supportive neighborhood and community services. The standards for the MU-R designation provide an incentive for larger public and quasi-public uses where they provide a meaningful and appropriate mix to the development. The developments are encouraged to be designed consistent with the conceptual MU-R plan depicted in Figure 3D. The Applicant proposes a multi-family development consisting of 84 apartment units at a gross density of 24 units per acre consistent with the density desired in the MU-R designation and the conceptual development plan included in the Development Agreement.A mix of retail stores,restaurants,vertically integrated residential,multi-family residential apartments and single-family residential dwellings exist in this overall MU-R designated area. Transportation: There is a commercial collector street(N. Centrepoint Way)which runs along the west boundary of this site and stubs to the property to the north that will eventually extend to E. Wainwright Dr.No other collector streets are depicted on ACHD's Master Street Map for this site. Access to the site is proposed via N. Centrepoint Way. Page 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridianciU.org/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): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the variety of housing types in the City and will provide housing options in close proximity to employment, retail and restaurant uses in this MU- R designated area. • "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 and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Locate higher density housing near corridors with existing or planned transit,Downtown, and in proximity to employment centers." (2.01.01H) The proposed multi family development is located in close proximity to SH-SS/N. Eagle Rd., a major transportation corridor, and to employment centers along that corridor. Transit services are not available to serve this area. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) Buffers to adjoining uses are not required for development in the R-40 zoning district. The adjacent properties to the north and east in the City of Boise's Area of Impact boundary are designated Mixed Use; currently, a single-family home exists to the north and vacant/undeveloped property exists to the east. Multi family apartments about the site to the south (Brickyard).A collector street (Centrepoint Way)separates the property from the single-family homes in the development process to the west. The proposed site design was deemed to be appropriate with surrounding uses with the previously approved annexation and preliminary plat application. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) The proposed multi family apartments will contribute to the mix of housing types available in the City. There is currently a mix of single-family detached dwellings and multi family apartments in this area. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed multi family apartments should be compatible with future uses allowed in the Mixed- Use designation to the north and east and with existing apartments to the south, which should minimize conflicts and maximize use of land. • `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 Page 5 provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The area surrounding this site has redeveloped except for the properties to the north and east. Development of this vacant site will result in more efficient provision of public services. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with development as proposed. • "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 proposed multi family development is in close proximity to employment, retail and restaurant uses, which should reduce vehicle trips and enhance livability and sustainability. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits." (4.05.03B) Development of the subject vacant land, currently in the City limits, is encouraged over parcels on the fringe of the City. The development of this property will result in better provision of City services. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP) A CUP is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 84 residential units [(36) 1-bedroom& (48)2-bedroom units] in four(4) 3-story structures on 3.49 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. Three(3)of the structures will contain 24-units each and the fourth structure will contain 12 units. A single-story 2,446 square foot clubhouse is also proposed along with other amenities for the development. The existing Development Agreement(Inst. #2020-131190) for the larger Delano Subdivision entitled this property to develop with four(4) 3-story apartment buildings with up to 96 units per the conceptual development plan depicted on the landscape plan,as follows: UVI�a U A Li Phasing: This development is proposed to be constructed in one phase; it's the third phase of development of Delano Subdivision. The final plat for Delano has been recorded and the subdivision Page 6 required improvements have either been installed or a surety agreement has been submitted Development is currently still in the first phase. Access: Access to this development is proposed via an existing curb cut approved with the final plat from N. Centrepoint Way, a collector street, at the west boundary with secondary access at the east boundary of the site via Jasmine Lane,a private street. An access easement(Inst. #2021-118517) exists from Centrepoint Way through this property to the adjacent parcel to the east(#R4582530202)for access via Centrepoint Way,as required by the Development Agreement, since that parcel only had access via SH-55/N. Eagle Rd. Pathways:No pathways are depicted on the Pathways Master Plan for this site. A detached sidewalk was constructed with the street buffer along N. Centrepoint Way with the subdivision improvements in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. Walkways from the perimeter sidewalk along the west boundary are proposed to Building A,which fronts on Centrepoint. Pathways are proposed internally for access to each of the structures from parking areas and through common areas to amenities. Landscaping is required along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Staff recommends the Applicant work with the property owner of the development(Brickyard apartments)to the south to see if they'd be amenable to removing a section of the existing fence between the two properties to allow for pedestrian interconnectivity between developments as desired in mixed-use designated areas such as this.If so,the site/landscape plans should be revised accordingly. Fencing: A 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence is proposed along the north, east and south sides of the development as shown on the landscape plan. Staff clarified with the Applicant the fence depicted along the southern boundary is actually the existing fence constructed with the adjacent development to the south; double fencing is not proposed or allowed. Staff recommends the Applicant work with the property owner to the south to create a break in the fence to allow interconnectivity between developments. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text) 11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: `B. 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. The proposed multi family structures comply with the minimum setbacks required for the R-40 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8; however, the carports proposed along the south &east boundaries of the site do not. The south and east perimeter buffers should be widened to 12 feet to accommodate a minimum 12-foot wide building setback for the carport structures, in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.1. 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 screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts two (2) trash enclosures that are screened and not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas shall comply with this requirement. The trash enclosure should accommodate recycling. 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. Page 7 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. The site plan states a minimum of 80 square feet of private usable open space will be provided for each unit in the form of decks and patios as depicted on the floor plans (see Sections VITA and D). 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 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 shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. The proposed parking meets and exceeds UDC standards per the analysis below. Based on 36 1-bedroom units and 48 2-bedroom units, a minimum of 158 off-street parking spaces are required, including guest parking,with 84 of those in a covered carport or garage. A total of 168 spaces are proposed,with 84 of those in covered carports,which exceeds the minimum standard by 10 spaces. Accessible parking is required in accord with ADA standards; a total of six(6)accessible spaces are proposed with two(2)of those being covered carport spaces. Based on 168 vehicle parking spaces, a minimum of seven(7)bicycle parking spaces shall be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. A total of 44 bicycle spaces are proposed in accord with and exceeding this standard with bicycle racks at each building. 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. d. 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 plan states the property management office and maintenance storage area will be located in the clubhouse. Mailboxes are proposed on the outer wall of each of the two (2) trash enclosures. A directory and map are proposed to be provided at the clubhouse. The site plan and floor plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict the location of these items in accord with this standard. C. 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 ten(10) percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of five(5)acres or more.Because this site is below 5 acres in size, this standard is not applicable. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: Page 8 a. One hundred fifty(150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred(500) or less square feet of living area.None of the units are below 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.All 84 units are between 500 and 1,200 sf.; therefore, a total of 21,000 sf. (or 0.48-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 are over 1,200 s.f of living area. Per this standard, a total of 21,000 sf. (or 0.48-acre) of common open space is required. Because this site is below 5-acres in size, the baseline requirement in UDC 11-4-3-27C.1 does not apply. A total of 28,185 square feet(or 0.65-acre) of common open space is proposed consisting of a S,000 sf central common open space area and common areas of at 20'x 20'in area as depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.C. 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 common open space areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.0 meet this requirement. 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. This project is proposed to develop in one phase. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial street buffers 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)Some of the common open space is located adjacent to a collector street(Centrepoint Way)—Commission approval is needed in order for these areas to qualify toward the open space requirement. The two (2) northern areas depicted on the open space exhibit aren't really recreation areas but the southern area where the pickleball court is proposed is. Therefore, if approved by the Commission,Staff recommends a berm or constructed barrier is constructed between the pickleball court and the street buffer in accord with this requirement. D. Site Development Amenities: All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space, and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as noted in UDC 11-4-3-27D. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of the multi-family development based on the number of units. For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, such as this, four(4) amenities shall be provided with at least one(1) from each category. The following amenities are proposed from each of the following categories: 1)Quality of Life— clubhouse with fitness facility; Open Space—covered patio with BBQ and covered seating at the clubhouse; Recreation—pickleball court with internal pedestrian walkways; and,Multi-Modal— charging stations for electric vehicle. The proposed amenities meet and exceed UDC standards. E. Landscaping Requirements: Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. Additionally, all street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Page 9 Compliance application should depict landscaping along the street facing elevation of Building A adjacent to N. Centrepoint Way in accord with these standards. Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Street buffer landscaping along N. Centrepoint Way, a collector street, was installed with the subdivision improvements. 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;a copy of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the development. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations of the multi-family structures were submitted with the annexation application for Delano subdivision as shown below. The existing Development Agreement(DA)requires future development to be generally consistent with those elevations and comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. 'ft4 While the style of the proposed elevations is not really consistent with the conceptual elevations included in the DA,they are consistent inform in that they are both 3-stories in height with balconies and patios for each unit with a variety of materials and have similar modulation. The proposed elevations have pitched roofs with architectural asphalt shingles,vertical fiber cement board and batten siding, fiber cement horizontal lap siding with stone wainscot accents. Staff is of the opinion the proposed design is preferable as it's more consistent with the style of residential structures in the surrounding area and will blend better. Therefore, Staff does not recommend a modification to the DA. Final design of all structures is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual and will be reviewed for compliance with these standards with the Design Review application. Compliance with the building code requirements for separation between structures within the development is required. Public testimony has been received requesting the structures along the north and west boundaries of the site be limited to 2-stories in height to better transition to the existing single-family home to the north and future uses on that property,which is designated as Mixed-Use. Other testimony notes that the development is too dense and doesn't have enough parking to adequately serve the development. Note:Staff has not recommended changes to the development plan pertaining to number of stories and/or transition to adjacent properties as this property was entitled to develop as proposed with the Development Agreement. Page 10 VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed 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 this item on March 16,202.At the public hearing.the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Becky McKay,Engineering Solutions(Applicant's Representative) b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Laura Trairatnobhas: Jim Ostyn: Paul Miller: Robert Hartley: d. Written testimony: Becky McKay.Engineering Solutions(Applicant's Representative): Laura Trairatnobhas: Jim Ostyn:Mike and Melissa Barnard: Bill and Marge Schumacher: Mac and Janice Hartley: Marian Van Ausdal and Alice Clovis: Sherry and Chuck Garey e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Concern pertaining to traffic generated from the proposed development and adequacy of parking for the development: b. Concern pertaining to the existing multi-family development(Brickyard)to the south not having enough on-site parking and exacerbating the issue with this development C. Question if a traffic study had been done that accounted for the intensity of development in this area and the adequacy of the existing roadway network to handle the traffic: d. Concern pertaining to the amount of traffic that will use Centrepoint and streets in adjacent neighborhoods. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The proposed development is consistent with the existing entitlements for the property. b. In favor of the relocation of the clubhouse internal to the development and the proposed common open space area. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None Page 11 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Proposed Site Plan(dated: 2/22/23) YICINUMAP AERIAL MAP PROJECT DIRECTORY WE DATA DEVELOPMENT DATA i ORMER PLANNER/CML LDi - __ 19TW SF,1.,u.6 K13 L 1 f IL I --------------- T.I OCATIO, w�� a u m IREMOFFiv P EaeMw«kxw xi�inxr p�rc xm. m .i.zwrs:zeumrss xuxns r° - MEAROwm ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE stterc! L E i ut m v 1 sw Fl nFl io rr Lr T 1 ¢uxns -TH �, '. .,.. a M«.xa.� ipp6+ pe wsnnwr wxerc la®cfxvz xns unxcl ertvw¢Ao airs nk.mxs tx Livik utrs(.ul _ vwmrok«w a l� �S[¢ _ �,rs teak wrs(s-al N OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS m I n w sa fT.4ix.xcars Fn=mfx DELANO APARTMENT S li _ awsfx.wcr was "i"w usus,iw.x ucwswss nw N.CENTREPOINT WAY n Imo{ �1 rf �I /I 4 I II, I Nu�agw oFSGxEWNcwumNn5 xoo FE, 1-1s IBr. MERIDWJ,IDRH083646 JF. a-rr IL IY� rc°fm a.A 1 P J `Trt `� PARKING ANALYSIS y l9C1 L S 1 ax° I ° .�nL, x uam z�mcrm u 1 -_ xW°O4 a[°�M�ux exx5 r[xxVM E anAN° 'f` L i wm�k u zo Pw uxn sn k� 1� cwus' I�,, V�oE�Gc oa soo ss n u °xILAIXCG —LL '�"�u a"J a w A cn G—o:5 __II I Q I V auwxc f i.s4ix ❑ Cr lY "� w awry cstws amIT 1 -! " �. I i I I T J TJC=1 ,�a a���—x°xEan�°I x°�I, 5=_,x n� r-1- m �w�xk�rtartg I I - _ �� �. �i~-r n � � t l �� � � n � Ir•! ----� _ {°�a�a� AT t� PROJECT AMENITIES �I -aA6. SITE PIAN ® �n.w., IT w o�f AS 1.0 1 m STE PLAN Page 12 B. Proposed Landscape Plan(date: 2/27/2023) _ OI PLANTER GUT ESED ED6E 1 ' WMI 3 I II i ENSENBELTS I r ^uaxc�nava.mrwwxu, ..wa n.n SHRUB I,^, �� O B PLANTING I l l Z 1 - W z o a PLANT PALETTE EL a c ��»° S�.Qa fO"�° ,,..L a.. NOTES eew.,um,x.<ewmu.:c wim>�surc or�v.wws1x+xce O3 TREE PLANTINWSTAKIN& w«- <. U In ewm.mrovn r�rwn xrr.wrn viuw.e.rr�, �we.e oiunac'o wx sz r.aawm o.a ccaxre,�swe swow„ecrb s 'M':3M'v.,a. lot �Mr+m.ve cnNnrae nY�5.,Fr6cat w.raxr sWe.e ocvwenagvsmxriiv�m-ms ia.,nwsrur ee urmm.o.cweeo��vrivrin.� wa vcsr - r.w.�.nw moo.�..ff roff �. mrn rxas. acw.on..re .^eCOiVCEPT SITE DATA cs..nr �w arnsw,urcx c�sn,e LANDSCAPE PLAN ea.ra wrsvm nccn rscsm.�s srsw,s�wcuws zw ��,�� a..o .ok v— -,m. 4 6'SOLID VINYL PRIVACY FENCE v�H®ur'e x xmna ,m%.r>xrxce rw.mww,rgan• s u`-"i Page 13 C. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 2/27/23) TA10 THEARENIfE(i50FFIa9 OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS - EI � 7MIR � R 1) ELAN0 I L' ae r -I I — W—— jOFS AID A P A R T M E N T S ILI E T I I 2 ) -� d" EIECI IIS 250SF ICR R 2fA05F _ h r 'E RRmnom���......._....._....._...zs.iss s.r N.CENRIEPoINT WAY ��1 Y FE ��oh�c n couMon MERIOWJ,ID0.HG 03646 .I. -0000 JAL ��. .1 ciueeousE �� B G A --. t -.. NC eu Pw McmFl (' cso y�N� _!I�Ff 1OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT ® AS1'1 OPEN SPACE EXHIBR Page 14 D. Conceptual Building Elevations &Floor Plans for Multi-Family Structures &Clubhouse (dated: 2/27/23 &4/14/22) TA10 __j iHEARCEETOFFIV m m m m m m m m m m m m BUILDING TYPE 1 FRONT ELEVATION �. DELANO A P A R T M E N T S N_CENIHEPDINTWAY MERIDIAN,IDAHO 83645 m m m mOM r ax m m w m00 m m BUILDING TYPE 2 FRONT ELEVATION m o m m o m m o m m o m ■ ® ® ■ ■ ® � ® ■ AA5.0 TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION TYPICAL SIDE ELEVATION TN DuiLolNc ELEVAraNs Page 15 TAM TNEA10IM MOFFILFR Y I I -...........,. LA Y Y n 5 EA €_a"-- DELANO APARTMENTS ulni�ur,la�c 1 � BUILDING TTPE 1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN I �pQy v � SD2.2 BINLOINO PPE 2 FIRST FLOOR PLAN TA02 TOEAROIRELIS OFF IGEA DELANO APARTMENTS � a 0 UNIT TYPE 1.1 UNIT TYPE 2.2 FLOOR PLAN - 2 FLOOR PLAN SD2.3 Inrt vwxs Page 16 TAM THEAMUKISOFFIEE9 ©V J0 tg� BUILDING SECTION mIIDIN6 SECTION DELANO APARIIIEIIS a� ® L27 � m � rAiuouw.Daxo "3 BUILDING SECTION N -- SNDIIIRIO NECIIOR 6BUILOING SECTION 302.6 BUILDING SECTION BUILDING SECTION - TAM THEARIINMOOFFIV IT] Ell El 0 ❑ � -� NORM FIL"AnoN DELANO ❑ ----- p. APARrEEM INNWI.LWp 3NIEBEELENAnBN _e mRII EL"AnON �S02.7 .".FmrL"A"m ...•. IYILNLN ACfYAI Page 17 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The developer shall comply with all previous conditions of approval for this property [H-2019-0027 (Development Agreement(Inst. #2020-131190);FP-2021-00011. 2. The multi-family development shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. 3. Submit floor plans demonstrating compliance with the minimum private usable open space standard of eighty(80) square feet for each unit in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.3 with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 4. The multi-family development shall record a legally binding document that states 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 said document shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 5. Comply with building code requirements for separation between structures within the development. 6. The Applicant should work with the property owner of the development(Brickyard apartments)to the south to see if they'd be amenable to removing a section of the existing fence between the two properties to allow for pedestrian interconnectivity between developments as desired in mixed use designated areas such as this. If so,the site/landscape plans should be revised accordingly. 7. Provide a minimum of 0.65-acre of qualified open space as shown in the open space exhibit in Section VIII.0 that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C. 8. Site amenities shall be provided from each of the following categories: 1) Quality of Life— clubhouse with fitness facility; Open Space—covered patio with BBQ and covered seating at the clubhouse; Recreation—pickleball court with internal pedestrian walkways; and,Multi-Modal— charging stations for electric vehicles,in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D. Other comparable amenities may be considered by the Director. 9. The trash enclosures shall accommodate recycling. 10. The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised as follows: a. Depict the 6-foot tall solid final fence along the southern boundary of the site as"existing" fencing.Double fencing is not allowed. b. All transformer and utility vaults and other service areas 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. c. Depict landscaping along the foundation of the street facing elevation of Building A adjacent to N. Centrepoint Way as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-2 7E.2. d. Depict landscaping along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. e. Widen the perimeter buffers along the south and east boundaries of the site to 12 feet to accommodate a minimum 12-foot wide building setback for the carport structures,in accord with UDC 11-4-3-2 7B.1. f. Depict the location of electric charging stations for electric vehicles. Page 18 g. Commen open spaee areas shall not be adjaeent to eelleeter-or-ar-ter-ial street buffefs tifiless appfoved by the Ceffffnission. if appfo e ,*The common area on the southwest portion of the site where the pickleball court is located shall be 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 in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.7.Note: The Commission approved the location of the common area adjacent to the collector street buffer. 11. 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 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 12. 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 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches. 1.2 Additional 9109 gpd committed to model. WRRF decline balance is 14.56 MGD 1.3 Must provide to and through to R4582530202 and R4582530100. 1.4 Sewer and water running in parallel require 30ft easement. 1.5 Sewer must be at least 1 Oft from edge of easement. 1.6 Carports and other permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) cannot be built within the utility easement. 1.7 Project is consistent with the Master Plan. 1.8 Fire flow modeled at 1500 gpm. If more flow is needed contact Public Works to Discuss. 1.9 Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc.) are built within the utility easement. 1.10 Streetlights are existing for this project. 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. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Page 19 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. 2.4 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. 2.5 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 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 2.10 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. 2.11 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. 2.12 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.13 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.14 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. 2.15 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. 2.16 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. Page 20 2.17 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. 2.18 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.meridianciU.o�ublic_works.aspx?id=272. 2.19 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. 2.20 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 No comments were submitted. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciU.oLgzl ebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=286934&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU&cr =1 E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=288839&dbid=0&r0o=Meridian City F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=287361&dbid=0&r0o=Meridian City G. SETTLER'S IRRIGATION DISTRICT(SID) https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=287325&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=290485&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) hggs://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=290645&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy J. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) hyps://weblink.meridianciU.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=288120&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City Page 21 X. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission 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. The Commission finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 zoning district(see Analysis, Section V 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. The Commission finds that the proposed use is consistent with the future land use map designation of MU-R and is allowed as a conditional use in UDC Table 11-2A-2 in the R-40 zoning district. 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. The Commission finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for and existing in this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the 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. The Commission 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. The Commission finds that essentialpublic services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities;see comments in Section IX from WASD. Page 22 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial of Variance Request Concerning a Proposed Addressing Change for 2201 E Gala St. by Orme Family and Implant Dentistry CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, E DECISION,AND AND ORDER I D A H O Date of Order: April 6, 2023 Case No.: N/A Applicant: Aaron Orme, Orme Family and Implant Dentistry In the Matter of. Variance request from a Department Determination concerning a proposed addressing change for 2201 E. Gala Street by Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Pursuant to testimony and evidence received regarding this matter at the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian (the "Commission") on March 16, 2023, as to this matter, the Commission enters the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, decision, and order. A. Findings of fact. 1. The facts pertaining to the Applicant's property, the Applicant's request, and the process are set forth in the March 2, 2023, staff report titled"Staff Recommendation on Application for Variance,"which is incorporated herein by reference. 2. The Applicant requested that the City assign separate suite numbers to two businesses which are co-located in the same building at 2201 E. Gala Street, but that request was denied by the Director of Community Development. 3. The Applicant subsequently requested a variance from the requirements set forth in Meridian City Code section 8-2-7(E)(1), which states, "Only one (1) address number shall be assigned to each residence, dwelling, structure, business, industry or other property." 4. Under Meridian City Code section 8-2-11(A)(2)(d), in order to grant the Applicant's request, the Commission must find that the variance "will not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the community including the accurate dispatch of emergency vehicles or delivery of emergency services." 5. Under Meridian City Code section 8-2-11(A)(2)(b), in order to grant the Applicant's request, the Commission must also find that the variance will not grant a right or special privilege to the Applicant that is not otherwise allowed under the Meridian City Code. 6. Deputy Chief of Prevention Joseph Bongiorno testified,both in writing and in person, that the proposed variance would adversely affect the delivery of emergency services by the Meridian Fire Department. The Commission finds Chief Bongiorno's testimony to be credible and trustworthy. 7. Staff from the Community Development Department testified, in writing and in person, that the proposed variance would grant a special privilege to the Applicant because the City FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,DECISION,AND ORDER Variance Request from Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Page 1 routinely denies similar requests from other property owners. The Commission finds staff s testimony to be credible and trustworthy. 8. Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that the Applicant's request for a variance is not in accord with Meridian City Code sections 8-2-11(A)(2)(b) and(d). B. Conclusions of law. 1. The Commission takes judicial notice of the Meridian City Code, including, but not limited to, chapter 2, title 8. 2. In order to grant a variance under Meridian City Code Section 8-2-11(A), the Commission must make certain findings, including: a. "That the variance requested will not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the community including the accurate dispatch of emergency vehicles or delivery of emergency services." MCC § 8-2-11(A)(2)(d). b. "That the requested variance will not grant a right or special privilege to the property owner that is not otherwise allowed under this chapter."MCC § 8-2-11(A)(2)(b). 3. When the Commission cannot make the findings required by Meridian City Code section 8- 2-11(A)(2), the Commission must deny an Applicant's request for a variance. See MCC § 8- 2-11(A)(2) ("A request for variance may be granted upon a finding by the Commission that all of the following conditions have been met."). C. Order. Pursuant to the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Commission hereby denies the Applicant's request for a variance because the Commission is unable to make all of the required findings under Meridian City Code section 8-2-11(A)(2). D. Final decision. Upon approval by majority vote, this is a final decision of the Commission. E. Limited right of appeal to City Council. Pursuant to Meridian City Code section 8-2- 11(13)(2)(a), "A property owner may appeal to [City] Council a final decision of the Commission in which the property owner is an affected party by filing a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk's Office. The appeal shall be filed within five (5) working days of the mailing date of written notice of the Commission decision. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be provided to the [Community Development Department]."Additionally, "The notice of appeal shall specifically state where the [C]ommission erred in the findings of fact and/or the interpretation or application of[chapter 2, title 8, Meridian City Code]."MCC § 8-2- 11(13)(2)(b). F. Notice of right to regulatory takings analysis. Pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,DECISION,AND ORDER Variance Request from Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Page 2 IT IS SO ORDERED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian, Idaho, on this 6th day of April, 2022. Andrew Seal, Chair Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,DECISION,AND ORDER Variance Request from Orme Family and Implant Dentistry Page 3 E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Changes to Agenda:  Item #5: Costco Development – MDA, CUP (H-2023-0007): This item needs to be vacated from the agenda because the th neighborhood meeting wasn’t held in accord with UDC standards. A neighborhood meeting was held on April 4 and new th public hearing will be scheduled for May 4 to correct the error & the project will be re-noticed. (A vote is not needed to vacate this item from the agenda.) Item #6: Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning  Preliminary Plat  Alternative Compliance (doesn’t require Commission action) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.002 acres of land, zoned R1 in Ada County, located at 4135 W. Cherry Lane. History: none Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium-Density Residential (MDR) Summary of Request: Annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district, Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 residential building lots (including one existing home to remain) and one (1) common lot, and three (3) Alternative Compliance requests at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre, which is within the desired density range of the MDR designation for Crowley Park Subdivision. The proposed development offers lot sizes ranging from 4,011 to 5,768 square feet (s.f.) with the existing home on a 9,744 s.f. lot. Single-family detached and attached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: An existing home on the property is proposed to remain on Lot 1, Block 1 is required to connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. The outbuildings located on Lots 2, 3, and 4, Block 1 should be removed with development of this property. Alternative Compliance: (1) Common Driveway: Common driveways shall serve a maximum of four (4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three (3) dwelling units be located on one (1) side of the driveway. The Applicant is proposing five (5) dwelling units take access off the common driveway, all five (5) dwelling units are also located on one (1) side of the driveway. Based on the analysis, the Director is supportive of the request for ALT for the proposed five (5) dwelling units taking access off the west side of the common driveway. (2) Parking : (UDC 11-3C): The existing home does not meet the required number of off-street parking spaces per UDC Table 11-3C-6 for a three (3) bedroom home; four (4) parking spaces are required, at least 2 in an enclosed garage, other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10-foot by 20-foot parking pad. The existing home does not have an enclosed two-car garage; however, the required number of parking spaces is provided via an existing attached carport and driveway. Based on the analysis, the Director is supportive of the request for ALT for the existing carport with the addition of the lattice. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Staff will confirm compliance with these standards at the time of building permit submittal for each residence. The Applicant has provided an additional three (3) parking stalls at the end of the common drive on the southeast side of the site for overflow parking. (3) Landscaping: (UDC 11-3B): A twenty-five-foot landscape buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane in accord with UDC 11-3B-7. Alternative Compliance (ALT) to the landscape buffer width is requested due to the front porch on the existing home encroaching more than two feet into the required Landscape buffer. Based on the analysis, the Director is supportive of the request for ALT with Staff’s recommendation to modify the plans. Access: Access is proposed from W. Cherry Lane from a common driveway on Lot 2, Block 1. Direct lot access from W. Cherry Lane for Lot 1, Block 1 is prohibited. The interior Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6 Block 1 are proposed to take access via a common drive to W. Cherry Lane, meeting the street access requirements of UDC 11-3A-3A. Common Open Space (UDC 11-3G-3): Common open space and amenities are not required for properties less than 5-acres in size. Building Elevations: Two (2) conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like (see Section VIII.D). Variations of two-story homes with a two-car garage are proposed. The submitted elevations depict field materials of lap siding, differing color accents, roof profiles, and stone. The final design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement, and preliminary plat per the conditions in the Staff Report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2023-0006, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2023, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2023- 0006, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2023-0006 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Item #7: Modern Craftsman Franklin (H-2022-0079) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification (doesn’t require Commission action)  Annexation  Conditional Use Permit  Preliminary Plat  Private Street (doesn’t require Commission action) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 11.47 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County & R-15 in the City, located at 4540, 4490, & 4420 W. Franklin Road. History: The western portion of the site at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. was previously annexed into the City with the Compass Charter School East Expansion project. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MHDR in the TMISAP Summary of Request: The Applicant requests a modification to the existing DA to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Road from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed MFR development and the new DA associated with the proposed annexation – this application does not require action from the Commission, only City Council. The Applicant proposes to annex the eastern 2 parcels consisting of 10.29-acres of land with an R-15 (medium high-density residential) zoning district. A MFR development with a mix of housing types is proposed with a gross density of 10.6 units per acre consistent with the MHDR FLUM designation in the Comp Plan. A DA is recommended as a provision of annexation that includes the west parcel proposed to be removed from the existing DA for the charter school. A Preliminary Plat is proposed consisting of one (1) building lot and one (1) other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. ROW is proposed to be dedicated with the plat for the extension of W. Aviator St., a collector street, across the NWC of the site in accord with the Master Street Map. Access is proposed via the collector street (Aviator) with a driveway access via W. Franklin Rd., an arterial street, along the southern boundary of the site. The driveway is required to be located along the west property line for shared access with the property to the west. Private streets are proposed for internal access and for addressing purposes. Street buffer landscaping is required along the collector & arterial streets in accord with UDC standards. The Purdam Gulch Drain lies off-site along the east boundary of the property within a 100’ wide easement on land owned by NMID. The easement encroaches on this property at the NEC of the site. A CUP is proposed for a MFR development consisting of 122 dwelling units in the R-15 zoning district; a mix of housing types with 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units is proposed consisting of SFR detached, attached/duplex and townhomes. Because all units will be on a single-lot rather than individual lots, it’s considered a MFR development. All units will be for rent, rather than individually owned. A minimum of 1.85 acres of qualified common open space and (5) site amenities are required to meet the minimum standards. The common open space exhibit submitted with this application included some areas that don’t qualify per the UDC standards for MFR development; staff has requested the exhibit be revised prior to the Council hearing in order to determine compliance with the minimum standards. Site amenities are proposed as follows from each of the required categories: 1) Quality of Life – clubhouse & a dog park (a waste station is required); Open Space – community garden; Recreation – swimming pool, internal walking trails, children’s play structure; and, Multi-Modal – charging stations for electric vehicle, which meet and exceed UDC standards. Off-street parking is proposed for the development that meets and exceeds UDC standards (a minimum of 248 parking spaces are required, a total of 260 are proposed). Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures within the development as shown. Building materials appear to consist of a stucco-like material with wood look lap siding and stone accents with asphalt shingle roofs. Final design should comply with the multi-family design standards listed in the ASM & and the traditional neighborhood design guidelines in the TMISAP for the MHDR FLUM designation. Written Testimony: Shannon Ely, Baron Properties (Applicant’s representative) – requests the following changes to conditions in the staff report:  #A.2.1c - requests the proposed private streets are allowed to be in an easement rather than a common lot due to the nature of the project and the civil complexities associated with it and concerns pertaining to spacing & easements. The UDC states the preference is that the private street(s) is in a lot if the property is being subdivided; it’s also Staff’s and the Ada County street name Committee’s preference for clarity & accuracy in determining the street alignment and for approval of the street names that they are depicted on the final plat and recorded.  #A.3.6m – update the street names referenced in the condition to reflect those on the updated plans. Ok  #B.2.9 – requests this condition (“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.”) is replaced with the following condition consistent with other Modern Craftsman developments: “Prior to vertical permit acceptance/receipt, street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer may be installed/inspected in part or in whole (but not required as activated or fully approved as not necessary for site safety), and water systems activated and approved as related to hydrant locations, road base installed and approved for use and capacity of 80,000 lb. vehicle, prior to payment or receipt of vertical building permits. Vertical building permit plan sets may be submitted and reviewed/approved prior to horizontal acceptance of above listed requirements. However, approved plan sets may not be paid for or collected until horizontal acceptance. This stipulation does not pertain to garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles, or site roads to be constructed. Garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles or site roads are allowed to proceed with plan submittals, reviews and approvals along with permit payment and receipt, and can be constructed concurrent with completion of horizontal requirements for the site, and be permitted prior to horizontal acceptance to minimize access impact in regard to the emergency access of the site.” – Staff is amenable to the proposed change. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/the requirement of a DA per the provisions in the staff report. Staff requests a condition is added to require a sidewalk along the south side of W. Fresh Powder Ln. on the north side of the common area where the community center is located for pedestrian connectivity & safety. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2022-0079, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2023, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2022- 0079, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0079 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #8: Artisan Victory Market (H-2022-0066) Application(s): Annexation; Preliminary Plat; Conditional Use Permit & Private Street Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 14.47 acres of land, zoned RUT, located at 2820, 2910, 2960, and 3020 S. Eagle Road. History: CPA-05-001 Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-use Community Summary of Request: Annexation of approximately 14.47 acres of land with the R-15 (12.38 acres) and C-C (2.09 acres) zoning districts; Preliminary Plat (PP) consisting of 5 building lots (3 multi-family and 2 commercial) and 1 common lot on approximately 13.6 acres of land in the requested R-15 and C-C zones; and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a multi-family development consisting of 131 units on 11.94 acres in the R-15 zoning district. The site will develop in a single phase and the existing structures on the property will be removed with development of the site. The proposed use of the property may include 18,100 square feet of commercial uses (tenants unknown) and 131 multi-family residential units on 13.60 acres in the C-C and R-15 districts. Access: A private driveway is proposed via S. Eagle Rd., an arterial street. No stub streets are required or proposed for this application. The site does have three (3) existing stub streets that are proposed to be extended with this development. This critical because most of the residential units and the commercial uses will take access from the internal private street. The extension of the local street connection will allow traffic to flow better through this site to the signalized intersection at Easy Jet and not rely solely on the Eagle Rd. access. The units located on the east side of Titanium take access from shared driveways. Although not classified as common driveways, the applicant should provide at a minimum 20-foot driveways to ensure vehicles can access the designed garage spaces associated with those units. With the CZC application the applicant should demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Staff and ACHD have required traffic calming at the intersection of Titanium and Publisher. Cross-access/ingress-egress should be provided between all C-C zoned commercial lots in the subdivision and the Inglewood commercial uses to south via a note on the final plat. A private street is proposed for internal circulation. Conditional Use Permit: A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi-family residential development consisting of 131 dwelling units on 11.94 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. The proposed development will have (24) 2-story townhome units; (31) duplex units and (45) single detached units and clubhouse centrally located within the complex. The mix of units consists of 1- (62), 2- (53) and 3- (16) bedroom units ranging from 692 to 1,352 square feet in size. Parking: The site is required to provide 191 total parking stalls with 90 of those being covered. Based on the parking calculations provided by the applicant, the residential portion of the development will have 236 spaces (in combination of carports, surface, driveways and garages) which exceeds code requirements. Further, on-street parking (approximately 50 spaces) will be available along Publisher and Titanium. However, approved plan sets may not be paid for or collected until horizontal acceptance. This stipulation does not pertain to garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles, or site roads to be constructed. Garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles or site roads are allowed to proceed with plan submittals, reviews and approvals along with permit payment and receipt, and can be constructed concurrent with completion of horizontal requirements for the site, and be permitted prior to horizontal acceptance to minimize access impact in regard to the emergency access of the site. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/ conditions in the staff report Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2022-0066, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2023, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2022- 0066, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0066 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Landscaping/Open Space and Amenities: Baseline standard of 1.09 acres of common open space and a total of 36,750 s.f. (or 0.84 of an acre) is totaling 1.93 acres of qualified open space is required. The open space exhibit submitted with the application exceeds the minimum code requirement however, the applicant should remove the linear open space along the east and south boundary from the calculations as this area doesn’t meet the minimum 20-foot dimensional standard noted below. The applicant may incorporate a 5- foot walking path in these areas in order to allow these areas to count. Proposed amenities include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool, an outdoor lounge area, dog park, internal walking trails, community garden and passive open space areas. Vehicle charging stations are proposed as recommended by staff. Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential and commercial structures. The residential units are proposed to be 1- or 2-stories in height, and the clubhouse and commercial buildings are also proposed to be a single-story in height; building materials consist of stucco in various colors, culture stone accents in various colors, horizontal lap siding, and asphalt shingle roofing. Both the residential and commercial uses complement each other as desired in the MU-C designated area. Staff is supportive of the design for the development as proposed. Compliance with the ASM is required. Written Testimony: 48 pieces of public testimony has been submitted for the subject application. Major concerns – traffic, density, and extension of the adjacent stub streets. The Commission should be aware that the applicant was aware of neighborhood concerns st with traffic, use and the extension of the stub streets and held another meeting on March 21 to try to mitigate the concerns raised by the surrounding residents. Applicant comments: VIII.A.1.C - The final plat shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for any structures within this development. We request that condition of approval VIII.A.1.C be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following which is consistent with our arrangements at our previous projects in Meridian, Modern Craftsman Black Cat and Modern Craftsman at Mile High Pines: Prior to Vertical permit acceptance/receipt; Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer may be installed/inspected in part or in whole (but not required as activated or fully approved as not necessary for site safety), and water systems activated and approved as related to hydrant locations, road base installed and approved for use and capacity of 80,000 lb. vehicle, prior to payment or receipt of vertical building permits. Vertical building permit plan sets may be submitted and reviewed/approved prior to horizontal acceptance of above listed requirements. However, approved plan sets may not be paid for or collected until horizontal acceptance. This stipulation does not pertain to garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles, or site roads to be constructed. Garage buildings or vertical structures located within the driveways, drive isles or site roads are allowed to proceed with plan submittals, reviews and approvals along with permit payment and receipt, and can be constructed concurrent with completion of horizontal requirements for the site, and be permitted prior to horizontal acceptance to minimize access impact in regard to the emergency access of the site. VIII.A.9 - Comply with the private street standards in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private streets shall be in a common lot. If the private street is proposed to intersect Eagle Rd. apply for alternative compliance 15 days prior to the City Council hearing. Per UDC 11-3F-4, private streets are permitted to be constructed on a perpetual ingress/egress easement OR a single platted lot that provides access to all properties served by such private street. We are concerned that due to the nature of these projects, and the civil complexities, that we may have issues with spacing, easements, etc. per our experience with Bailey Engineering on our prior two projects of similar product and character in Meridian, Modern Craftsman Black Cat and Modern Craftsman at Mile High Pines. Additionally, the proposed connection to Eagle Road is a common driveway, not a public street, so we will not be applying for alternative compliance. As such, we request that the general condition VIII.A.9 be amended to read: Comply with the private street standards in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private streets shall be in a common lot. If the private street is proposed to intersect Eagle Rd. apply for alternative compliance 15 days prior to the City Council hearing. VIII B.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. We request that condition of approval VIII.B.2.9 be revised to read as follows which is consistent with our arrangements at our previous projects in Meridian, Modern Craftsman Black Cat and Modern Craftsman at Mile High Pines: Prior to Vertical permit acceptance/receipt; Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer may be installed/inspected in part or in whole (but not required as activated or fully approved as not necessary for site safety), and water systems activated and approved as related to hydrant locations, road base installed and approved for use and capacity of 80,000 lb. vehicle, prior to payment or receipt of vertical building permits. Vertical building permit plan sets may be submitted and reviewed/approved prior to horizontal acceptance of above listed requirements. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 6, 2023 Item #6: Crowley Park Subdivision AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP 0006-2023-HAnnexation, Preliminary Plat, Alternative Compliance – Annexation ExhibitPreliminary Plat Landscape Plan Conceptual Building Elevations Existing House Item #7: Modern Craftsman Franklin AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAPexisting Development Agreement is also requested but only requires action from City Council)(A modification to the 15 district. -family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11.47 acres of land in the R-multi15 district; and Conditional Use Permit for a -containing one (1) building lot and one (1) other lot on 11.47 acres in the R-Annexation of 10.29 acres of land with an R– Existing Concept Plan in Development Agreement Proposed Annexation Area Preliminary PlatLandscape PlanSite Plan Open Space ExhibitFencing Plan Conceptual Building Elevations Item #8: Artisan Victory Market AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP0066) -2022-Annexation, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit and Private Street (H– Proposed Annexation Area Preliminary Plat Site Plan Open Space Exhibit 6’ Wrought Iron–Green Vison4’ Solid Vinyl w/ 2’ Open –Blue 6’ Solid Vinyl–Red Fencing Plan Amenity Plan Conceptual Building Elevations W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) by Riley Planning Services, located at 4135 W. Cherry Ln. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/H-2023-0006 A. Request: Annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 residential building lots (including one existing home to remain).C. Request: Alternative Compliance. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: April 6, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 6 PROJECT NAME: Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) 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 ST6� Lky" 0",q /-5- 3 e x) -bter, C( L 2 3 4 n� I(A C-- 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT C�W IDIAN�-- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I D A H O HEARING April 6,2023 Legend DATE: Project Location 0 TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ��o E SUBJECT: Crowley Park Subdivision lin " 0 H-2023-0006 fflp=T� TTTn � f LOCATION: 4135 W. Cherry Lane in the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10, Township 3N,Range 1 W(Parcel #S1210212465) mom I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district,Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 residential building lots(including one existing home to remain) and one(1)common lot,and three(3)Alternative Compliance requests for Crowley Park Subdivision. Alternative compliance is requested to UDC 11-6C-3.D,which requires that no more than three(3)dwelling units be located on one (1)side of the common driveway; UDC 11-313-7 (Landscape Buffers along streets),which requires a 25-foot landscape buffer along W. Cherry Lane (a principal arterial);and UDC Table 11-3C-6,which requires two(2)parking spaces in an enclosed garage,other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10-foot by 20-foot parking pad. Pagel IL SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 1.002 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential(MDR) Existing Land Use Single-family residential(SFR)/ag Proposed Land Use(s Single-Family attached residential Current Zoning Single-Family residential zone(Rl)in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8(Medium Density Residential) Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 5 building(including 1 existing lot)/lcommon Phasing plan(#of phases) 1 Number of Residential Units(type 4 single-family attached units and 1 existing home of units) Density(gross&net) 4.99 units/acre(gross) Open Space(acres,total [%]/ 0%,not required for developments under 5 acres buffer/qualified) Amenities None Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 11/16/2022 History(previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description I Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report Yes (yes/no) • Requires No ACHD Commission Action es/no • Existing 1. Right-of-Way—Cherry Lane Conditions a. Existing Conditions: Cherry Lane is improved with 5-travel lanes, on-street bike lanes,vertical curb,gutter,and 7-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site.There is 90-feet of right-of-way for Cherry Lane(45-feet from centerline). Page 2 • CIP/IFYWP C.Traffic Information Trip Generation This development is estimated to generate 29 additional vehicle trips per day(10 existing); and 2 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour(1 existing),based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual,I ll'edition. Condition of Area Roadways:Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH) Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service Cherry Lane 126-feet I Principal Arterial 704 Better Than"E" *Acceptable level of service for a five-lane principal arterial is"E"(1,780 VPH). Average Daily Traffic Count(VDT): Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD's most current traffic counts. • The average daily traffic count for Cherry Lane west of Ten Mile Road was 14,642 on March 20,2019. Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Cherry Lane is classified as a principal arterial roadway. Other than the Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) access specifically approved with this application off of W.Cherry Lane, direct lot access is prohibited to this roadway and should be noted on the final plat. Proposed Road Improvements None Fire Service No comments received Police Service No comments received. West Ada School District No comments received. Distance(elem,ins,hs) Capacity of Schools #of Students Enrolled Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed North Black Cat • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works' Site-Specific Conditions in Section B. Water • Distance to Services Water available at site. • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works' Site-Specific Conditions in Section B. Page 3 � + k � :: i���"fit��`�® '�r♦r �::�� - - ., ,'��� , 1111■ i���'1111111i���� _ � �\ r INININININ UNESCO ■■ ■■ .�■ pA ma mu , i • 1 • ,,ice ■■■■s ice■. !naP-� . . ■■■■s 1111■ ■��■ 1l11■ . i����®■ i�► �� 1111■ ■��■ ��111 NOW NAFF ■■■ - -�mo iioma rrm ��������► ■■■ - it `'�1�;,���r► �►�r�>r��i i IBM MEMO i . of C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/22/2023 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 3/16/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 3/27/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 3/16/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS LAND USE: This property is designated as Medium Density Residential(MDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan. This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The subject 1.002-acre property currently contains an existing home and is an enclave surrounded by existing single-family residential homes. The subject site abuts an R-8 development to the west and south, Cherrywood Village Subdivision;to the east is an R-4 development,Rods Parkside Creek Subdivision; and to the north are two R-4 developments, Golf View Estates Subdivision and Cherry Lane Village Subdivision. The subject property is designated as Medium Density Residential on the future land use map consistent with the approved development to the west. The Applicant proposes a 5-lot subdivision for single-family residential attached homes and one existing single-family detached home at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre,which is within the desired density range of the MDR designation. 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): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed single-family attached and one existing single-family detached dwellings with a mix of lot sizes will contribute to the variety of housing options in this area and within the City as desired. Existing single-family attached and detached dwellings are in the Medium-Density Residential development to the west and south and existing Medium Low-Density Residential developments consisting of detached dwellings are located within the surrounding area. • "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. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City." (2.01.01G) Page 5 This area consists primarily of single family detached homes with some single-family attached homes located to the west; only single-family attached homes and one existing single-family detached home are proposed within this development. The proposed development offers lot sizes ranging from 4,011 to 5,768 square feet(sf.)with the existing home on a 9,744 sf. lot. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The proposed medium-density residential single-family detached homes contribute to the variety of residential categories within the surrounding area as desired. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed site design provides maximum use of the land with the proposed residential dwelling types and should be compatible with the existing developments on adjacent properties that are also designated for MDR uses. • "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting,existing development. Infill projects in downtown should develop at higher densities,irrespective of existing development." (2.02.02C) The proposed development will not likely impact the existing abutting developments to the east, west, and south. • "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 with development of the subdivision;services are required to be provided to and through this development in accord with current City plans. • "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D) A 5-foot-wide existing pedestrian sidewalk connection is located along W. Cherry Lane. The existing sidewalk provides a link between all subdivisions east and west of this site. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter, and sidewalks are required to be provided with development of the subdivision. • "Eliminate existing private treatment and septic systems on properties annexed into the City and instead connect users to the City wastewater system; discourage the prolonged use of private treatment septic systems for enclave properties." If annexed, the existing home will be required to abandon the existing septic system and connect to the City wastewater system. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) Development of the subject infill parcel will maximize public services. Based on the analysis above, staff finds the proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive Page 6 Plan. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION(AZ) The Applicant proposes to annex 1.002 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.A. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. A preliminary plat and conceptual building elevations were submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided and developed with 4 single-family residential attached dwelling units, I existing single-family detached dwelling unit, and 1 common lot at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre (see Sections VIII.B, E). The proposed use and density of the development is consistent with the MDR FLUM designation. Single-family detached and attached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. There is an existing home on approximately a quarter of an acre adjacent to W. Cherry Lane. The property owner intends to annex and connect to City utilities with this development. The property is contiguous to City annexed land to the north and is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. A legal description and exhibit map of the overall annexation area for the R-8 zoning districts are included in Section VIII.A. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. If this property is annexed, Staff recommends a DA is required with the provisions discussed herein and included in Section IX.A. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 5 building lots and 1 common lot on 1.002 acre property in the proposed R-8 zoning district. Proposed lots range in size from 4,011 to 9,744 square feet(s.f.)(or 0.09 to 0.22 acres). The proposed gross density of the subdivision is 4.99 units per acre. The subdivision is proposed to develop in one phase as shown in Section VIII.B. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: An existing home on the property is proposed to remain on Lot 1,Block 1. The outbuildings located on Lots 2, 3,and 4,Block 1 should be removed with development of this property. Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat, all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the district are required to be removed. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I1-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. The proposed plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district, except for the front porch on the existing home which encroachsmore than two feet into the required setback(see alternative compliance analysis under landscape buffers below). Per UDC 11-2A-3B.3, lots taking access from a common drive do not require street frontage. Access: Access is proposed from W. Cherry Lane from a common driveway on Lot 2,Block 1. Direct lot access from W. Cherry Lane for Lot 1,Block 1 is prohibited. The interior Lots 3,4, 5, and 6 Block 1 are proposed to take access via a common drive to W. Cherry Lane,meeting the street access requirements of UDC 11-3A-3A. Common Driveways (UDC 11-6C-3D): Common driveways shall serve a maximum of four(4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three (3) dwelling units be located on one(1) side of the Page 7 driveway. The Applicant is proposing five(5) dwelling units take access off the common driveway,all five(5) dwelling units are also located on one(1) side of the driveway. Per UDC 11-6C-3D.9, the Director may approve or recommend approval of alternative design or construction standards when the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed overall design meets or exceeds the intent of the required standards of this section and shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. Alternative Compliance(ALT)to the common driveway standards is requested due to the lot only having access from an arterial roadway; there is no local street connection available to this site. Staff recommended this site layout to allow for more usable backyards for the southernmost lots, as the south boundary is encumbered by an irrigation easement. Based on the analysis,the Director is supportive of the request for ALT for the proposed five (5) dwelling units taking access off the west side of the common driveway. Parking(UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Staff will confirm compliance with these standards at the time of building permit submittal for each residence. The Applicant has provided an additional three(3)parking stalls at the end of the common drive on the southeast side of the site for overflow parking. The existing home does not meet the required number of off-street parking spaces per UDC Table 11-3C-6 for a three(3)bedroom home; four(4)parking spaces are required, at least 2 in an enclosed garage,other spaces may be enclosed or a minimum 10-foot by 20- foot parking pad. The existing home does not have an enclosed two-car garage;however,the required number of parking spaces is provided via an existing carport and driveway. The Applicant is not proposing to construct a 2-car garage as required and requests alternative compliance to this standard. Per UDC 11-3C-7, the Director may approve, or recommend approval of, an alternative off-street parking and loading plan, through the alternative compliance process specified in section 11-5B-5 of this title when the overall design, as proposed by the applicant, meets or exceeds the intent and the requirements of this article. Alternative Compliance (ALT)to the off-street parking standards is requested because converting the existing carport to a garage would substantially impact the residence's structural integrity. The carport shares a roofline with the existing home and is currently accessed from the west; access to the carport will change to the south upon approval and completion of the subdivision site improvements. To obscure the carport the Applicant has installed lattice on the north face of the carport and will add additional lattice to the west side once the entry point to the carport is shifted to the south and the common drive is constructed. The Applicant is also proposing to add a fence to provide additional screening of the carport from W. Cherry Lane. Staff recommends that the Applicant pave the driveway on Lot 1,Block 1 to comply with the 10- foot by 20-foot parking pad in accord with UDC 11-3C-4. The existing home is recognized as non-conforming due to the off-street parking requirements in UDC 11-3C-6. Per UDC 11-IB-4, no existing structure containing a nonconforming use may be enlarged, extended, constructed, reconstructed, moved, or structurally altered except through the approval of a conditional use permit. As a result of the non-conformity,the Applicant is required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit if the ALT is not granted for any future expansions on the property. Based on the analysis,the Director is supportive of the request for ALT for the existing carport with the addition of the lattice. Page 8 � I - MAM M.r 7 Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A twenty-five foot landscape buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane in accord with UDC 11-313-7. The landscape plan submitted depicts a 20-foot landscape buffer along W. Cherry Lane that includes four(4) existing trees. Per UDC 11-3B-7C.1(c), in a development where the required street buffer width results in an otherwise unavoidable hardship to the property, a written request for a buffer reduction may be submitted through the alternative compliance process. The request shall demonstrate evidence of the unique hardship caused by the required street buffer and propose a specific alternative landscape plan that meets or exceeds the intent of the required buffer. In no case shall the width be reduced to less than ten (10)percent of the depth of the lot. A reduction to the buffer width shall not affect building setbacks; all structures shall be set back from the property line a minimum of the buffer width required in the applicable zoning district. Alternative Compliance (ALT)to the landscape buffer width is requested due to the front porch on the existing home encroaching more than two feet into the required Landscape buffer; however, Staff recommends that the Applicant modify the plans to include the required 25-foot landscape buffer around the front porch. The landscape plan submitted does not depict an alternative means of mitigating the encroachment of the porch into the required landscape buffer. Staff recommends the Applicant add additional landscaping for mitigation as well as meet the requirements for the buffer landscaping materials. Per UDC 11-3B-7C.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 (see figures below). Page 9 Based on the analysis,the Director is supportive of the request for ALT with Staffs recommendation to modify the plans to include the required 25-foot landscape buffer meandering around the front porch and adding additional landscaping for mitigation to meet the requirements for the buffer landscaping materials in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.3. The landscape plan should be revised with the final plat application. Sidewalks(11-3A-17): Cherry Lane is improved with an existing 7-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site in accord with UDC standards. Staff is not recommending that this sidewalk be replaced with and 5-foot deatched sidewalk. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The existing home proposed to remain on Lot 1,Block 1 is required to connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, I1-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. According to the submitted project description,the Applicant is proposing fencing in front of the carport for screening provided there is not a conflict with the proposed layout of the fire hydrant service line. A detail of the fencing should be provided with the final plat. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18):An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. Building Elevations: Two(2) conceptual building elevations were submitted that demonstrate what future homes in this development will look like(see Section VIII.D). Variations of two-story homes with a two-car garage are proposed. The submitted elevations depict a number of different architectural and design styles with field materials of lap siding,differing color accents,roof profiles, and stone. The final design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement,and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. Page 10 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map tQ DAVID EVANS ,o.:)ASSOCIATES Nc: ANNEXATION BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION The following Describes a Parcel of Land lying in a portion of the NW 114 of Section 10, Township 3 N4orlh„Range 1 West.,Boise Meridian.City of Meridian,Ada County Idaho being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northwest Corner of said Section 15 which is being Moriumented with a found 5f8'Iron pin with'No Cap'.From which,the North 1A Corner of said Section 10 which is being Monumented with a found Brass Cap bears, South 8911631"East,2645.04 feet Thence along the Northerly Boundary Line of the NW 114 of said Section 10.South 89'15'31'Easl,2195.88 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Thence continuing,South 89'1514'East, 124.22 feet Thence leaving said Northerly Boundary Line,South 4d'04'22"East,386.74 fast to a found 518'Iron Pin"PLS 4116"; Thence.North 88123'57'West.13+0.98 feet in a found SW Iran Pin"PLS 4116% Thence,North t]t'1`55`39'East,384.74 feet ivthe POINT OF BEGINNING: The abmm Described Parcel of Land contai ns 1.13 Acres(49,213 Sq.Ft.),more or MSG. y1�7lil8�0 'LI2.1f�3 8251 _ 11.� Page 11 ANNF-YATION 2 HIBIT A PORTION OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 10,TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, 6015E MERIDIAN,CITY OF MERMAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2023 RMIS OF SEARING: SE WI S31'F Z$4'AX 3 A W.Cher Lane _ _ 889'15'31 ?2�.22' 4 9 fl'No 2T95,9$ — x L a= 324.9� N 114 G�tner �a 'PLS 5291' t+ z I 1 I I � d — o k . 'I I�d 01 — a O A � bA on (D 7 � a LS NSB'21'¢7'yy 130.98' pL$ 411fi' � Q,VaL L4 Block 1 ('Vqs$. q 4 Cherrywoo Yfflaga SuhdivWon 8251 DAVID E ANS oF A ID AND AS5O IATE'S o- 9179 W. BLACK EAGLE IDR. Boise Idaho Phone: 209M04)049 Page 12 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 1/5/23) -— PFSA LVllNARY PLAT FOR CROWLEY PARK SUBDIVISION � j;Z �... _- - -'L°-' -'—`- f "" T A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NE 1,14 OF I'VE NAY I/4 UP'SB'L'71VhV IU, 1'3N, - UITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO a ` ` -yid, 2023 N GCSHLOPEIB\"f PCA7LRH9: TEA IN E __ — �• ��gay I�011'l1 [Romxv '3 t` BU-ING si NTAH�S p ti :.PP1 , z Page 13 C. Landscape Plan(dated: 1/23/23)—NOT APPROVED(NEEDS TO BE REVISED) IalloscerE NorEa �z r.,,�.r„.a.�. — e.......e....r....,.w.r..a......er _a....,.,x.,....-,.�.v�o.A.,.,..-..a...,4.. - ____ ..e, -- r� --. 9 L&WRL-EE Kt NG' !IRU6PL NTM �zl , ........,"wrwn w...... 0 1 71 �.......o.,r ._ o, ...... i i of ' — xwrr w.e.r.� . w,..,�..r...,�-e...oi..� - �•IAN0.5CAPE a Page 14 D. Conceptual Building Elevations pw - ...1 T,,, Page 15 F 6 � -n - 11111 I y . � � . 3 ;`✓l��y.sf �¢ - fir �� ;p r� �; ,� ,>i�, - r t '4 r r � �# • i� � 7.•1'yr "� f� t ¢. � �.-.g •'wr+.: �. - � Y u ,rr -� . y,�y,:- ���. _ "'may`.;• _.,; '� _ - ,.�_ IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance,a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,incorporate the following provisions IF City Council determines annexation is in the best interest of the City: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan,and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. b. The existing home on Lot 1,Block 1 shall be required to connect to City water and sewer service within 60 days of it becoming available and disconnect from private service, as set forth in MCC 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Revise the plat to include a 25-foot easement meandering around the front porch of the existing home for the proposed common lot adjacent to W. Cherry Lane. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Revise the landscape plan to include a 25-foot easement meandering around the front porch of the existing home for the proposed common lot adjacent to W. Cherry Lane. b. Revise the landscape plan to depict a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover in the landscape buffer along W. Cherry Lane per UDC 11-3B-7C.3. c. Depict a fencing detail for all new fencing proposed for the subject site. d. Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement per UDC 11-3B-10C.5. 4. The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district. 5. Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat,all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the R-8 zoning district shall be removed. 6. The Director has approved the three (3)Alternative Compliance Requests to the common driveway requirements(UDC 11-6C-3D), off-street parking requirements(UDC 11-3C-6), and landscape street buffer requirements(UDC 11-3B-7). 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table I I- 3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit, except for the existing residence on Lot 1,Block 1. 8. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 9. Direct lot access from W. Cherry Lane is prohibited. Page 19 10. A Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed single-family attached homes prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and the Development Agreement. 11. The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-313-5,UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-313-14. 12. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or 20 obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-613-7. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches 1.2 Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.)are built within water/sewer easements. 1.3 Sewer must be at least 10'from edge of easement. 1.4 The well located on the site must be abandoned per regulatory requirements and proof of abandonment must be provided to the City unless the well will be used for irrigation. If used for irrigation all connections to potable water must be disconnected. 1.5 Instead of having multiple connections to Cherry In(Three are shown)bring a single 8" stub into the property and have all connections(meters and hydrants) come from this one connection. 1.6 Connections of meters and hydrant to the stub coming into the property should be made on the property and not in the ROW. 1.7 Main stubs,water services up to the meter, and fire hydrants all require a 20'easement up to and 10'beyond the main/meter/hydrant. Lines should be centered in the easement. 1.8 Some of the services are very long. The design engineer to verify that house will have adequate pressure during peak water usage. Possible evaluate upsizing the service line from the meter to the house to reduce pressure lose. 1.9 The fire hydrant lateral requires a 20'easement with the line centered in the easement.No trees, fences or any other permanent structures are allowed in the easement. 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 Page 20 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(MCC 9-1-28.C). 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. 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. Page 21 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 No comments at this time. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=290739&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCitX Page 22 G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES(ACDS) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=290606&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) No comments were received from WASD. I. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancio!.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=291408&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCity&cr =1 J. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) hitps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=291274&dbid=O&repo=MeridianCity K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=290556&dbid=O&repo=Meridig City X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: 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 an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the Applicant's request to annex the subject property with R-8 zoning and develop single- family attached dwellings on the site at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre is consistent with the density desired in the MDR designation for this property; the preliminary plat and site design is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if all conditions of approval are met. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to R-8 and development generally complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent single-family residential homes/uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds City services are available to be provided to this development. Comments were not received from WASD on this application so Staff is unable to determine impacts to the school district. Page 23 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the city if revisions are made to the development plan as recommended. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision- making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) Staff finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Staff finds there are no roadways, bridges or intersections in the general vicinity that are in the IFYWP or the CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. C. Alternative Compliance findings(Landscape buffers along streets UDC 11-3B-7): The Director has approved your request for alternative compliance to Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-313-7 for the subject property,based on the required Findings listed in UDC 11-513-5E, as follows: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds that it is not feasible to meet the UDC requirement for common driveways for for the proposed five (5) dwelling units all taking access off the west side of the common driveway. The Director is not feasible to meet the UDC requirement for off-street parking due to the existing carport attached to the home. The Director finds it is not feasible to meet the UDC requirement for a portion of the location of the required street buffer due to the front porch of the existing home encroaching into the street buffer. 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Page 24 Per the analysis above in section VI.B, the Director finds the proposed alternatives will be equal to the code requirement due to the following: the long rectangular shape of the property doesn't have access to any other street except for Cherry Lane, designated an arterial, which necessitates the need to develop the property with a common driveway to limit access to the Cherry Lane in accord with UDC 11-3A-3; the carport shares a roofline with the existing home,four (4)parking spaces are being provided, and the Applicat has installed lattice for screening and plans to install a fence to provide additional screening of the carport from W. Cherry Lane; and the actual buffer width will be 25 feet except for where the front porch to the exisiting home encroaches into the buffer. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. The Director finds that the alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended use and/or character of surrounding residential properties if the proposed conditions of approval are maintained. Page 25 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Modern Craftsman Franklin (H-2022-0079) by Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 4540, 4490 &4420 W. Franklin Rd., approximately 1/4 mile east of the northeast corner of W. Franklin Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/H-2022-0079 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst.#2020-117678) to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed multi-family development.B. Request: Annexation of 10.29 acres of land with an R-15 (medium high density residential) zoning district.C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of one (1) building lot and (1) one other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: April 6, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 7 PROJECT NAME: Modern Craftsman Franklin (H-2022-0079) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name c� 1911 L ��� E 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1,H p HEARING April 6,2023 Legend WE �M N DATE: ff , 0 I�Pro:ec- Loco-o� TO: Planning&Zoning Commission r FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner - 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Modern Craftsman Franklin AZ, CUP, MDA,PP,PS H-2022-0079 ' (aka Colorado Ridge) LOCATION: 4540, 4490, &4420 W. Franklin Road, approximately 1/4 mile east of the northeast corner of W. Franklin Road and N. Black Cat Road, in the SW 1/4 of Section 10,Township 3N,Range 1 W. (Parcel#S1210336521; #S1210336450; #S1210336405) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Modification to the existing Development Agreement(MDA) (Inst. #2020-117678)to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Road from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed multi-family development;Annexation(AZ)of 10.29-acres of land with an R-15 (medium high-density residential) zoning district;Preliminary Plat(PP) consisting of one(1)building lot and one(1)other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; Conditional Use Permit(CUP)for a multi-family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district; and internal private streets (PS)for Modern Craftsman Franklin Subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 11.47 acres Future Land Use Designation Medium-High Density Residential(MHDR)in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP) Existing Land Use Single-family rural residential(SFR) Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-family residential development(MFR) Current Zoning Rural Urban Transition(RUT)in Ada County&R-15 in the City Proposed Zoning R-15 Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 1 building/1 common lot Phasing plan(#of phases) 1 phase Page 1 Number of Residential Units(type 122 multi-family units(single-family detached&attached/duplex and of units) townhome style units) Density(gross&net) 10.64 units/acre(gross) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ Revisions are needed to the common open space exhibit buffer/qualified) Amenities Clubhouse,dog park,community garden; swimming pool,internal walking trails,children's play structure and charging stations for electric vehicles. Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 9/28/2022 History(previous approvals) A-2020-0164(ROS#12525 -Parcel B);H-2020-0042(Compass Charter School East Expansion Ord.20-1895;DA Inst.#2020-117678) B. Community Metric Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no Traffic Impact Stud es/no Yes Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One access is proposed via W.Aviator St.,a collector street,at the northern Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) boundary;and one access is proposed via N.Moshova Ave.,a local street,from W.Franklin Rd. at the southwest corner of the site. Traffic Level of Service Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service Franklin Road 618-feet Principal Arterial 793 Better than"D" . Aviator Street 67-feet Collector 433 "E" 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). Stub Street/Interconnectivity/ W.Aviator St. stubs to the property's west boundary at the north end of the site. Cross Access Existing Road Network W.Franklin Rd.,an arterial street,runs along the southern boundary of the site; W.Aviator St.,a collector street,stubs to the southwest corner of the site. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/Buffers A detached sidewalk exists along Franklin Rd.on the western portion of the site that transitions to an attached sidewalk on the eastern portion of the site.No street buffers exist on this site. Proposed Road Improvements Page 2 Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)I Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): There are no roadways,bridges or intersections in the general vicinity of the project that are in the Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP). • Franklin Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from McDermott Road to Black Cat Road with the design year in 2026 and the construction date has not been determined. • Black Cat Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Franklin Road to Cherry Lane between 2031 and 2035. • Black Cat Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Overland Road to Franklin Road between 2036 and 2040. Traffic Impact Stud es/no Yes Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 2.6 miles from Station#2 • Fire Response Time Falls outside of the 5-minute response time goal • Resource Reliability 85%(above the targeted goal of 80%) • Accessibility This project meets all required access,road widths,and turnarounds as presented in the preliminary plat. • Additional See Fire comments in the link provided below under Section IX.I. Comments/Concerns Police Service • Distance to Fire Station 4 miles from Meridian Police Department • Fire Response Time Expected response time is 4:17 minutes;Average emergency response time is 3:46 minutes for City of Meridian • Accessibility If Applicable,any climate-controlled multi-family developments,the Meridian Police Department required police access into each building's entry point using a multi-technology keypad per UDC 11-4-3-27G. See Meridian Police Department Staff Report in the link provided below under Section IX.D. West Ada School District Distance(elem,ms,hs) Approved MF units Pro ected Approved lots per per attendance Students from Capacity of Schools Enrollment Capacity attendance area area Approved Dev. #of Students Enrolled Chaparral Elementary 494 700 619 3650 275 Meridian Middle School 1064 1250 656 2947 147 Meridian high School 1718 2075 3S60 3613 607 School of Choice Options Chief Joseph Elementary—Arts 526 700 N/A N/A Barbara Morgan STEM Academy 417 500 N/A N/A #of students estimated for this 20 development Wastewater ' • Wastewater Modeling •Additional 1,350 gpd committed to model.WRRF decline balance is 14.5 MGD • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water • Distance to Services • Pressure Zone 1 • Estimated Project Water ERU's • Water Quality Concerns Each Phase will need to be modeled independently to verify adequate pressure. • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works' Site-Specific Conditions Page 3 C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map (fLegend ® (fLegend Project Laca-fior. — I Project Luca ion /Illel�t ICn_ 63 9 _ Lo Q Med-Hig. �i i ential Zoning Map p Planned Development Map (fLegend (Legend �F13 P!ojecf Lacaton k� - I Project Laca-fior. k� ' R1 — Planrsed Parceis R- S --- RUT RUT 1 � w R . -N AA1 -E 1 TN�R J - T1-R_ . hA1 M1 kSR- R R- - - -L RUT R-15 TN-C - III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Kindi Moosman,Horrocks Engineers, Inc. -2775 W.Navigator Dr., Ste. 210,Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owner: BPS Franklin Road,LLC- 1401 171" Street, Suite 700,Denver, CO 80202 Page 4 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/22/2023 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 500 feet 3/16/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 3/22/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 3/16/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS This property is designated Medium High-Density Residential(MHDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)and is located within the area governed by the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan(TMISAP). LANs USE: MHDR areas are locations recommended primarily for relatively dense multi-family housing types, such as row houses,townhouses, and condominium and apartment buildings and complexes. These areas should have a mix of housing types that achieve an overall average density target of 12 dwelling units per gross acre with densities ranging from 8-15 units per acre. MHDR areas typically are relatively compact areas within a larger neighborhood and generally should be located around and near more intensely developed areas, such as Mixed Use Commercial or Employment areas,in order to provide convenient access to these commercial activity and employment centers for the greatest number of residents. Apartment buildings are desired to be accessed via shared entrances and hallways. The proposed multi-family development incorporates a mix of single-family detached and attached/duplex and townhome style units containing a mix of 1-, 2-and 3-bedrooms at an overall gross density of 10.64 units per acre. Although single-family and townhome style units are proposed,the use is considered multi- family because all of the units are on one lot instead of individual lots. As such,they will all be rental units and not privately owned. The proposed density is consistent with the density desired in the MHDR designation.A charter school and landscape business exist to the west;residential uses with a mix of housing types including single-family detached and attached,townhomes and multi-family apartments, are entitled and planned to develop to the north(Aviator),northeast(Newkirk)and east(Alamar)of this site. Employment and commercial uses are planned to the southeast of this site across Franklin Rd.,which will provide jobs and services in close proximity to area residents. TRANSPORTATION: ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) depicts a new towncenter collector street(i.e. W. Aviator St.)across the northwest corner of this property extending from the west from N. Black Cat Rd. The Transportation System Map in the TMISAP lists the functional classification for this street as a collector street and the Street Section Map lists the design classification as a major collector street,which is intended to be constructed consistent with Street Section C, as follows: Page 5 19' 6' W 6' 11' IT I G lnvd Laric Nvel Lane 1 Dike Lane Lane Curbto-cab Islanre This street is planned to eventually provide a connection from W. Franklin Rd. '/Z mile west of N. Black Cat Rd.to Franklin Rd.via Umbria Hills Ave., 1/4 mile west of N. Ten Mile Rd. A local public street(Moshava Ave.) is proposed for access to the development from the south via W. Franklin Rd., an arterial street. ACHD is requiring this access to be a private road/drive aisle constructed along the west boundary of the site to ensure the parcel to the west has access to the driveway. Private streets are proposed for internal access to the proposed dwelling units. Franklin Rd. is fully improved abutting the site; therefore,no additional right-of-way or street improvements are required. The Ten Mile interchange is located within about 1.5 miles to the southeast of the site. State Highway 16 is planned to extend from Chinden Blvd. to I-84 approximately 1.5 miles west of this site,just west of McDermott Rd.; no interchange is planned at Franklin Rd. DESIGN: All residential neighborhoods in the Ten Mile Interchange area should be developed in consideration of Traditional Neighborhood Design(TND)principals and concepts and the standards established by the City for the R-15 zoning district. Future development should be consistent with the design elements in the TMISAP for the Residential MHDR FLUM designation as determined by the Application of the Design Elements table(see pg. 3-49), as follows: (Staffs analysis of consistency with these elements is in italics.) 0 3-33. Street-oriented Design: Useable porches should be a dominant element of residential buildings and should be located along at least 30%of the front fagade of the buildings—a higher percentage is recommended as is the location of porches on one or more side facades. When possible, garages should be loaded from a rear alleyway. Where garages must be accessed from the front,the garages must be located no less than 20' behind the primary fagade. Front-loaded 2-car garages that are visible from the primary street must be designed with two(2) separate garage doors. Largely, this plan (65%) does not incorporate street-oriented design;there is no on-street parking along the collector street and no porches are proposed except for the townhome style units, which have porches and balconies and are accessed from the rear via a private street along the periphery of the site. The 2-car garages have single-doors but are located at the rear of the structures away from public view and the primary street,no front-loaded garages are proposed. • 3-34.Buildings to Scale: Everything seen and experienced from the sidewalk—building fronts, lighting,open space—should be designed for human interaction at a pedestrian's perspective. Key elements to consider are the continuity of the building sizes,how the street-level and upper-level architectural detailing is treated, elements that anchor and emphasize pedestrian scale,roof forms, rhythm of windows and doors, and general relationship of buildings to public spaces such as streets, plazas and other open space. Human-scale design is critical to the success of built places for pedestrians. Building entrances should be placed close to the street; ground floor windows, articulated facades, appropriately scaled lighting, awnings and other weather protection should be provided. Page 6 Continuity of building sizes is proposed between the single-story single-family style structures and between the 2-story townhome style structures along the eastern boundary of the site. The street- level and upper-level architectural detailing of the townhome style units is very similar with windows of like size and orientation and balconies over porches. Stone veneer wainscoting is proposed along portions of the facades to anchor and emphasize pedestrian scale; landscaping along street facing foundations is also required for pedestrian scale. Weather protection is proposed over entrances. Roof forms are symmetrical in various pitches. 3-36.Neighborhood Design: All residential neighborhoods in the Ten Mile interchange area should be developed in consideration of traditional neighborhood design principles and concepts,which pertain to mixed housing stock, architecture and design, streetscapes and streets. Front porches and garages accessed from an alley are usually the standard in residential areas;parking for homes is primarily located behind buildings. Streetscape design relates to the street itself and consists of landscaped parkways with trees between curbs and sidewalks, adjacent sidewalks and front yard spaces and provides public space for street trees, street furniture and view corridors. Other aspects of neighborhood design that contribute to a traditional streetscape are connected network of streets, alleys and sidewalks. Roadways and pedestrian ways are interconnected so that access for pedestrians, cyclists and automobile drivers is direct and convenient and allows traffic to be dispersed through a variety of streets and ways.Narrower streets designed with TND characteristics result in slower moving traffic and provide a safer,more pleasant pedestrian environment and encourages interaction among residents. A variety of residential housing types is proposed for a mixed housing stock and diversity of housing choices within the same neighborhood. Hip and gable roofs and I-and 2-story structures are proposed for a variety in architecture and design. Porches and balconies are depicted on the concept elevations for the townhome style units. Parking is located off internal private streets. The townhome style units have garages at the rear of the structures accessed from a private street. Internal walkways and private streets provide connections for pedestrians and vehicles to adjacent public streets and developments. The narrow private streets and center planter islands with bulb- outs assist in slowing traffic for a safer neighborhood and pedestrian environment. 3-37.Building Form& Character: Building Facades—Buildings should be designed so that their primary facades relate to active public spaces and pedestrian areas. The primary fagade of a structure is that frontage of the building that has been designed and detailed so as to represent the building's most important elevations. The primary fagade should always include an entry into the building. Entries should be located so as to provide direct access from adjacent public spaces,primary streets and activity areas. Access from walkways should be uninterrupted by vehicular traffic. Buildings should be located so as to help frame adjacent public spaces and to provide an architectural backdrop for associated passive and active activities. The space between a building fagade and the adjacent walkway should be appropriately landscaped with a combination of lawns,groundcover, shrubs and trees. Building facades front on internal private streets and common open space areas. The overall design of the development is very auto oriented, not pedestrian oriented as desired.Although there are a lot of walkways, there is a lot of asphalt in the site design and pedestrian crossings in vehicular use areas (i.e.private streets). For pedestrian safety and to delineate walkways, Staff recommends crossings are distinguished from vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4. The townhomes are designed so that their primary facades face the private street and have direct pedestrian access from the sidewalk along the private street. Landscaping(lawn, groundcover, shrubs and trees)should be provided between building facades and adjacent walkways. Page 7 • Pitched Roofs: A mix of flat and pitched roofs are anticipated in the Ten Mile area based on a wide variety of individual buildings. Pitched roofs should be,where possible, symmetrical hips or gables, with a pitch between 4:12 and 12:12 with an overhang of at least 12 inches and a maximum of 2.5'. Roof brackets and rafter tail treatments are encouraged. A mix of symmetrical gable and hip style roofs are proposed. The conceptual elevations do not depict the pitch of the roofs or dimensions of the overhangs;all roof pitches should fall within the desired range. No roof brackets, rafter tail treatments or other similar architectural design elements are proposed but should be considered. Compliance with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual is required. • 3-47.Public Art: Public art should be incorporated into the design of streetscapes,public buildings, parks,transit, infrastructure, and other public projects in the Ten Mile area. Public art should be meaningful and encourage the free flow of ideas and cultural ideologies. Public art should be integrated into either the architectural design or the design of plazas and public spaces associated with a building and should be easily visible to the public(e.g.visible from the street or publicly accessible open spaces rather than interior courtyards). Public art is not proposed but should be provided in accord with this guideline in a prominent location that provides an identity for the development.Details should be submitted prior to the City Council hearing on what type ofpublic art is proposed and the location of such. The provision ofpublic art would also qualify as another amenity. 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): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed single-family detached and attached/duplex and townhouse style dwellings will contribute to the variety of housing types and rental options available within the City. • "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. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) This overall area contains a variety of housing types, including single-family attached and detached homes, townhomes and apartments for sale and rent, which contributes to the diversity in housing types and options available within the City. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) Proposed structures are oriented to front on adjacent collector and arterial streets (Aviator& Franklin) as desired.A minimum 5-foot wide landscape buffer should be provided around the perimeter of the development in areas adjacent to vehicular use areas. A 100 foot wide strip of land owned by NMID exists along the eastern boundary of the site where the Purdam Gulch Drain is located, which will provide a spatial separation and buffer between the proposed townhome style units and single-family detached and attached units approved to develop in Alamar Subdivision to Page 8 the east.A 20 foot wide landscape buffer exists along the shared property line on the school site to the west, which provides screening and buffering between land uses. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed residential use and site design should be generally compatible with adjacent residential uses, the school and landscaping business. • "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Infll projects in downtown should develop at higher densities,irrespective of existing development." (2.02.02C) The proposed infill development shouldn't negatively impact adjacent existing properties as similar uses and densities exist and/or are planned in this area. • `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 with development of the subdivision;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D) There are no multi-use pathways designated on the Pathways Master Plan for this site, nor are any pathways stubbed to this property other than the sidewalk along Aviator Street. There are no neighborhoods abutting this site. Internal pedestrian pathways provide access to the sidewalk along Aviator St. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided with development of the subdivision. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) Development of the subject infill parcel will maximize public services. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA): The Applicant proposes a modification to the existing Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #2020- 117678)to remove the property at 4540 W. Franklin Road from the agreement for the purpose of including it in the proposed multi-family development and associated DA. There is a conceptual development plan included in the DA that depicts a parking lot and a sports field for the adjacent charter school to the west that previously owned this property(see Section VIII.A). That plan is proposed to be replaced with the multi-family development plan proposed with the conditional use permit included in Section VIII.D. Since the time the DA was approved, a property boundary adjustment was approved(A-2020-0164,ROS#12525 -Parcel B)which broke this portion off into its own parcel. Page 9 With the concurrent annexation request for the adjacent parcels to the east, Staff recommends a new DA as a provision of annexation.As a provision of the new DA, Staff recommends the property located at 4540 W.Franklin Rd. no longer be subject to the terms of DA Inst.#2020- 117678(Compass Public Charter School East Expansion H-2020-0042) and be subject to the terms of the new DA. A legal description and exhibit map are included in Section VIII.H for the overall boundary of the property subject to the new DA,which includes the subject parcel at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. and the property proposed to be annexed. B. ANNEXATION(AZ): The Applicant requests annexation of two parcels of land(i.e. Parcels#51210336450& 51210336521) consisting of 10.29-acres with an R-15 (medium high-density residential)zoning district. The parcels are currently zoned RUT in Ada County. As discussed above in Section V,the proposal is generally consistent with the guidelines for development in the TMISAP except for certain design elements as noted. A preliminary plat, site plan and conceptual building elevations were submitted, included in Section VIII, showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided into one(1)building lot and one(1) common lot for the development of 122 multi-family residential units. The proposed residential use,mix of housing types and density of the development is consistent with the MHDR FLUM designation. The design partially incorporates traditional neighborhood design elements but not entirely as noted above in Section V. The proposed R-15 zoning and multi-family development with single-family detached&attached and townhome style units is compatible with adjacent future single-family detached and attached homes to the east in Alamar Subdivision, zoned TN-R; single-family attached homes and apartments to the northeast in Newkirk Subdivision,zoned R-15; and to future single-family attached homes approved in Aviator Subdivision to the north. This property is an enclave surrounded by City annexed land to the north,west and east. A legal description and exhibit map for the boundary of the property proposed to be annexed is included in Section VIII.B. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure future development is consistent with the guidelines for development in the TMISAP and with the development plan proposed,Staff recommends a DA is required with the provisions discussed herein and included in Section IX.A. C. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP): A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of one (1)building lot and one(1) other lot on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district(see Section VIII.Q. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are two(2)existing homes and several outbuildings on the property that are proposed to be removed with development. Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat,all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the district are required to be removed.A detached sidewalk exists along W. Franklin Rd. on the western portion of the site that transitions to an attached sidewalk on the eastern portion of the site. Page 10 Dimensional Standards: The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. Access: Access is proposed via the extension of W. Aviator St., a collector street,which is planned to cross the northwest corner of the site and extend to the northeast through Aviator and Newkirk Subdivisions. If Aviator St. hasn't been constructed with Aviator Subdivision,ACHD is requiring the on-site and an off-site portion to be constructed with this subdivision. The street shall be designed consistent with Street Section C (major collector street)in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan,unless an alternative street section is approved by ACHD (see pgs.3-20,3-22 and 3-23). Another access (N.Moshova Ave.)is proposed at the southwest corner of the site via W.Franklin Rd., an arterial street.ACHD is requiring this access to be a drive aisle or private street rather than a public street as proposed because there is no public benefit to a public street in this location.The access drive should be located along the west property line so that the adjacent property at 4610 W.Franklin Rd.has access to the driveway and a cross-access/ingress-egress easement should be required granting access to that property. The UDC (11-3F-4A.2)prohibits private streets from connecting to an arterial street unless otherwise approved through alternative compliance as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. Therefore,the access should be constructed as a drive aisle. Private streets are proposed for internal access within the development and are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Staff recommends the private streets are constructed on a lot within the subdivision rather than an easement as set forth in UDC 11-3F-4A.1; revise the plat accordingly.Where the private street connects to a public street(i.e.W.Aviator St.),the connection shall be approved by ACHD. The private streets should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B.2. A common/shared driveway exhibit was submitted for the access driveway to the townhome style units at the southeast corner of the site as shown in Section VIII.C.Because common driveways aren't allowed off of a private street and this driveway meets the standards for a private street,it should be constructed as a private street. No stub streets are proposed or recommended to adjacent properties as the property to the east where the Purdam Gulch Drain is located is owned by NMID and a crossing isn't needed in that area; and the northern portion of the property to the west is a school. The access proposed via Franklin Rd. will be located along the west property line so that the property to the west(currently a landscape business)has access via the drive aisle. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 25-foot wide street buffer with an 8-foot wide parkway and a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk is required to be provided along W. Franklin Rd., an arterial street,per UDC Table 11-2A-7,landscaped per the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. On the eastern portion of the site where the sidewalk is attached, Staff doesn't recommend it's removed and replaced with a detached sidewalk as it's fairly new. A 20-foot wide street buffer with an 8-foot wide parkway planted with Class II trees and a 6-foot wide detached sidewalk is required to be provided along W. Aviator St., a collector street,per UDC Table II- 2A-7 and Street Section C in the TMISAP, landscaped per the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 7C. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. Shrubs should be added to common open space areas and the calculations table on the landscape plan(Sheet L5) should be updated to demonstrate compliance with this standard. Page 11 There are several existing trees on this site that will be removed with development as depicted on the landscape plan. Mitigation is required to be provided per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5; calculations demonstrating compliance should be included on the landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and/or final plat application. Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Common Open Space(UDC 11-3G-3): Because this is a multi-family development,the open space standards in UDC 11-3G-3 do not apply; however,the open space standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C for multi-family development do apply(see analysis below in the CUP section). Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-4): Because this is a multi-family development,the site amenity standards in UDC 11-3G-4 do not apply;however,the site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D for multi- family development do apply(see analysis below in the CUP section). Sidewalks(11-3A-17): A detached sidewalk exists along the western portion of the site along W. Franklin Rd. that transitions to an attached sidewalk on the eastern portion of the site. The UDC(11-3A- 17)requires minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalks along collector and arterial streets. Because this is a fairly new sidewalk, Staff doesn't recommend it's removed and replaced with a detached sidewalk. Staff recommends a 6-foot wide sidewalk is constructed along the collector street at the northern boundary of the site in accord with Street Section C in the TMISAP.No sidewalk is required along internal private streets. Staff does recommend a sidewalk is constructed along the entry drive aisle via Franklin Rd.for pedestrian connectivity and safety. Fencing(11-3A-7): Fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A fencing plan was submitted, included in Section VIII.E,that depicts 6-foot tall solid vinyl privacy fencing along much of the perimeter of the site. A 6-foot tall black iron open vision fencing is proposed around the swimming pool. A 4-foot tall solid vinyl fence with a 2-foot open vertical slat top is proposed in certain locations as depicted on the plan. Lighting(UDC 11-2D-6F1: All lighting installed on the site should comply with the standards set forth in UDC I1-3A-11 and with the guidelines in the TMISAP. Waterways: The Purdam Gulch Drain lies along the east boundary of the site within a 100-foot wide easement on land owned by Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District.Where the drain shifts to the northwest at the northeast corner of the site,the easement encroaches on this site as depicted on the plat. A 6-foot tall closed vision vinyl fence is proposed within the easement area. Per NMID's comments in Section IX.F,no structures shall encroach within the easement area without a signed License Agreement and approved plan before construction. The UDC (11-3A-6C.3)requires an open vision fence at least 6-feet in height and having an 11- gauge,2-inch mesh or other construction,equivalent in ability to deter access if the drain isn't improved as a water amenity or linear open space.Therefore, Staff recommends the fencing type is changed to 6-foot tall black iron open vision fence along the east boundary of the site and across the northeast corner of the site at the easement line if an encroachment agreement isn't obtained from NMID for the proposed fence. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC I 1-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18):An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.Design and construction shall Page 12 follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. A geotechnical report was submitted with this subdivision. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT A conditional use permit is proposed for a multi-family development consisting of 122 dwelling units on 11.47 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district. A mix of housing types are proposed including(18)2- bedroom single-family detached style homes, (6) 3-bedroom single-family detached style homes, (56) 1- bedroom single-family attached/duplex style units, and(42)townhome style units with(28)2-bedroom units and(14) 3-bedroom units. All units will be for rent and are located on one lot rather than individual lots,which constitutes a multi-family development. A multi-family development is listed as conditional use in the R-15 zoning district per UDC Table 11- 2A-2 and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27:Multi-Family Development as follows: "B. 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. The proposed multi family structures appear to comply with the minimum setbacks required for the R-15 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 if the street buffer along the collector street(W. Aviator St) is placed in an easement rather than a common lot.Also, comply with building code requirements for separation between structures within the development. 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 screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts four(4) trash enclosures within the site that are screened and not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas shall comply with this requirement. The trash enclosure should accommodate recycling. 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. The open space exhibit, included in Section VIII.F, demonstrates compliance with this standard. The landscape plan depicts enclosed yards for the single-family style units. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site. 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 shall comply with this requirement. 6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. The proposed parking meets and exceeds UDC standards per the analysis below. Based on (56) 1-bedroom units, (46)2-bedroom units and(20) 3-bedroom units, a minimum of 248 off-street parking spaces are required, including(12)spaces for guest parking, with 122 of Page 13 those in a covered carport or garage. A total of 260 spaces are proposed with 165 of those being covered(i.e. 84 in-unit garages, 23 in separate garages and 58 covered carport spaces) and 95 surface spaces, which exceeds the minimum standard by 12 spaces.Accessible parking is required in accord with ADA standards. Based on 260 vehicle parking spaces, a minimum of 10 bicycle parking spaces are required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.A total of 30 bicycle spaces are proposed in accord with and exceeding this standard. 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. d. 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 narrative states these items have been incorporated into the design; the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict the location of these items in accord with this standard. C. 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 ten(10) percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of five(5)acres or more.Based on 11.47 acres of land in the development, a minimum of 1.15 acres of common open space that meets the qualifications listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C.2 is required. 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.None of the units are below 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.All 122 units are between 500 and 1,200 sf.; therefore, a total of 30,500 sf. (or 0.70-acre) of common open space is required that meets the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27C. 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 are over 1,200 sf of living area. Per the above standards, a minimum of 1.85 acres of common open space is required overall. The common open space exhibit included in Section VIII.F depicts a total of 2.1 acres of common open space,however, it includes areas that don't meet the qualifications as noted in UDC 11-4-3-27C(i.e. street buffers,planter islands in parking areas, and the linear open space area depicted along N. Hanging Lake Ln. and along the east boundary of the site don't meet the minimum area and dimension standard noted below).A revised plan should be submitted at least 15 days prior to the City Council hearing that demonstrates compliance with the minimum Page 14 open space standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C;or, an application for alternative compliance should be submitted as allowed by UDC 11-4-3-27C.3b. 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'). 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. This project is proposed to develop in one phase. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process,common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial street buffers 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, ef£retroactive to 2-4-2009)Some of the common open space is located adjacent to a collector street(Aviator St.) and an arterial(Franklin Rd.)street— The Applicant shall provide a berm or constructed barrier as noted unless otherwise approved through the CUP process. The Applicant should state what their intentions are at the Commission hearing(whether or not they're proposing a berm or barrier;or are requesting approval as-is through the CUP). D. Site Development Amenities: All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space, and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as noted in UDC 11-4-3-27D. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of the multi-family development based on the number of units. For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, such as this,four(4) amenities shall be provided with at least one(1) from each category. For multi-family developments with more than 100 units,the decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the size of the proposed development.Based on 122 units, Staff recommends a minimum of five (4) amenities are provided with at least one (])from each category. The following amenities are proposed from each of the following categories: 1)Quality of Life— clubhouse,dog park(a waste station is required); Open Space—community garden; Recreation— swimming pool, internal walking trails, children's play structure; and,Multi-Modal—charging stations for electric vehicle. The proposed amenities meet and exceed UDC standards. E. Landscaping Requirements: Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. Additionally, all street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict landscaping along the street facing elevations of all buildings along W. Franklin Rd. and W.Aviator St. in accord with these standards. Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Street buffer landscaping along W Aviator St., a collector street, and W. Franklin Rd., an arterial street, is required to be installed with the subdivision improvements. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide buffer around the perimeter of the development in areas adjacent to vehicular use areas with landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C.1. 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,a copy of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the development. Page 15 Pathways(UDC 11-3A-81: The Pathways Master Plan does not depict a multi-use pathway on this site. No pathways are proposed except for sidewalks required along streets within the development and internal pedestrian pathways. All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. For better pedestrian connectivity, Staff recommends the north/south pathways next to the linear open space at the west boundary of the site between Mount Elbert&Pyramid Lane are connected. Staff further recommends pedestrian crossings across private streets are distinguished through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures within the development as shown in Section VIII.G. Building materials appear to consist of a stucco-like material with wood look lap siding and stone accents with asphalt shingle roofs. Design Review: A design review application(s)is required to be submitted for all structures within the development. Final design of all structures should comply with the multi-family design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM) and the traditional neighborhood design guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP)for the MHDR FLUM designation(see the Application of Design Elements table on pg.3-49)—the proposed conceptual elevations are not approved. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted for the multi- family development; compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 is required. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Development Agreement Modification,Annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement,Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit per the provisions in Section IX, in accord with the Findings in Section X. The Director has approved the proposed private streets within the development per the provisions in Section IX, in accord with the Findings in Section X. Page 16 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Conceptual Development Plan Included in Development Agreement(Inst. #2020-117678 H-2020-0042) for Property Located at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. t n-L _r . �LT. � Z 1 17 - +. i m - §, III _ It �e 7 b b4vw. ! -I jjI •i, j •� I I I i l' it I I I � i II •i. ! i � ill it rl - ...—._.. r.:q mob, MPASS Bouma USA • 8 I Ire{ EAST PARCEL o �A � !e • - ..... . ... _... . ._. _. - crave. - .._.,...- s[ Page 17 B. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map Descriptlon for R-15 Zone CcAcfrado Ridge Subdivision October 79, 20.'—'g A portlon of the Southwest 1 f4 of the Southwest 114 of Section 10,Township 3• North, Rangy 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows; Cornrr ier jni at the Section cornigr common to Sections 9, 1 U. 15 and 1 S. T.3N,, R,t VV.. B.M. from which the 114 comer corn mon to said Sections 10 and 15, bears South 89,15'34" East, 2640.54 feet,thence on the south boundary line of said Section 10 South 89"1584`East, 909.44 feet to the REAL P01W OP BEGINNINGS rhence leaving said south boundary line, North-UU'UV1+4" East, Tudf.arj feet; thence South 89'15'50'East, 412.30 feet to the east boundary line of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 114 of said Section 10; thence on said east boundary line,South 00-W'35'West, 1087_89 feet to the West VIC corner common to s.aed Sections 10 and 15: thence on the South boundary line of said Section 10. North OT15`34"+Nest, 41 t,97 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING_ Containing 10.2-91 acres, more or less_ End of Description_ pL LAkD ENst 1. 1177 0 O OF X 'V M c f{ Page 1 of >t Page 18 589'35'S "E 412.30' i 0 50 100 204 404 W. Aviator 5t. Lu t10,281 Acres t'1 o o to I O I � I o 4 5.9 S.110 90$*t' W. Franklin Rd- 73 q.23' _ t' a S.tG ,i S_ N89 f '3a"w11.97' +_ -- S-t 5 Real Polnk WI 6 of Beginning Basis of Bearingv NL LA a 11779 m any 1 / CS ID H Annexation Exhibit lar Jab Nu. 2-0445 # —15 Zone s—"T7 SURVEYram` Colorado Ride Subdivision 1 GROUP, LLC PVt-lnr, of 4hc sWIf4 of kha SW114 of Sxtiwr, 10, Q.q, Data T.3N., R71k, B.N., Ala (�4unty. I[W". 10/19/202; Page 19 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 10/20/22) PREHMINARY PLAT FOR Mu. Ip TIF r-� T .7- M V. 7 z T I T I I I I IT I I I IL -41 j�jj 0 z fr Page 20 C. Common/Shared Access Drive Exhibit—NOT APPROVED AS A COMMON DRIVEWAY(TO BE APPROVED AS A PRIVATE STREET) IFURED ACCESS DRIVE FDIC COLORADO RIDGE A PORTION OF 2W 1/1 OF TEE EW 1/4 OF SEC710N 10 TO-ffNiHIF 3 NORTH, R3NGE 1 7PE!5r, 10nE MERIIDIAN MERIGL4N, ADA COUNTY, II}AHO 2022 I i W CHAIR LIFT LN - p RI ATE I li r I w IIl C-.; L Z + I fO l I I I C0 I ~ I { � II u I I j, T � P:f A%TE R I& EST, 25.0 I Q-) II I CD C1} r t� I I m r'I`• I I � II I t� I I 0 1 20 0 10 20 40 SCALE IN FEET 1'-20' �iley Engineering, In ■ PROJECT: C3422i�:b CiviL E4GIREERING I PLARNING I CARD LAUL Y:AIL Y: 5W fL 310 lLL ;!]4J 2-�GIJ AXSL.IG L.{J ®16 Page 21 D. Site Plan(dated: 10/20/2022) CONDITIONAL USE SETE PLAN FOR COLORADO RIDCB c� IfLTr id -- • — L- HEET E T ' ]� HEEf E I TI *,-c c, me-- - - E HEEf I E I I IT - E r.- r .r R. - -1T -n u E IEEI L- - - n c c -c u c - — -E T E TIE __ c'LZ =•''FI'' - " •Q � `f mac. E -EEHI IT _I" L• �� y .•L f �- l' „m-•- ice-!— �� _ 2 Li zl !+ f ,illll l lil_yi^ ■_ - _._ am' U;=® N O I i i i:11 L1f NIIILIL� III II II' r'1 ¢r C N O w �.j-+ ci � i' a 1. r -�--�- __ � 7, ., ,�.. .- wraa �maro urn ] ➢ q i —— ---- —— MEN J 0 r Page 22 E. Landscape Plan&Fencing Plan(dated: 10/18/2022) L --ig• LI I - - ....... C 0 L 0 R A D 0 RIDGE `"� OOCTOBER I6,3631 JENSENEIELF6 MERIDIAN, ID CUP LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 23 j. 0 w a } �i y _ �w E Q W4 o � :r4 :::✓ • ` 'I —AUTcllllE L1 Q �W Q AIAiC MF L2 LL Z J U PLAT PALETTE (� NOTES pii�uue�n w.a��i>.w�..w., KEY MAP ............... .,. ;. wxrnF "••""a � - LA PE PLAN Li.. i�ATCPLWE Ll - — T — rv.i MAT-LINE LY T 1� w r - p wa {JJ1 w MAT�HLIHE L2 OJ a Y f MhTCHLINE LS 0 ;U Q O Z Q OJ J a6 Q in U PLAIT PALETTE NOTES x.x. ivn . wm�i-,.icy V.us - KEY MAP VIIN r.x, ,� NCSCAPE 51WRMK i..x.a � v�ix.. wii n� yLR PLAN om+auEnc wi ii N O® L2 Page 24 T MATCHLINE L2 — — MATCHLINE L8 I� S F W J 0 a a cc mx mv, Fnllh I OJ O Da J a� O m U U PLA}.T PALETTE NOTES KEY MAP L3 1 - e i � e CI�6'tLA,,r I'F4N�.I'tN vl'iICN FCFtt �.,.r,�..r _ f _ —f i MMlLu ea Z U Em 1 O } 71 iJ W z a -. f J J KcD a U � � tl LcrLIR`JNYL PRIVACY PLk:,I' (J £'JFLN=LOT TOP VINYL FErILE rt L4 Page 25 FLAN7 FIALC77E tJ 4 ""4 1, 'mm I'M a6H�I��l Qj rPl=r=PLAWIN5rTAKING M pl, 1111W"t-- LU zz K I '71VY!" LLI< _j LLI 0 LU >Vol LU L.ANPSLA�� LALLUI-ATIOKS z ----—-----——--- cc :V! L6 EE Page 26 F. Common Open Space Exhibit(dated: 10/20/2022) NOT APPROVED OPEN SPACE ERIDBIT FOR L MOI]HRN CRAFT9MAN AVIATOR ROATi n m 1 91 ' -M Q L w_ kk Ld 1 0 „err • — _ LdZ W .� i+ � 'sir. .� ..■ r. ❑ i q CL 1 C - � �� =• � YW N o Z W w ,nOL ... AMP Page 27 G. Conceptual Building Elevations MODERN- CRAFTSMAN FRANKUN 4 f CLUBHOUSE/ENTRY FEATURE EA17 I =2 MEN EIEN . .... . .... 11 - BARON H U M M..E..L MODERN CRAFTSMAN FRkKKUN CWUHM;F DEIN MEN ;A� LINE BARON IAUMMEL Page 28 MODERN CRAFTSMAN ENTRY FEATURE Z z _ ■■■ [�IM6 _ mxa,ewxr �a ❑❑■ MEN BARON 1HUMMEL - MODERN CRAFTSMAN - 1 BED 1 BATH DUPLEX All LILIAN V �� 3 -1 ok -4, ■■■ SINGLE SLOPE ROOF W . - � — ���❑ _ III �� a� -- - ! ❑® MEN BARON HuMMFI Page 29 MODERN- oomm CRAFTSMAN 2 BED 2 BATH TYPE A oil r� FINE MEN vool, _ �Te�mee�me�c MEN BARON 11UMM EL HIP KOF MODERN- - 2 BED 2 BATH TYPE B MEN a■❑ FINE MEN BARON I� V M M E L Page 30 MODERN CRAFTSMAN a 3 BED 2 BATH - - F A ❑■■ MEN 113r,DIE pllo - LIAM MINE MEN BARON 1UMMEL MODERN CRAFTSMAN GARAGE—STORAGE BUILDING _u ❑■■ MEN Alt` - ❑■■ . ■■■ BARON iUM M EL Page 31 MODERN CRAFTSMAN MEN 00 A §,fin �• � �i'� �.� ■ ill _ J y y� -all - _ LIE7 BARONEEL] H. Legal Description for Property Subject to New Development Agreement 17e5onp1ion for Colorado Ridpa Subdivision tatkv 19,20?2 A paraal ON land locate#trl Ihg 4pulhweS1 114#I the Svulhwest 1r4 of S-a tiov 10.Townshp 3 Norih,Range 1 Wesl-WiSe N nd+an,Ada County,Idaho,more particularly descrited as icftw6; CMffdfC rig 481 IhL&3ecLofl corner commas to Seviliwis 9. 1:0. 15 and 16. T.M., R.tW.,R.M.Irom whwch Tm t1d owner of said SaeRivrt4 $0 and IS,bears Soull+ A9'15'3d'EaSL 2W.54 roet Il'1e ee bh the!�aurh bown0ary kre of 5aid SeVion 10 South 89-1534' East.702.06 Iva+l;Ihamo Ntdh oo"W35'East,35.B8lout to the HEAL POIHT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 00"WM'EjW.319.00I06I; thence South 89''1539'Fast.206.24 fs8t; thence NWh 00'35'14'Eaat.732,97 feel, thane Sau1:h 0W 1 S'Sl}'East,412.30 Ieet 10 the east boundary hne or trio 5oWhwost 114 of tho Soulhwasl 1A of card Sodicn 10; ih9rca on sattl east boundary line.Saulh 00'36 5'West 1,[57-99 fml to the rrodlh right-0-way line qf VY,FranKin Road: Vience on sa4 noM tqhl-Qt-wey airle tfie Vlaw*rrg three(3)courses and NorttM 59'15,34,West.55.31 feet; North 0 4-4-26-EMIC 5-58 feel. Norm 'l S34'WW. -0 teal IG To RIVAL MNT 4F BEGINNING. Con4linirlg 11.472 acres,more or leas, End of Descriox. t~L LANJ T Ns MQ PaEc 1 of I Page 33 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. Annexation 1.1 A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,incorporate the following provisions: a. The southwest portion of the property located at 4540 W. Franklin Rd. (Parcel#S 1210336405) shall no longer be subject to the terms of the previous Development Agreement recorded as Instrument#2020-117678(Compass Public Charter School East Expansion H-2020-0042)and shall instead be subject to the terms of the subject Development Agreement. b. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, site plan, landscape plan, qualified open space exhibit and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. c. Right-of-way shall be dedicated and/or the collector street(W. Aviator St.)shall be constructed across and adjacent to the northwest corner of this site on-and off-site as required by ACHD. The shall be designed consistent with Street Section C(major collector street)in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(see pgs. 3-20, 3-22 and 3-23). d. Public art of a high quality of design shall be provided within the development and incorporated into the design of the streetscape or publicly accessible open space as set forth in the TMISAP (see pg. 3-47). The art shall be provided in a prominent location and should provide an identity for the development. e. A maximum of 122 multi-family units shall be constructed within this development. f. A Design Review application shall be submitted for all structures within the multi-family development. Compliance with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and the guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP) is required. The residential development shall be developed in consideration of traditional neighborhood design principals and concepts as set forth in the TMISAP for the MHDR Future Land Use Map designation as specified in the Application of the Design Elements table on pg. 3-49 including but not limited to: roof pitch and overhang(roof brackets and rafter tail treatments are encouraged design elements). g. Pedestrian-scale lighting should be provided on all building facades facing the street and internal walkways in accord with the TMISAP(pg. 3-34). h. The space between the building fagade and adjacent walkway should be appropriately landscaped with a combination of lawns, groundcover, shrubs and trees in accord with the TMISAP (pg. 3-37). 2. Preliminary Plat 2.1 The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Depict the extension of the collector stub street(i.e. W. Aviator St.) across the northwest corner of the site as required by ACHD. Page 34 b. A drive aisle access shall be depicted via W. Franklin Rd.,an arterial street, at the southwest corner of the site along the west property line to ensure the parcel to the west has access to the drive aisle, as required by ACHD. c. Depict the internal private streets in a lot within the subdivision per UDC 11-3F-4A.1. Where the private street connects to a public street(i.e. W. Aviator St.),the connection shall be approved by ACHD. d. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide street buffer along W. Aviator St., a collector street, in a permanent dedicated buffer easement with an 8-foot wide parkway and a 6-foot wide detached sidewalk,per UDC Table 11-2A-7 and Street Section C in the TMISAP,unless an alternative street section is approved by ACHD. tr PRva Lane Irani Lame e Lane A Lane {urbm-M&distance 2.2 The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Include mitigation calculations on the plan for existing trees that are proposed to be removed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-I005. b. Depict landscaping within the 20-foot wide street buffer along W. Aviator St. in accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.An 8-foot wide parkway is required along the collector street planted with Class 11 trees and a 6-foot wide detached sidewalk as set forth in the TMISAP (Street Section Q. Include the linear feet of buffer with the number of required vs.provided trees in the Landscape Calculations table on Sheet L5 that demonstrates compliance with UDC standards. c. Depict landscaping within the 25-foot wide street buffer along W. Franklin Rd. in accord with the updated standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. d. Change the fencing type along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the Purdam Gulch Drain to 6-foot tall wrought iron in accord with UDC 11-3A-6C.3.Fencing should not encroach within the easement at the northeast corner of the site without a License Agreement with NMID. e. Depict enhanced landscaping and design features in the street buffer along W. Franklin Rd. that meets the entryway corridor standards in UDC 11-3B-7C.3fin order to count 50%of the street buffer toward the open space requirement in UDC 11-3G-3A.1. 2.3 The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. 2.4 No structures shall encroach within the Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District's easement for the Purdam Gulch Drain that crosses the northeast corner of the site without a signed License Agreement and approved plan before construction. Page 35 2.5 A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be granted to the property to the west at 4610 W. Franklin Rd. (Parcel#S1210336377) for access to the drive aisle via W.Franklin Rd. located along the west property line. 2.6 Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat, all existing structures that do not conform to the setbacks of the district shall be removed. 2.7 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. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections(A)and(B) of UDC 11-6B-7,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. 3. Conditional Use Permit 3.1 The multi-family development shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. 3.2 The multi-family development shall record a legally binding document that states 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 said document shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 3.3 Comply with building code requirements for separation between structures within the development. 3.4 Site amenities shall be provided as proposed from each of the following categories: 1) Quality of Life—clubhouse, dog park(a waste station is required); Open Space—community garden; Recreation—swimming pool, internal walking trails, children's play structure; and,Multi-Modal —charging stations for electric vehicles, in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D. Other comparable amenities may be considered by the Director. 3.5 The trash enclosures shall accommodate recycling. 3.6 The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised as follows: a. Remove the street sections for N.Moshova Ave. and depict a drive aisle instead of a public street on the plan. The drive aisle shall be located along the west property to ensure the parcel to the west can utilize the access.Depict a sidewalk along the drive aisle for pedestrian connectivity and safety. b. Change the fencing type along the east boundary of the site adjacent to the Purdam Gulch Drain to 6-foot tall black iron open vision fencing in accord with UDC 11-3A-6C.3 to deter access to the lateral. If the fence is placed within the easement area, a License Agreement shall be required with NMID. c. All transformer and utility vaults and other service areas 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. Page 36 d. Depict landscaping along the foundation of all street facing elevations adjacent to W. Aviator St. and W. Franklin Rd., as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2. e. Depict landscaping along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 12C. f. Include mitigation calculations for trees removed from the site as set forth in UDC 11-3B- 10C.S, g. Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3; include calculations in the Landscape Calculations table that demonstrate compliance with the updated standards. h. The drive aisle via W. Franklin Rd. shall be located along the west property line in order to provide a shared access to the property to the west(Parcel#S1210336377). i. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide buffer around the perimeter of the development in areas adjacent to vehicular use areas with landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-8C.1. j. 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 as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. k. Depict a berm or constructed barrier at least 4-feet in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access along W. Aviator St. and W. Franklin Rd., as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27C.7,unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process. 1. Depict a waste station in the dog park as required by UDC 11-4-3-27D.Ia. in. Connect the north/south pathways on the east side of the linear open space at the west boundary of the site between Mount Elbert&Pyramid Lane. n. Distinguish pedestrian crossings across private streets through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. 3.7 All internal private streets shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC I I-3F- 413.2. The Applicant or owner shall have one (1)year to complete 3.8 All pathways shall be constructed in accord with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-8. 3.9 A minimum of 1.85 acres of common open space is required that complies with the standards for qualified open space listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C.A revised open space exhibit shall be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the required standards OR an alternative compliance application shall be submitted at least 15 days prior to the City Council hearing. 3.10 A minimum of 260 off-street parking spaces shall be provided for the multi-family development with a minimum of 165 of those spaces in a covered carport or garage as proposed on the site plan, in accord with UDC Table 11-3C-6. 3.11 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 design guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan, the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 3.12 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 Page 37 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 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Since the 6-plexs to the east and west will not be individually owned lots,have a single meter come off of W Chair lift for each individual building instead of extending a water main down the common driveway. 1.2 Water services up to the meter are the responsibility of the City and require a 20'easement up to the meter and 10'beyond. 1.3 Water main needs to be on the north side of the private drives and a minimum of 25'from all infiltration structures unless an alternative protection per DEQ is provided. 1.4 Water main pipe sizes were not provided in the plans.Water was modeled with all mains being 8" 1.5 Any unused sewer stubs must be abandoned per City requirements 1.6 All manholes must have a 14ft wide graveled/paved access path per City requirements. 1.7 Infiltration trenches and other permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences,light poles,etc.)cannot be built within City water/sewer easement. 1.8 Remove SSMH 4, 5,B 13, and B 14 to reduce number of unnecessary manholes. 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 F 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 11-3B-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, Page 38 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. 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. Page 39 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://weblink.meridianciU.oLgzl ebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=288044&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiu&cr =1 D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=288041&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments were submitted. F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=289411&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity G. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=290809&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.m eridia n c i ty.org/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=2 918 7 0&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=292086&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU J. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=289772&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU Page 40 K. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=288836&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr =1 L. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=290682&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: 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 an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Stafffinds the Applicant's request to annex the subject property with R-15 zoning for a multi family development complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, the density and mix of residential housing types is consistent with the land uses and density desired in MHDR designated areas in the TMISAP. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to R-15 and development generally complies with the purpose statement of the Residential Districts in that it will provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential use should be compatible with adjacent residential and school uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds City services are available to be provided to this development. WASD has provided comments on the application that are included above in Section IX.H. 5. The annexation(as applicable) is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the city. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the decision- making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) Stafffinds the proposed plat is in general conformance with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 41 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Staff finds the plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements for this area in accord with the City's CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. C. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission 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. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-15 zoning district(see Analysis, Section Vfor more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use as a multi family development is consistent with the future land use map designation ofMHDR and is allowed as a conditional use in the R-15 district per UDC Table 11-2A-2. 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. Staff finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for and existing in this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the 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. Staff 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. Page 42 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. Staff finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities;see comments in Section IX.Hfrom WASD. D. Private Street(UDC 11-3F-5) In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The Director finds the proposed design of the private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. See analysis in Section VI.C for more information. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; The Director finds granting approval of the proposed private streets will not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan; and, The Director finds the use and location of the proposed private streets does not conflict with the regional transportation plan. While private streets do not provide connectivity with adjacent neighborhoods, which is desired in the Comprehensive Plan, the properties to the east and west are already developed/entitled with no connectivity to this site. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. This finding is not applicable as it's a multi family development and is not a mew or gated development. Page 43 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation P R 0 P E R T I ES MODERN CRAFTSMAN FRANKLIN BARON PROPERTIES 24 FOUNDED IN TOTAL PROPERTIES (� AT A GLANCE DEVELOPED 8 59000 + OPERATING IN OWNED + OPERATED UNITS 6 MARKETS L _may■ � � yff.��}}'i and operate QUALITY MANAGEMENT Long term ownersrdevelopments 1 ijA s 1 Experienced & professional management service seven days a week 1 24 hour on-call maintenance Regulated community oversight ;,- _ MODERN yam : - CRAFTSMAN F L _ ■1 BEDROOM ' •+ -_-- DUPLEX $—'� ■ 2 BEDROOMS 2 BEDROOMS 1 "'°'°`" ■ WITH GARAGE , 77 w.w.vmmx u. €� � � '*� ■ 3 BEDROOMS o I I € 6-PLEX 4 PARKING NU VAN ui ACCESSIBLE l w n AMENITIES C A t\ r V GARAGEFPO ■ STORAGE _ ■ LIVE-WORK :: J—I —-- UNITS J gr Ashley Cotton 2 reviews 4 reviews Littlefair 4 revews ***** a month ago ***** amonthago Modern Craftsman is easily the best community in the valley_Nestled close to Costco,Freddies and MODERN - everything else you could possibly need,not to mention the staff is absolutely amazing)Best decision The leasing team was a huge help!Modern Craftsman has built a fantastic community with luxury — CRAFTSMAN you could make would be to call this community home.Trust me,you won't regret it!l amenities and very spacious homes to rent.I can't wait to move in! AT TEN MILE 135 UNITS APPROVED 2/9/2021 _ : ■.,, DUPLEX 2 BEDROOMS ■ 1' ■ 3 BEDROOMS i 1 1 ■ ff PARKING mod. ♦ ;° �.� �♦ �lAMENITIES -- /I �♦ ♦ �. ��� �o O. MODERN _ - -\ - CRAFTSMAN IDAHO APARTM[NI ASSOCIATION AWARDS 1 Modern Craftsman at Black Cat received the \� following Tribute Awards from the Idaho • IDAHO �,�_ ��' IDAHO. `, Apartment Association in January 2023: IDAHO „c o , tie Yews o.Yr,sorr,,,a ter, �y Modern Craftsman at BlackCat Y Aislinn Richardson • Property of Excellence in Meridian A—Praperrlo Modern Craftsman at Black Cat — Daniel Isaac Boron Proyrrtiw tA— B°"°"P, ._ Best Model • Regional Manager of the year Manager of the year MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN I IV - I qil 17 .r aI L AM AT#2 DR - '�• C!-IJtiRTER I — =� - J W. FFRANKU RD I Ti 9ARAYA - �•. I f PRODUCT VAHIIIV AND mix 1 • Residential Units: • 1 bed/1 bath duplex (46%) - 56 units, 692 sf • 2 bed/2bath single family homes (15%) - 18 `MKI u n its, 1,019-1,052 sf ig • 3 bed/2bath single family homes- (5%) - 6 j units, 1,302 sf • Townhomes with garages - (34%) - 42 units, i 1,213 -1,352 sf r • Detached Garages with Storage I • 23 garage bays (4 buildings with 5-6 bays each) • 68 storage units (4 buildings with 17 units each) MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN MODERN CRAFTSMAN e d" �a .an 10_ �N r ARN Fd f - SIT[ MAP arias .psi �4,V - � 1 � ROW "qw — MR ROW IINI' RO ...............viu■ia■11111■11 '.I•�n r,•.N � PPRI{ Yt�Y4iIR�Yr,�I r_ F1GF, tile_ IRL1, rt:l FOR `iri YY��HY ":p F' WK muc INC r:•C F M I�riC R PARK HNF "HIF IY fJ f, J MD �R rr,a�14.1 AIH LIJF'DR R I� FH FT Hot -Pipe IN ff II�,J 44 L f f I DC _ Legend Land Use Transportation -M(cd Use Commercial(MUC) Functional Classtficstion Q WN W Use Revderlid(MIJR) —Adafial u -Larcymc f:C>w(LU) 21101 Potetltlal Arterlal Extension I I I I Low Density Residential(LDR) a—('.nllra.trr I.INCP v �r h!I IC:C. h!LN. Medium Densitypesldenval(MUH) imams POtentlal Collector Extension !-'rrlilnn H iGh Densily RPS ielrnfW(MHr)R) Limited Access �^ulDr v. i HVgn Denstty Resltliaatlaf(HOR) PuLer did Slip Ramp I M Drnsily Em(11mffm rnt(I DP) --- Local -Higil Density Eirlpluyrnerll(HDE) —6rlstiry LuLA nwH MD(COtmpIOyOICnt(Mlt) wounconou: CJTean Spaee anO Parllantl(PARK) ` vnrz .T -Ga aline Easement{GAS) I W ) -- -�-I-I n �,sa0 5.2 0 Zoning District Compatability Matrix, Continued I I 'Residential Existing City Zoning Districts R-2 R-4 R-S - I b MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. Density; 8-15 DJ/AC �J- • • •' • • Uses: SF- detached • Townhouses • . . Two Family Duplex S flat units Apartments • • • • • •' Secondary DU • • -• Live-work Parks Recreation Centers • ' '• • Elementary School • • • • • • Day Care Centers • • • Public Use • •• • Religious Worship Home Occupation ' *` I. *�i ii�*�i}#rf��i!■EiiF*ii#i iiM*�� a0&3i' I i .. L r x to TRANSPORTATION TMISAP ' * �- � • .I • Focus on traffic and -e- interconnectedstreets \ I • 1 Collaboration property owner to our north to facilitate W. Aviator extension •tely GHT�F-1N connect south to Franklin Road t • Worked with ACHD to limit access ( Aviator Street as a LoY fj��`��� r /rr points on . . • provide access for property to West l.ot Area Description � Sri� f! I 1 I� II �� I�! BLOCK i Lol i 4941T2 NE519EhnAL AREA 1 _ f 1 �/ 111 I l II BLOCK i Lot 2 .R61 FUTURE NCw UEDicATloh I I � ,`� '� f �,/n l I II �I�`LI MODERN - CRAFTSMAN �r s� Residential A All Unit.1 -.. INISAP - STRET DISION AND PRODUCT ORINTATION • Walkways and pathways on both sides of streets to enhance pedestrian experiencei -------- -- - - - - - - - - ---- ----- • Facilitate slow-moving vehicular traffic • Street oriented front porches and entryways ,� � _�- -- -•�� � y • On-street parking for activation • Alley loaded garages • Located on VRT routes 40 & 42 MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN MODERN _ = CRAFTSMAN INISAP DISION [[[MINTS BUILDING DETAILS • High quality cementitious lap siding, cultured stone, stucco and architectural asphalt shingles • 3 unique exterior color schemes • All Units 1-2 stories • Variety of roof lines for diverse, well balanced and appealing aesthetic • Mechanical units screened with fencing and parapet walls per TMISAP RISIDENTIAI: WIMP i k! 1 f • Two different rooflines • 56 units (46% of unit mix) • Three exterior color schemes • 692 sf MODERN CRAFTSMAN RISIBINTIAI: ok, e • 42 units (34% of unit mix) • Three exterior color schemes 1,213-1352 sf ' Two car garage for each unit MODERN CRAFTSMAN }nr � x INTIRIOR ANINITIls Private patio, balcony or yard for each unit • Tuck under and attached garages in select units • 10-12 ceilings —�s • Spacious, open living floor plans ! • Luxurious and modern finishes, stainless steel appliances, quartz countertops • In-unit washer/dryers • Smart security systems, smart thermostat and keyless entry MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN COMMUNITY AMIN1111S to • Spacious clubhouse with lounge, coffee bar, t conference room, zoom room and state of the art .. _ -�i z d fitness center - - ,- - • Large pool deck and pool with covered patio/grill , - = area and high-end furniture ------- • Community garden, playground, fenced dog park, and large open spaces • Package lockers • Wide sidewalks and connectivity throughout the site to allow for social interaction i • Lush landscaping throughout the community - + r a_ • In-unit washer/dryers I _ Y YI'IYIIYYr rt.,�mir�!III!!mPinnl, . • Smart security systems, smart thermostat and keyless entry '�"""'I" � i►� f��� MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN CIUBHOUSI "x �" • r Y. r a� Y � MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN D[TACHID GARAB[S WITH STORABI oop .4 N -= T AUNM A S _ • 23 garage bays (4 bldgs w/ 5-6 bays each) Three exterior color 68 storage units (4 bldgs w/ 17 storage units each) schemes MODERN CRAFTSMAN SERVICE a UIIIIIIIS Meridian Fire 2.6 miles from Station No. #2 Meridian Police 4 miles from Meridian Police Department Meridian Sewer and Water Meets Meridian Waste Water Master Plan ACHD All conditions of approval are acceptable MODERN - CRAFTSMAN ■ ;= ADJACENT PRO' COLORADif AnnexatioH a z0fli ------------- - - • Seeking R-15 (10.3 acres) • Two largest parcels currently zoned RUT • Third and smallest parcel is already zoned R-15 • Zoning of immediately adjacent properties • North: R-15 • East: TN-R q/o., • South (across Franklin): RUT j • West: M-E --------------------------- ----------------------- RUT J �1 MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN CONDITIONS Of APPROVA[ We agree with all of the staff conditions of approval with the exception of the following: V I I I.A.2.1 c Staff Recommends: Depict the internal private streets in a lot within the subdivision per UDC 11-3F-4A.1. Where the private street connects to a public street (i.e. W. Aviator St.), the connection shall be approved by ACHD. Developer Proposes: Depict the internal streets to comply with the private street standards per UDC 11-3F-4. Where the private street connects to a public street (i.e. W. Aviator St.), the connection shall be approved by ACHD. MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN CONDITIONS Of APPROVAI VI11 B.2.9 Staff Recommends: 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. Developer Proposes: Prior to Vertical permit acceptance/receipt; Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer may be installed/inspected in part or in whole (but not required as activated or fully approved as not necessary for site safety), and water systems activated and approved as related to hydrant locations, road base installed and approved for use and capacity of 80,000 lb. vehicle, prior to payment or receipt of vertical building permits. MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU MODERN - CRAFTSMAN Approved MF units Projected Approved lots per per attendance Students from Enrollment Capacity attendance area area Approved ❑ev. Chaparral Elementary 494 700 618 3650 275 Meridian Middle School 1064 1250 656 2947 147 Meridian High School 1718 2075 3560 3613 607 School of Choice Options Chief Joseph Elementary—Arts 526 700 N/A N/A Barbara Morgan STEM Academy 417 500 N/A N/A West Ada School District supports economic growth. Based on future enrollment forecasts, the schools will be operating at or near full capacity. Future developments will continue to have an impact on the district's capacity. To meet the need for additional school capacity in this area one or more of the following may need to be accomplished: • Transporting students to an alternate school with available classrooms. + Attendance area adjustments if there is availability in a nearby school. • Portable classrooms placed on the property. • Passage of a bond or plant facilities levy to build new schools to fit the enrollment needs. • 6 ft 1 911.111 i e MOMMOM v M tjl I I 2 010 2 BATH A 10 RISIDINTIAI: n -L- 4 1 • 18 units (15% of unit mix) • Two different rooflines MODERN • 1,019-1,052 sf 0 Three exterior color schemes — CRAFTSMAN RISIBINTIAI: � ■ 1 r I I� t'l��f�-h�y4 ���'� fs I rf �Ti'� I 7y�.t ✓�,H,;'; r;.S,�'/��,. y r�l�_�Y µ� e�4� i �' r •, ` t�'' 4�+fit d• i Sq! y c L r 8; s S"' ' �t 4 o f v! I� � ' w ��' �tiT "� yip ��r f/��y Y��{ �'j$�p��/ ,; 41,, ��� tar•�r tr Y v��a rt rr u'„J�j 'Srly,ty �h' -'-"mum I � � M!�1 \ �'!•'i)F� CS 'ISM���G^'71' Y��L'1 t IY '\ I "h'1� •i{t�`Ci �'M I�i'�`a ;i }, cu t -: .'. •+, F `.7{ ,.> f i+ S c .I,.r�,'nj �s, ,�1 {..r>rr.�, +d � v�+r.., 1�vt4���'c' Jt ,s 1,'r,u } ,a i' l vl +{i �,"ti'a'. � �.:; f��1. f.f•, c y,"' ,{ .;i 1. �3�.1. � "b .1' {I�w� c. yl,rl�;')+�1,`ir+a d r'�+.,'}•, .� � , 'I S�� �:.'��-,.I, e �M�.. �{� - ��t r tJ? i ,41• � a+�,�= iti �} �-: M. ], y,p"1� ,,:,r�,j. .f.�.,} ,S 1.�d1�(',1 IF +•_r I �! ��I„I,i � ?;..3Sr 1.,,��.rA, ,��S t, I ,yt�,re J Y,�;,�7��,ti,e.' x 1i< 1. .r;.�I .� ]:51:!`r Y�j�r�i�.,`��,� �Ih, ti!1� [�;n..,L��`;,. �y�Y.n y � r t l�i, 's• II 7 "> v' 4y r.. t !., I r {... - �/":': 1( . if , I• �9 �'.,�.{ c�gJ >�v ( aP �' d ! 5,��` 1'I;' �r�`' 't ` -r� ,. Ifr'.... ., Z4�+a..77.��./:71� 6 units (5% of unit mix) • Two different rooflines • 1,302 sf • Three exterior color schemes MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Artisan Victory Market (H-2022-0066) by Kindi Moosman, Horrocks Engineers, Inc., located at 2820, 2910, 2960, 2990 and 3020 S. Eagle Rd. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/H-2022-0066 A. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 14.47 acres of land with the R-15 (12.45 acres) and C-C (2.03 acres) zoning districts.B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 5 building lots and 1 common lot on approximately 13.6 acres in the requested zoning district.C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 132 units on approximately 12.45 acres in the R-15 zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: April 6, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 8 PROJECT NAME: Artisan Victory Market (H-2022-0066) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name lv- T 6� Gtz-' 3 , 4 � 5 -4, 6 urn 7 r n le 8 tk(70S ,e ix 10 � .fr � �3 Lv '`e 12 13 217 S U �XAW aW 14 9 7;E S0a �v t:E-: STAFF REPORT C:�*%_ W IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING April 6,2023 Legend LI L<LJ' DATE: Continued from:January 19, February �Project LOCatipn 0 2, and March 2, 2023 FI-J TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0066 0 . Artisan Victory Market—AZ, CUP,PP, t PS LOCATION: 2820,2910,2960,2990 and 3020 S. Eagle Rd.,in the SW 1/4 of Section 21, T.3N.,R.IE. (Parcel#S1121336051; '' v S1121336101; S1121336176; S1121336200; S1121336230; S 1121336251; and S1121336276) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation and Zoning(AZ)of approximately 14.47 acres of land with the R-15 (12.38 acres)and C- C(2.09 acres)zoning districts; Preliminary Plat(PP)consisting of 5 building lots(3 multi-family and 2 commercial) and 1 common lot on approximately 13.6 acres of land in the requested R-15 and C-C zones; and a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)for a multi-family development consisting of 131 units on 11.94 acres in the R-15 zoning district. Private streets(PS)are proposed for internal access within the development. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 13.6-acres(14.47 AZ area) Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County(existing);R-15 (12.38 acres)&C-C(2.09 acres) (proposed) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) Existing Land Use(s) Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Multi-family residential&Commercial Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 5 buildable lots and 1 common lot Phasing Plan(#of phases) 1 phase—For occupancy purposes 6 phases are proposed for the multi- family project. Page 1 Description Details Number of Residential Units(type 131 multi-family dwelling units;2 commercial buildings totaling 18,100 of units)and square footage of square feet commercial uses Physical Features(waterways, NA hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 7/28/22;March 21,2023 the applicant held another neighborhood meeting based on the public comments received for this application. History(previous approvals) CPA-05-001 B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was prepared by Kimley-Horn. es/no Access Main access for this development will be from S.Eagle Rd.ACHD has approved the (Arterial/Collectors/State connection as a temporary full access and reserves the right to restrict this access in Hwy/Local)(Existing and the future;a local street network will be extended to provide additional access to and Proposed) through the development.Internal circulation is being provide through a private street connection. Traffic Level of Service Stub 3 local streets are stubbed to this property and will be extended with the plat;cross Street/Interconnectivity/Cros access via is required to the property to the south(Inglewood Place Subdivision). s Access Existing Road Network S.Eagle Rd.,arterial street, S.Titanium Ave. and E.Publisher St. abut this site. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is an existing 7-foot wide attached sidewalk along S.Eagle Rd.All existing Buffers curb cuts to S.Eagle Rd.not being utilized by this development must be closed and im roved with curb,gutter,and sidewalk. West Ada School District • Predicted#of students West Ada School District has experienced sustained growth in student enrollment during the last ten years.Based on current generated from enrollment data specific to new development(within the last 5 years)in proximity to this proposed development,we estimate proposed development this development consisting of 138 multi-family units could house approximately 26 school aged children.Approval of this • Distance(elem,ms,hs) application will affect enrollments at the following schools in West Ada School District based on attendance areas forthe • Capacity of schools 2022.23 school year.For your information,included in this data is the number of approved lots and multi-family units • #of Student Enrolled approved by this and other agencies. Approved MF units Projected Approved lots per per attendance Students from Enrollment Capacity attendance area area Approved Dev. Pepper Ridge Elementary 515 675 186 756 68 Lewis&Clark Middle School 885 1000 501 2297 71 Mountain view High School 2461 2175 2956 408 401 School of Choice Options Christine Donnell Elementary—Arts 474 Soo N/A N/A Spalding Elementary-STEM 678 750 N/A N/A West Ada School District supports economic growth.Based on future enrollment forecasts,the capacity of the high school is projected to be operating above building capacity and full utilization of educational spaces upon the completion of the previously approved lots.Future developments will continue to have an impact on the district's capacity. Page 2 Description Details Police Service No comments received • Distance to Police Station • Police Response Time • Calls for Service • Accessibility • Specialty/resource needs • Crimes • Crashes • Other Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent Services • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project Sewer See application ERU's • WRRF Declining 5,780 MGD Balance • Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/concerns Additional 5,780 gpd committed to model. See Public Works site specific conditions Water • Distance to Water Directly adjacent Services • Pressure Zone • Estimated Project Water See application ERU's • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Yes Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns See Public Works site specific conditions Page 3 1 1 1 • - • - • - • r • - • • • iAA�-ice - � • • r • �. _ � - ,' it=■.77 _ rY•i'- ��in•��Cr�•►�ilrrrdr r ■■ \ii.�rur■r• .r■■■■r■1� ���Illlhi? Ills- IBM� �ii■u■ul 4 � ���' 4111111 ♦pay ����unurr■r ■=iw�n g:q:: �■r■ ... ,ir•t�'ri►rr f�ii��■- �Illpulun Ilnr►'��..�a�•�rt. ate•+..J .E..nm1 1:'......`�rr VfiCTO I & V+ICTQR-Y - i` �I�� 11mm �=m • r - - /��►j1i=�rrr r r = w-- yn 1 nr ■ , ■ ■1!1!l11,■ f R ••r: j�r�ttllji■i��flll�t li a 1 ,f��/J !!1!� ;T a A�A- -■r r /��% i - • - in 11.1 - • - in rrrtt on r I �l�i♦+ 'Mo rrgHjjrjlIr1■ l NonnirNonniuq■ r�tllllfrip p--_�#� 1ii ■■ rrrr • -• '• - a Ilun +illlr�r�ii r �� ►� .rlr =e rr _ ►�.. �moo■ ■x•■u■■ur+ / = r._ a o■ ) __- ■- us■ ♦ i it .wort •// -■I -ril,► I' ��:--�.a v■ /i� ■Y-_nul�il�.�- ■■ #•}�1•,�+iri��--rr■■ `�.� IIIIIIIII Inl�f►• +7 ���}' ��+ �'r 1 It r,■� �1�.'4}♦ •♦+ is■... ` _ i�= •4r�♦ q♦+rr r•�+ar rnuuuaul Inn �•=- ■■r ��i*i�i��i��4r�■■■■�! .luury �a■� �/�rrratii,�i��i�4rri i■ nnlurulllrll�a�_ �/err��,,,}•a`�•�� rr strraN�� - Ir Illrru■■r�i�=LI + ♦ •}•♦ r�s�au _ I �-.rf rt ♦ ♦ * ► rr *��+ ♦•• ruun r----...., w + ♦�?} }•�! � lunrn + uun■r■Isi:� 1 ♦ ♦�- rl_•.-. �.w�+_rw� fw� !�.► ��ti���■� , ww+ar t►r ii +t1i+��t�• ■ ■rrrrrrl■ ���::• \�\+��! +� !�� ■rlrrr■ .�1;.r+.�++ i♦ i.� ■■nwn�� I - •w rr RI .�;. +��■■n■n■r ■w. rr Rh � �!+ •fir��■■ '-- �. .■■rr;► ♦! � ■■■ _ � ..a rr;► +�`;•+`'���C::::�:;::: I1 ::■■■■■li■iii�_r ��*O; r+.��:��..•1„ _ ;',e rr�er,y ud ��I\t+ti� ra •�I ��jir�' G1 � tI!� `ADC -�•rlri� IN R EN -11I CTORY YICT�RY rumen rn1 .�1 _ /Q,,►cur b1A_ � • ==III.��'=�� ���?ii !►►ii iffu■■r:1r��: �� ��■■■■■■ �•iii^S■■■■ rlt►it«+ ■1�1111111 W �r*+•••■/�f��R t K��rr!■II1i111 nHIM ;; +���a�•■�:sir�►� � i uuiii B. Owners: BPS Eagle Road,LLC— 1401 17th Street, Ste. 700,Denver,CO 80202 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 2/15/2023 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 2/10/2023 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 2/17/2023 Nextdoor posting 2/10/2023 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan) Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use—Community(MU-C). 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. Sample uses appropriate in MU-C areas include: All MU-N categories, community grocer,clothing stores,garden centers,hardware stores,restaurants,banks,drive-thru facilities, auto service station, and retail shops, and other appropriate community-serving uses. Sample zoning include: R-15,R-40, TN-R, TN-C, C-C, and L-O. Proposed Development: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with two (2)land use types— small-scale commercial(includes retail,restaurants, drive-through pharmacy, etc.)and residential(i.e. multi-family residential). The site is designed for commercial uses along Eagle Road, an arterial street,with 131 multi-family residences for a gross density of 11 units per acre and a net density of 12.4 units per acre located to the north and east of the commercial pads. The site includes a mix of 1- bedroom duplex-style multi-family units,2 and 3-bedroom bungalow-style multi-family units, and 2 and 3-bedroom townhome-style multi-family units with open space integrated throughout. The proposed development is generally consistent with the conceptual MU-C plan in the Comprehensive Plan. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in all Mixed-Use areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pg.3-13): (Staffs analysis in italics) Page 5 • "A mixed-use project should include at least three types of land uses. Exceptions may be granted for smaller sites on a case-by-case basis. This land use is not intended for high- density residential development alone." The proposed 13.60-acre development includes two types of land uses—commercial and residential. The Inglewood Subdivision along the south boundary is also designated MU-C and the City has approved a restaurant w/drive-through and a daycare on this site. Therefore, staff is supportive of the site developing with two land uses types as proposed. Since one of the buildings will be multi-tenant building, staff does anticipate other commercial uses developing on the property. • "Where appropriate,higher density and/or multi-family residential development is encouraged for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to US 20/26, SH-55, SH-16 or SH-69." The proposed development includes 131 multi family units at a gross density of 11 units per acre. The multi family portion of the project is located along east side of Eagle Road. An employment destination center is not desired due to the size of the property; however, other neighborhood commercial uses could develop on the commercial lots which may encourage a walkable environment and provide additional services for the area. • "Mixed Use areas are typically developed under a master or conceptual plan; during an annexation or rezone request, a development agreement will typically be required for developments with a Mixed-Use designation." A site plan was submitted with the annexation request, included in Section VII.B.A Development Agreement is required that binds future development to this plan. • "In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,the buildings should be arranged to create some form of common,usable area, such as a plaza or green space." The conceptual development plan does not depict common usable open space for the commercial portion of the development. Staff recommends that the Applicant re-orientate the buildings to create some form of common usable area between the commercial buildings and the common lot directly south of the clubhouse and pool.A decorative crosswalk should also be used to delineate the connectivity through the private street and continued through the commercial parking lot to the existing 7-foot sidewalk along Eagle Rd. • "The site plan should depict a transitional use and/or landscaped buffering between commercial and existing low-or medium-density residential development." The applicant has oriented the commercial next to commercial uses approved with the Inglewood Subdivision to the south.As a transition to the existing residential on the north/east and south boundary, the applicant is proposing two-story townhomes on the south boundary adjacent to the larger assisted living facility and orienting single-story duplex and single detached units along the east and north boundaries. • "Community-serving facilities such as hospitals,clinics, churches, schools,parks,daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in larger mixed-use developments." No such uses are specifically proposed in this development—the tenants of the commercial buildings are unknown at this time. From north to south, the larger MU-C area includes storage, an office park, single-family residential, two (2)planned daycares, assisted living, two coffee shops w/drive-throughs, and a Rite Aid. Page 6 • "Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas,open space,libraries,and schools are expected; outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count." There are no public and/or quasi public spaces or places proposed with this development. As noted above, the applicant should include a plaza area in the commercial area that ties in with the open space south of the clubhouse and pool. A decorative pedestrian crossing would also help integrate the two open spaces. A pedestrian connectivity should also be provided to the existing 7-foot sidewalk adjacent to Eagle Rd. • "Mixed use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi- public centers of activity. Spaces should be activated and incorporate permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play. These areas should be thoughtfully integrated into the development and further placemaking opportunities considered." See analysis above. • "All mixed-use projects should be directly accessible to neighborhoods within the section by both vehicles and pedestrians." The proposed commercial portion of the development is directly accessible to the multi family residential portion of the development to the north/east, the single-family developments further to the north and east(Bancroft Square Sub. &Sutherland Farm Sub. No. 2) by both vehicles and pedestrians. "Alleys and roadways should be used to transition from dissimilar land uses, and between residential densities and housing types." A landscape buffer is proposed between the proposed multi family and existing single-family developments to the north/east and to the assisted living facility located to the south as a transition and buffer between uses. The buffers are between 15 and 20 feet respectively. Further, the applicant has intentionally placed the one-story duplex and single detached units along the north and east boundary to ensure compatibility. • "Because of the parcel configuration within Old Town, development is not subject to the Mixed-Use standards listed herein." The subject property is not located in Old Town; therefore, this item is not applicable. In reviewing development applications,the following items will be considered in MU-C areas,per the Comprehensive Plan(pgs.3-16 thru 3-17): • Development should generally comply with the general guidelines for development in all Mixed-Use areas. Staffs analysis on the proposed project's compliance with these guidelines is included above. • Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20%of the development area at gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre. There is neither a minimum nor maximum imposed on non-retail commercial uses such as office,clean industry, or entertainment uses. Residential uses are proposed over 87.8%(11.94 acres) of the development area at an overall gross density of 11 units/acre, consistent with the density desired in MU-C designated Page 7 areas. • Retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area. Retail/commercial uses are only proposed to comprise of 12.2%(1.66 acres) of the development area in accord with this policy. 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 beprovided upon development. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed retail/commercial uses should be compatible with the existing commercial to the south. The proposed multi family development should be compatible with existing single- family residential uses to the north in Bancroft Square Subdivision, to the west in Sutherland Farm Subdivision No.1, and to the south in the Inglewood Place Senior Housing with the proposed separation in uses by fencing and landscape to minimize conflicts between higher and lower density residential. • "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 proposed development will provide housing in close proximity to goods, services and employment. This area of Meridian is predominately detached single-family dwelling units. • "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A) The development plan depicts pedestrian pathways throughout the commercial and multi- family residential development. Staff recommends the applicant relocate the trash enclosure located on the north side of the parking lot east of the pool and install a 5-foot wide sidewalk to provide a more direct connection to the children play structure. Five-foot wide detached sidewalks are being extended as part of the local street network(Sutherland Farm, Bancroft Square, and Inglewood Place Senior Housing)for interconnectivity. • "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 multi family development to the commercial buildings.As noted above staff recommends the applicant provide a Page 8 decorative crossing. Usable open space and quality amenities are proposed with the multi- family development that exceed UDC standards (see analysis below). • "Evaluate the feasibility of annexing existing county enclaves and discourage the creation of additional enclaves."(3.03.03I) This property is an enclave that abuts City annexed land to the north, south, east, and west. Here is the applicant's justification on how the project complies with some of the policies in the plan: Section Comprehensive Plan Goal and Project Compliance 2.01.01 Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels, household sizes and lifestyle preferences. Artisan Victory Market will include mix of f-bedroom duplex. 2-,& 3- bedroom bungalow-sole multi famdy units and 2-&3-bedroom tawnhome-style multi family units,providing diversity within the Project and also diversify from nearby single-family detached residences.Artisan Victoty Market will offer a variety ofamenwes to cater to the different recreational bobbies of residents and fo foster a sense of community. 2.01.01 E 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. This project provides medium high-density residential units that complement and provide a transition between the commercial and employment areas to the south on Victory and to the north closer to 1--84, and the single-family residences to the north and east. The area has been largely developed in compliance with the larger Mixed-Use Community area, and the mix of surrounding employment and retail uses will benefit from the addition of higher densuy residential homes. 2.02.01 A With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathways connections,easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks,safe routes to schools and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities. Artisan Victory Market is a connected community with pathways that connect the residential development to the north and east with the more intensive commercial and retail uses to the soufh_ The project includes over L6 miles of internal pathways and sidewalks an public streets,and qualay amenities including a ciuhhouse,fitness room,swimming pool and community garden. 2.02.02C Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Artisan lrictory Market has been designed to minimise impact an the surrounding neighborhoods with 2-sfory residences on the north and east boundaries_ 3.{}3.0D Direct and prioritize development in strategic areas and in accordance with corridor and special area plans. Page 9 As an infill site with all services readily available,Artisan Victory Market exemplifies the vision of the Mixed-Use Community designation by providing a well-designed, interconnected living and commercial space where people can live,work,sloop,and raise a family all within the same community- 3.06.02E 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 This mixed-usesproject fosters the mixed-use environment of the larger area by complementing the surrounding commercial,retail, and si ngle- famdy detached residential uses. Planned and developed commercial and employment centers are within walking distance of the Site.Artisan Victory Market residents can shop,dine,plan and work in close proximity and reduce vehicle trips in the area. This Project will increase the overall livability and sustainability of the surrounding area by providing much needed housing that will help nearby businesses thrive with a permanent customer base. 3.07.01 A Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering,screening,transitional densities,and other best site design practices. Smaller commercial and multi family residential provides an appropriate transition beiween the C C retail and commercial uses to the south and Eagle Road to the west,and the single-family residences to the east and north_ The Site integrates higher density buildings along Eagle Road and the commercial areas to the south and provides single-level duplex and bungalow-style multi family units along the north and east adjacent to the single-family homes.Fencing screens the projeci from surrounding developments_ 6.01.01 H Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. With approximately L6 miles of internal paih woj)s and detached sidewalks,Artisan Victory Market provides necessary connectivity between current and future developments and uses an all sides of the property. 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. V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS UD A. Annexation: The proposed annexation is for 14.47 acres of land with R-15 (12.38 acres)and C-C zoning(2.09 acres)districts. The proposed use of the property will include 18,100 square feet of commercial uses(tenants unknown)and 131 multi-family residential units on 13.60 acres in the C-C and R-15 districts. Parking for the multi-family development is discussed further in the report however the conceptual development plan does depict 55 parking stalls for the commercial lots. Based on the square footage of the proposed commercial development,the UDC only requires a minimum of 36 stalls. A conceptual development plan was submitted,included in Section VII.B below that shows how the overall property is planned to develop. Based on the analysis above in Section IV, Staff is of Page 10 the opinion the proposed annexation,zoning and development plan is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan with the provisions noted in Section VIII as discussed herein. A multi-family development requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)in the R-15 zoning district, subject to the specific use standards for such listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. Commercial/retail uses and drive-through uses are listed as a principally permitted uses in the C- C zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2.However,the proposed drive-through associated with the southern-most commercial building will require the approval of a CUP because of its proximity to the proposed and existing residential uses. Staff is supportive of a drive- through on this site however,the commercial area is more neighborhood serving and therefore the site should be restricted to only developing one drive-through on the property as proposed. The proposed uses and zoning districts are listed as appropriate uses and zoning in the Comprehensive Plan for the MU-C designated area. The property is contiguous to City annexed land and is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. A legal description and exhibit map of the overall annexation area is included in Section VII.A. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure future development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the development plan proposed with this application, Staff recommends a DA is required with this application,containing the provisions noted in Section VIII.A, as discussed herein. B. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat consists of 5 building lots (3 multi-family and 2 commercial) and 1 common lot on 13.60 acres of land in the R-15 and C-C zoning districts. The proposed subdivision will develop in a single phase. However, for occupancy purposes,the applicant is proposing 6 phases for the multi-family portion of the development. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are existing homes and outbuildings that need to be removed with development of the property. Since the project is being phased staff anticipates the removal of the structures with the first phase. Dimensional Standards: Development of the proposed lots are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district. The minimum lot size in the R-15 zone(no minimum lot size in the C-C zone) size is not pertinent to this development because the applicant is proposing multiple units on larger parcels. The CUP site plan doesn't depict any setbacks on the plan. Per the specific use standards, a minimum setback of 10 feet is required unless a greater setback is required by the UDC. In the applicant's narrative it states that the units along the north and south boundary have a 15-foot setback and the units along the east boundary have a 20-foot buffer which exceeds code requirements. Further,the applicant has provided all single-story units adjacent to the existing single-family homes therefore staff is supportive of the setbacks along these boundaries. For those units along Eagle Rd.,the code requires a 25-foot landscape buffer in a common lot and those units adjacent to the buffer should be setback 10 feet from the interior edge of the buffer. The other units adjacent to Titanium and Publisher are required to have a 10-foot setback to living area.None of the garages are oriented towards the street. NOTE: As discussed below the applicant has included the 15-foot setback areas along the south boundary in their qualified Page 11 open space calculations.This area does not count towards qualified open space unless it is dimensioned a minimum of 20 feet(see analysis below). Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-31: Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3. The project complies with these standards. Access(UDC 11-3A-31 A private street is proposed via S. Eagle Rd., an arterial street.No stub streets are required or proposed for this application. The site does have three(3) existing stub streets that are proposed to be extended with this development. This critical because most of the residential units and the commercial uses will take access from an internal private street.The extension of the local street connection will allow traffic to flow better through this site to the signalized intersection at Easy Jet and not rely solely on the Eagle Rd. access. The units located on the east side of Titanium take access from shared driveways.Although not classified as common driveways,the applicant should provide at a minimum 20-foot driveways to ensure vehicles can access the designed garage spaces associated with those units. With the CZC application the applicant should demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Cross-access/ingress-egress should be provided between all C-C zoned commercial lots in the subdivision and the Inglewood commercial uses to south via a note on the final plat. A private street application(A-2022-0165)was submitted with this application for the internal private streets.Private streets are required to comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Staff has reviewed these standards and it appears the Applicant can comply with all standards except for the following: o Private streets are required to connect to a local or collector street—connection to an arterial street is not allowed(11-3F-4A.2). The private street is proposed to connect to S. Eagle Rd. and ACHD has approved this location. Council will need to grant the applicant request for the Eagle Rd. access. Staff is supportive the additional entrance because it aligns with E. Mackay Dr. on the west side of Eagle Rd. and provides better access to the commercial planned in the southwest corner of the development. Upon recommendation of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall, the Director may approve, or recommend approval of alternative design or construction standards through the alternative compliance process when the Applicant can demonstrate that the proposed overall design meets or exceeds the intent of the required standards of this article and shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare,per UDC 11-3F-4B.3. As is,the private street connection to Eagle Rd. does not currently meet all of the required standards and cannot be approved; a request for alternative compliance may be submitted for consideration by the Director. Staff recommends the applicant submit the alternative compliance application 15 days prior to the City Council hearing.If the portion of the Eagle road access is not part of the private street,the applicant should depict the ingress/egress easement on the face of the plat to allow access to the platted private streets.Further,the plat should be revised to place the private street in a common lot rather than an easement. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 : A 7-foot attached sidewalk exists along Eagle Rd. and will remain as part of the development. Where there are existing driveways being closed,the applicant is required to install curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping per UDC standards. Five-foot detached sidewalks are proposed along the internal local streets. Internal sidewalks are dispersed throughout the multi-family development. Staff has concerns with the residential units on the east side of Titanium Ave, Page 12 specifically pedestrian safety. The residents on this side of the roadway will need to cross the street to gain access to the main amenities. Staff recommends that the applicant coordinate with ACHD and include decorative crossings through this roadway and provide traffic calming at the Titanium and Publisher intersection. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Street buffers are required to be provided as follows: A minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required along S. Eagle Rd. and a minimum 10-foot wide buffer is required along the private street in the C-C zoning district(east side of the southern-most building),measured per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.la. Landscaping is required within the street buffer as set forth in UDC H- 3B-7C(see updated standards). Street buffers are required to be maintained by the property owner or business owners' association and should be depicted on the plat in a common lot or permanent dedicated buffer per UDC 11-3B-7C.2b. Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G5B.3. There are existing trees on the site to be removed or that require mitigation. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat should include the detail mitigation plan in accord with UDC 11-3B-10. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-I81: An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction are required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11 C. Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-157: Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided in the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. 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 No major facilities traverse the site. Comment letters from the irrigation districts indicate they don't have any facilities on this property but the property does have a valid right. Per Idaho State Statues,Title 42, local irrigation/drainage ditches that cross this property, in order to serve neighboring properties,must remain unobstructed and protected by an appropriate easement by the landowner,developer, and contractors. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7)• All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. The applicant has provided a master fence plan that depicts the fencing styles and locations for the development. A combination of 6-foot tall solid,4-foot with 2 foot open-vison and 6-foot tall wrought iron fencing is proposed. With final plat submittal, any fencing proposed along Publisher and Titanium should be installed 10 feet from the property line. C. Conditional Use Permit(CUP): A Conditional Use Permit is requested for a multi-family residential development consisting of 131 dwelling units on 11.94 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-2. The proposed development will have (24)2-story townhome units; (31)duplex units and(45) single detached units and clubhouse centrally located within the complex. The mix of Page 13 units consisting of 1-(62),2-(53) and 3-(16)bedroom units ranging from 692 to 1,352 square feet in size. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3-27): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staffs 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. The site plan included in Section HID depicts buildings a 20 foot buffer on the east and a 15 foot setback on the north and south. 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 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. The Applicant's narrative states the average private open space for each unit is 353 sq.ft. Each duplex and detached single family unit include a patio and private yard ranging in size from 509 sq.ft. to 681. sq.ft. The townhome units each have 92 to 94 sq.ft. of private patio space. Staff finds each unit exceeds UDC requirements. 4. For the purposes of this section,vehicular circulation areas,parking areas, and private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. These areas were not included in the common open space calculations for the site (see OS-1 Exhibit below). 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. The parking ratio the applicant used to calculate parking for this development doesn't meet the current multi family standards. However, this application was submitted prior to the adoption of the new ordinance so staff has analyzed the parking based on the previous standards. Based on the previous code the site was required to provide 191 total parking stalls with 90 of those being covered. Based on the parking calculations provided by the applicant, the residential portion of the development will have 236 spaces (in combination of carports, surface, driveways and garages)which exceeds code requirements. Further, on-street parking (approximately 50 spaces)will be available along Publisher and Titanium. The commercial portion of the development will have 55 parking spaces. NOTE: The parking ratio for the commercial area could decrease with staffs recommendation for Page 14 incorporating a 10 foot wide landscape buffer on the east boundary of the southern- most commercial lot and a plaza area. 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. d. 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 applicant's narrative states that they are providing the required items noted above. The location of the directory and map of the development should be depicted on the site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 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.A minimum of 1.09 acres of common open is required to meet this standard. 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 five(5) central common open space areas throughout the development in excess of this code requirement. 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 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 91 units contain between 500 and 1,200 sf of living area; therefore, a minimum of 22,750 sf. (or 0.52 of an acre) of common open space is required. Page 15 c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.A total of 40 units contain more than 1,200 sf.; therefore, a minimum of 14,000 sf. (or 0.32 acre) of common open space is required. At a minimum, a total of 36,750 sf. (or 0.84 of an acre) of qualified outdoor common open space is required to be provided per this standard. In order to meet the baseline requirement noted above and this standard, a total of 1.93 acres of qualified open space is required. The open space exhibit submitted with the application exceeds the minimum code requirement however, the applicant should remove the linear open space along the south boundary from the calculations as this area doesn't meet the minimum 20 foot dimensional standard noted below. 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').All of the red hatched areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VII.G meet this requirement. 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. The Applicant anticipates the multi family development will be constructed in 6 phases for occupancy purposes. 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) None of the common open space areas are located adjacent to a collector or arterial street. 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. Page 16 c. Recreation: (1) Pool. (2) Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. d. Multi-modal amenity standards: (1) Bicycle repair station. (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) Proposed amenities include a clubhouse with a fitness facility, a swimming pool, an outdoor lounge area, dog park, internal walking trails, community garden and passive open space areas.Another amenity should be included in the development since the applicant is proposing over 100 units. Of the amenities included in the development, there isn't one listed from the multi-modal category above. Therefore, staff recommends that the applicant add one additional amenity from the multi-modal category above and include the amenity on the site plan submitted with the certificate of zoning compliance application. 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(3')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. Page 17 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. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential and commercial structures, included in Section VII.G. The residential units are proposed to be 1-or 2-stories in height, and the clubhouse and commercial buildings are also proposed to be a single-story in height;building materials consist of a stucco in various colors,culture stone accents in various colors,horizontal lap siding, and asphalt shingle roofing. Both the residential and commercial uses complement each other as desired in the MU-C designated area. Staff is supportive of the design for the development as proposed.As noted below compliance with the ASM is required. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this application.Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation with the requirement of a development agreement,preliminary plat and conditional use permit with the provisions noted in Section Vlll, per the Findings in Section IX. The Director has approved the private street request. Page 18 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Descriptions&Exhibit Maps Description for Annexation Artisan Victory Market Subdivision September 22,2022 A portion of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 21,Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 1/4 corner common to said Sections 20 and 21,T.3N., R.1 E., B.M.,from which the Section corner common to Sections 20, 21, 28 and 29 T.3N., R.1 E.,B.M., bears South 00°00'26" Fast,2,700.16 feet, thence on the west boundary line of said Section 21, coincident with the centerline of S.Eagle(load, South 00°0t}"26" East, 1,350.01 feet to the South 1116 corner common to said Sections 20 and 21 and the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence on the north boundary line of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 1 M of said Section 21 coincident with the south boundary of Bancroft Square Subdivision as filed in Book 111 of Plats at Pages 16142 through 16144,records of Ada County, Idaho, South 89°22'03"East,800,06 feet to the west boundary line of Sutherland Farm Subdivision No.2 as filed in Book 89 of Plats at Pages 10242 through 10244, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on said west boundary line and the west boundary line of Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 1 as filed in Book 86 of Plats at Pages 9806 through 9808, records of Ada County,Idaho, South OU'UO'25" East,786.42 feet to the Northeast corner of Inglewood Place Subdivision No. 1 as filed in Book 120 of Plats at Pages 18835 through 18837,records of Ada County,Idaho; thence on the north boundary line of said Inglewood Place Subdivision No. 1 and the westerly extension thereof, North 89'36'03"West, 800.03 feet to the west boundary line of said Section 21,coincident with the centerline of S. Eagle Road; thence on said west boundary line,North 00°00'26'West,789.68 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 14.473 acres, more or less. End of Description. KL LAND CDti� FINS S ~fin. pp1177 9 Nei/'�/-, C'0d9�� or Xo) O� Page 1 of 1 Page 19 1 f4 5,20 5,21 Scale; 1"=20a' 1 0 50 100 200 400 �I �I r7 I Reol Point Balioroft Squa7e 4f Beginning Subdivision 51r16 S89'22'03T $00.D5' I Sutherland. Farm Sub. No. 2 0 0q .0 f 14.47 3 a� [� w o n Acres t w O N (A o P o z a o Q C3 m o Sutherland Farm .Sub, No. 1 N8936'03'W $00.03' lltepdalted Inglewood Place Sub_ No_ 1 Ci w}I o �L r_ 5,20 5.21 Y E,ictory Road I� 779 5.29 5,28 Q €Of 4a qt� y �d Ha Exhibit Drawing for Job No SURVEY BB55W.rP&R/L°9 Annexation �om No- SURVEY C'm 6?79d ae}eaeasru Artisan Victory Market Subdivision GROUP, LLC A portion of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4-of SeceipM1 21, pwg_ oats 7.3N,, R.T., B.M., Ada County, Idaho 9/22/2022 Page 20 Descrlphon for C-C Zone Artisan Victory Market Subdivision March 17,2023 A portlon of the Southwest 1A of the Southwest 114 of Section 21,Townshlp 3 North, Range 1 East. Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 1/4 corner common to said Sections 20and 21, T,3N., R,1E., B.W.from which the Section corner common to Sections 20,21,29 and 28 T_3N_, R.1 E_, 8_M_,bears South 0d'00'25" East,2,700.16lest,thence an the west boundary line of said Section 21,coincident with the centerline of S. Eagle Road, South 00°0926"East, 1.748.31 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING, thence leaving said west boundary line, North W59'344 East, 189.33 feet thence South Ot} W26`East, 109_04 feel; thence 77.62 feet on the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 80.M feel, a central angle of 5503933",and a tang chord which bears South 27048'13' East, 74.61 feet; thence South W3559" East,69.73 feel; thence South 3,P2NO1"West, 10.11 feet thence 30,03 feet on the arc o1 a curve to the left having a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 34°24'26",and a long chord which bears South 17011'47"West, 29.58 feet; thence South 00°03"26" East.92.48 fast; thence 26.76 feet on the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 50.00 feet,a central angle of 2V3234", and a long chard which bears South 14°4651' West, 25.50 feet; thence 26.14 feet on the arc of a reverse curve to the left having a radius of 50,00 feet,a central angle of 2W56`57',and a long chord which bears South 1 V33'40" West,25.84 feel, I%L L q&D DENS 11779 �'5717 It,Z%D Vr [+p OF %Izl ' UrCA Page 1 of 2 Page 21 thence North 89°36'03'West,254,20 feet to the west boundary line of said Section 21,coincident with the centerllne of S. Eagle Road; thence on said west boundary line, North OMO'20"Wasi, 391.38 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Umaining 2.093 acres,more Or less, End of Description. 1179 [39 OF xpc M4, Page 2of2 Page 22 ,A »& , y saw r=�2 o 50 QQ 200 qo adncroft Ass subs vi.� k 4 C o Stcl64w�d FG7-Fn ~ | R « Sub. No. 2 [of Beginning N ® ¥3 E 2CD / J� 10,jjr y�s ' 10 �■7 q ol d �nd Farm§ � � I q' LLAJ in � � # zngl,_U e a_ $ 3 . rT 0 : e o f rve Table ®.s3 21 .Eyao» R _ � ¥h -Radius a m 0�dBeam a� a t�k2S CI 2 o " , E 4£S.2i 2 MOLY 50- 3-V a• g p,'' n.5 c3 2,7� 50,0O 2�32»' e r«m„.w ME:] c■ 2e1d 50-10o 2g14- " 4 I,W-, Z5. ID H n hbt DG¥ng or o : SURVEY ��� — C—C Zoe *_ : ti n �� y Mark¥ b ¥+ 1 GROUP, LLC ApaptimCOm » + m _ # . _ Sw_ a d. ae T-M, R , _ Cftfity, Ld_ 3/1 u3 Page 23 description for R-15 Zone Artisan Victory Markel Subdivision March 17, 2023 A portion of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Sectlon 21,Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows; Commencing at the 114 comer common to said Sections 20 and 21, UN„ R_1 E„ B.M.,from which the Section corner common to Sections 20,21,29 and 29 73N., RAE_, B.M.,bears South 00'00'26" East,2,740.16 feet,thence on the west boundary line of said Section 21,coincident with the centerli no of S. Eagle Road, South 00°00'26"East, 1,350.01 feet to the South 1/16 comer oommon to said Sections 20 and 21 and the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence on the north boundary line of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of said Section 21 coincident with the south boundary of Bancroft Square Subdivision as filed in Book 111 of Plats at Pages 16142 through 16144, records of Ada County, Idaho.South 89'22'0 "East,800,06 feel to the west boundary line of Sutherland Farm Subdivision No_2 as filed in Book 89 of Plats at Pages 10242 through 10244, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on said west boundary line and the west boundary line of Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 1 as Filed in Book 86 of Plats at Pages 9806 through 9808. records of Ada County, Idaho.South 00°0026'East. 786,42 feat to the Northeast comer of Inglewood Place Subdivision No_ 1 as filed in Book 120 of Plats at Pages 18835 through 18837, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on the north boundary line of said Inglewood Place Subdlvislon No_ 1 and the westerly extension thereof,Wrth 89'36`03' West,545,83 feet; thence leaving the westerly extension of said north boundary llne,26.14 feet on the arc cf a curve to the fight having a radius of 50.00 feet,a central angle of 29'56'57',and a long chard which bears Narfh 14'33'40" East, 25.84 feel; thence 25.78 feet on the arc of a reverse curve to the left having a radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 29032'34',and a long chord which bears North 14°45'51" East, 25.50 feet; thence North 00°00'26"West,92.48 feet; pL LA AID \ ,ENS $ — Ot 11779 LP3 3 O 0 ',- 0F1 # Aug CC A Page 1 of 2 Page 24 thence 30M feet on the arc of a curve to the rlght having a radlus of 50.00 feet,a central angle of 34024'26',and a long chord which bears North 171 V47" East, 29.58 feet; thence North 34°2,VOI" East, 10-11 feet; thence North 5S 3559"West,69.73 feel; thence 77.62 feet on the arc of a curve to the right hewing a radius of ROM fact,a central angle of 55'35'33',and a long chord which bears North 27'48'1 a'West, 74.i51 leet; thence North 00'00'26"West. 109.04 feet, thence South 89'59`34`Vilest, 199.35 feet io the west boundary line of said Section 21,coi ncident wiith the centerline of S_ Eagle Road; thence on Said west b0undsry line,North 00000'26"West. 398.30 feel to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. ontalnIng 12.360 acres,more or Im. End of Description_ W cIENS . 1177 ,A lz° ' OF % C) f! M&P� Pas!e Z of 2 Page 25 1/4 ,5.20 S_21 �V Scale 1"=200' ' 50 100 200 4?;) Ln ' d Bancroft Square Real uh4ibts$m of Begginning , - m - ae io w Sutherland Farm Sub. Na. 9 °` 0 Acres 0en w S89'S9'3*'w "00,00'26"W o W kd I 10�I,154' m I Ln r u�i r? N5535'59'W N34'24`01`E 69.73' 10.11' Sutherland Farm ;n �" C2 C1 �L LA NW'M'03'W 545.83' lJ 1a11ed fngieAuuvd rtrlace zz I Sub. ffa_ ? a_ 11779 'a Ob E 0 F �L,�P - � �'� A4 c C P•�`1� _ I Curve Table 5.2fl S_21 €.Vm ary Road Ourwe Length Radius Delta Chard Bearing Chard Distance C1 26.147 50.00' 22'56'57" N14'33'40'E 25.84' C2 25.79' 58.00' 29'3234' H14'45'51'E 25.50' C3 W-03' 50-00' 3447*"26' N17.1i'47E 29,30' C4 77.62' 1 84.44' S5`3533" N2 7-4871 3-W 74.61' IDAHO Exhibit OrowTng for Job E gee�r'fWiwn sr. R-15 Zone sneak 14a. SURV .oax nw�� Artisan Victor Mafke% $Ubdivi$ipn 1 GROUP, LLC k po Uk of khs Syr 1/4 of +1'. SW 1/4 of &KUQA S Z, fig. Doke r.31.. 'VE.. Ew., Aqa Caunk Idaho 3/17/2023 Page 26 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 03/15/2023) PFJUIMINMY AKMAN iueMTT suiomsw�u ' i I i i i E—i i i i _.._ .� --------------- a j "� '1RIIr PLAH sHEET INDEX o i i o�� -0rw awcc n.� "iK9` 'Mfi�9ii5i7R1•••�••••"•�«..� Q aZ j � J � --- ---—--- Il BLOCK irx Avo I I I P- Page 27 �! M11� S�` it ■N.}'a - I;i �+ : ' i. fr1 �I��:�I • I h.+. 4— II � I��i��a I II ■ I�r �:�� �i t v,. III. 1 ■rY rf Ir rf 1 r■ ` � ��:`� !li J� � C ,I ,� � ■� I W/YYp k��Y•W`W.�IY.•s" '�""tick a �'' : '� �4 11 � �� ,�% 4. 1. 1. i. �_ iwy..wy��.'i, - �.f■-. cf - loll Alm ��� g °Y �)��'�� � ^�.�! 11 1� ■.}fir I�� ,�� Irv, WIN— �, - � ■ i.�. I _-r it r� i_�;�ri�.'�� � � . - .; IF A15.•�7Ir I - � �.I � � � l:1 it..'f]f =r�1G' - j 'rr,•�'r.' �-�!� �ill I-�. _ I l l l i n d JL pLANT PAL=rlt MOM W11 Mt LLI LANOS:AM CALCULATIONS aL�'r VATA NOTES ms. Am am wowwE oarnae L4 Page 30 �" 11 J r ter.- MIR 19, nm YIIIYIYIYIfiYIYIYIIIYIY�WYIY - ,,ram m—c N VICTC'RV T.1ADVlC (`(l Al!-'CL]T L]L]AC1,.1/_OI i r 1 AMoaN7^c �flA'v.dd .f 11 ! r 1 -.� �2 L�6Nvh� tdKvd 6SAfS M'i 1 iFH f6vh d� !6HN �flfS�Kd S E 1h4s6vhd 4 ."6SSiYv'd �,1�1,' 1 EFS�Kfi�d� S dvR s11�1Rfidd \ � IYa H F6vRe di S dH�s CSf1 dd �k N AdvR:1l da 6vR 1 6-Af1-dc� °� - ldkfthfc Sc;'SJdKv�46�9,cKcA�: '��!j��i@ I �"d:,VF,`��:1\,•,;fS_�S'.C'��a :, �dd_T0_"-i(� Fit 1 I ' Y-� i,...' E. Common Open Space Exhibit for Multi-Family Development(dated: 03/15/2023) �Y. W SPACB 87®81f FOR . jj:Ity uAM r I I I i _ @ Y W o : .. .._,.. 0 W z p a s 1 Page 32 F. Site Amenity Exhibit for Multi-Family Development—CUP(dated: 2/6/23) AMENITIES A—Clubhouse and Pool B—Dog Parix A—Schematic Clubhouse and Pool C—Playground —-- B D—Community Gardens E—Open Space B—Dogii u . • airFFI t: C—Playground D—Community Cortlens _ 1110. E D Page 33 G. Conceptual Building Elevations&Perspectives for Multi-Family Development T voo� MODERN —CRAFTSMAN .- VICIOHY MANNA CLUBHOUSE E:1FM lift f i BARON -1 U M M E L MODERN CRAFTSMAN COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS DRAFF CONCEPTS f _ MMMI LINE MEN MAI BARDN IUM M EL Page 34 r - MODERN DRAFTSMAN 1 BED 1 BATH DUPLEX E _ MEN SImIfF.l`.ilAl"L HOOF ❑❑® MEN MEN. BARON iiuM MEL "'°R°°F MODERN CRAFTSMAN 2 BED 2 BATH TYPE A FINE INIMM SINGLE SLOPE ROOF � ❑�❑ Mr, rl=- NORM BARON iUMMEL Page 35 Hil°HOOF MODERN Y CRAFTSMAN K 2 BED 2 BATH GARAGE ■EN LINE MEN ENE ■■ Bn fAUMMEL MODERN CRAFTSMAN 3 BED 2 BATH ❑NE ■■ SWGLE SLOPE ROOF LINE 9-~ rt .0 ur vl —� ' � a im. uukuuaa iuuul�auvuva ❑❑® EaRRN SUM MEL Page 36 MODERN CRAFTSMAN TOWNHOUSES-6 PLEX INIMM �.. maw mwn BARDN I�UM M EL "�- MODERN CRAFTSMAN VC I CAY MAHHI I ENTRY FEATURE LINE ■ BARON HUMMEL Page 37 MODERN CRAFTSMAN GARAGE-STORAGE BUILDING - FINE ❑■N BARON PUMMEL Page 38 VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan, site plan,preliminary plat,conceptual phasing plan,landscape plan, open space and site amenity exhibits, and conceptual building elevations submitted with the application contained herein. b. The applicant shall include a plaza area in the commercial area that ties in with the open space south of the clubhouse and pool and provide a decorative pedestrian crossing to integrate the two open spaces. A pedestrian connectivity shall also be provided to the existing 7-foot sidewalk adjacent to Eagle Rd. c. The final plat shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for any structures within this development. d. The site shall be restricted to only one drive-through on the property as proposed.A conditional use permit approval is required prior to commencement of the use. Preliminary Plat: 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Include a note granting cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all commercial lots in the subdivision,Inglewood Subdivision to the south, and Eagle Road via a note on the final plat. b. Depict all street landscape buffers in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business owners' association as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.A minimum 25 foot wide buffer is required along S. Eagle Rd per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.1. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised as follows: a. Landscaping is required within the street buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C. (See updated standards.) b. Depict landscaping within common open space areas as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3. c. With final plat submittal, any fencing proposed along Publisher and Titanium shall be installed 10 feet from the property line. 4. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district and UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district. 5. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B,unless otherwise waived by City Council. Page 39 6. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the detail mitigation plan in accord with UDC 11-3B-10. 7. All structures on the property shall be removed for the site with development of the subdivision. 8. Comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 9. Comply with the private street standards in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private streets shall be in a common lot. If the private street is proposed to intersect Eagle Rd. apply for alternative compliance 15 days prior to the City Council hearing. 10. Staff has concerns with the residential units on the east side of Titanium Ave, specifically pedestrian safety. The residents on this side of the roadway will need to cross the street to gain access to the main amenities. The applicant shall coordinate with ACHD and include decorative crossings through this roadway and provide traffic calming at the Titanium and Publisher intersection. Conditional Use Permit: 11. Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi-Family Development. 12. The site/landscape plans included in Section VII shall be revised as follows: a. All shared driveways along the east side of Titanium shall be a minimum width of 20 feet and the garages stepped back as prosed to ensure vehicles can utilize the single car garages. b. 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. c. 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- 2 7B.7. d. Remove the 15-foot linear open space along the southern property boundary from the qualifying open space calculations. A new open space exhibit is required 15 days prior to City Council to ensure the development still complies with the multi-family common open space standards. e. Depict landscaping along all the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E. f. Depict a minimum of 20 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 two central locations as proposed. g. Depict a minimum of 236 parking spaces for the multifamily development as proposed. h. Provide amenities for the development as shown in Exhibit VII.F. The applicant shall provide another amenity from the multi-modal category and provide a detail of the amenity with the CZC submittal. Page 40 i. 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-5134; if 7-foot sidewalks are proposed,the length of the stall may be reduced to 17 feet. j. The applicant shall relocate the trash enclosure located on the north side of the parking lot east of the pool and install a 5-foot wide sidewalk to provide a more direct connection to the children play structure. 13. 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. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the multi-family and commercial development to ensure compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this application. B. PUBLIC WORKS Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Project must submit Phasing Memo with construction drawings per Land Development Notes associated with PREAPP-2021-0192. If project will be phased for occupancy,then separate Land Development record will need to be submitted for review of the public utilities with each phase. 2. A streetlight plan will be required for the development of this property. 3. Remove main for manhole 133 and 134. Run sewer service directly to building for apartment buildings. 4. Provide turn around area for manhole F 1 (turn around approximately the same as fire truck). 5. Common Driveways with four or more lots need to have a private sewer line that will be the responsibility of the HOA. A manhole in the common driveway located at the property boundary is required with a lid that states Private. 6. Sewer easement width varies depending on sewer depth. Sewer 0-15 ft deep require a 20 ft easement, 16-20 ft a 30 ft easement, and 21-30 ft a 40 ft easement. Also see general note three under Public Works General Conditions of Approval for additional easement requirements. 7. When sewer and water easements are combined the width of the easement will vary depending on sewer depth. Sewer 0-20 ft deep require a 30 ft easement, 20-25 ft a 40 ft easement, and 25-30 ft a 45 ft easement. Page 41 8. For water and sewer in parallel,if sewer depth is greater than 15', locate water main 5 ft from edge of easement and center the sewer main between the water main and other edge of easement. 9. Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches,light poles, etc.)are built within the utility easement. 10. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. 11. Avoid having the water meters in hardscape. First option would be to have them in landscaping where we can have at least 10 ft separation from the building and 10 ft easement(we are ok with extended pigtails). If there is no suitable landscaping to meet that requirement then place the meters as far from the building as possible and provide as close to 10 ft as possible. 12. Applicant to ensure that services up to the water meter have 20 ft easement. Carports and other permanent structures cannot be with in easement. The areas of concern are the units north of Loon Creek Ln and Publisher Ln. 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(MCC 12-13-8.3). 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. Page 42 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. 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 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-I2-3H. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 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. 2.20 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. Page 43 2.21 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. 2.22 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. 2.23 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://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=281216&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X Meets all Fire Dept.requirements and is across the street from Station#4. D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments have been received. E. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancitE.o.-glWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=282300&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit v&cr=1 F. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridiancitE.o.-glWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=289314&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X G. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL by s://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=282195&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=285810&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X I. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=281205&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit v&cr=1 Page 44 J. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL IMPACT h yps://weblink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=286761&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X K. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=282820&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X L. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=286497&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X M. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=290332&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y&cr=1 N. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=290332&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y&cr=1 IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: 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 an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment to the R-15 and C-C zones and subsequent development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the MU-C FLUM designation. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment will allow for the development of commercial uses which will assist in providing for the service needs of area residents; and residential uses which will contribute to the range of housing opportunities in the City consistent with the purpose statement of the commercial and residential districts in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Page 45 Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. 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; Staff 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; Staff 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, Staff 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; Staff 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, Staff 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. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. C. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E) The Commission 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. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed uses and dimensional and development regulations of the C-C and R-15 zoning districts (see Analysis, Section V for more information). Page 46 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed uses are consistent with the future land use map designation of MU-C. 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. Staff finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the 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. Stafffinds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission and Council should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 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. Staff finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. D. Private Street(UDC 11-3F-5) In order to approve the application,the Director shall find the following: 1. The design of the private street meets the requirements of this Article; The Director finds the proposed design of the private streets does comply with all of the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4., however the private street shall not connect to Eagle Road unless approved through the alternative compliance process. 2. Granting approval of the private street would not cause damage hazard, or nuisance, or other detriment to persons,property, or uses in the vicinity; and Staff does not anticipate the proposed private streets would cause damage hazard or other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity if the streets are designed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4B. The adjacent neighborhoods will still have access through the development via a local street network for a portion of the site. 3. The use and location of the private street shall not conflict with the comprehensive plan and/or the regional transportation plan. The Director finds the use and location of the proposed private streets does not conflict with the regional transportation plan.A local street network is being provided with the development to provide connectivity with adjacent neighborhoods which is desired in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 47 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. This finding is not applicable as this a multi family development and not a mew or gated development. Page 48 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation L------------- R P TIE�� 0 � 0 � � MODERN CRAFTSMAN BARON PROPERTIES 24 FOUNDED IN TOTAL PROPERTIES (� AT A GLANCE DEVELOPED 8 59000 + OPERATING IN OWNED + OPERATED UNITS 6 MARKETS L _may■ � � yff.��}}'i and operate QUALITY MANAGEMENT Long term ownersrdevelopments 1 ijA s 1 Experienced & professional management service seven days a week 1 24 hour on-call maintenance Regulated community oversight ;,- _ MODERN yam : - CRAFTSMAN F L _ ■1 BEDROOM ' •+ -_-- DUPLEX $—'� ■ 2 BEDROOMS 2 BEDROOMS 1 "'°'°`" ■ WITH GARAGE , 77 w.w.vmmx u. €� � � '*� ■ 3 BEDROOMS o I I € 6-PLEX 4 PARKING NU VAN ui ACCESSIBLE l w n V AMENITIES C A t\ r GARAGE ■ STORAGE _ - IL ■ LIVE-WORK ,. UNITS Sam J gr Ashley Cotton 2 reviews 4 reviews Littlefair 4 revews ***** a month ago ***** amonthago Modern Craftsman is easily the best community in the valley_Nestled close to Costco,Freddies and MODERN - everything else you could possibly need,not to mention the staff is absolutely amazing)Best decision The leasing team was a huge help!Modern Craftsman has built a fantastic community with luxury — CRAFTSMAN you could make would be to call this community home.Trust me,you won't regret it!l amenities and very spacious homes to rent.I can't wait to move in! AT TEN MILE 135 UNITS APPROVED 2/9/2021 EDROOM a DUPLEX 2 BEDROOMS 03z 0 r., 3 BEDROOMS ffPARKING AMENITIES GARAGE STORAGE UINITS W. I 1 1 ■ mod. gill ♦ �� i i s ♦ J� .�� I� . II ♦.1;1♦. r MODERN - - CRAFTSMAN MODERN _ — CRAFTSMAN - '" �, ■■ ■onos • s ■ .1 �■ ■ 111 11111lMINIM IN OR 111� INE OR VICINITY MAP MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN n 5 IN SIT[ PUN a ZONING • SeekingR-15 (10.57 acres) and � - �- � P'��� , F• C-C zoning (1.44 acres) • Zoningof immediate) .�� #" �� ",, ■ adjacent properties yE , '�� „ . f_!J �i • North. R-8 d - : 11� ira ._ • East: R-4 J , • South: R-15 and CC } , } I ------- MODERN - ! - �� � wil � CRAFTSMAN STORAGE CENTER o .j- THE EYE ASSOCIATES -� � I 4 !'ARK ` �Q Lu \, ACCOUNTING �� STONE CREEK DENTAL J �VJ g WQl J - �- I� 777 T C 1 N E � �, �i' I I I I f INITIAL POINT FAMILY MEDICINE !a -ALLSTATE -- - E Y� U----------- RESIDENTIAL PARCELS Q SPINE AND PHYSICAL MEDICINE c - 39 PARCELS TOTAL AREA OF 6.10 ACRES AUGUST STUDIO J R APPROVED PARCELS FOR COMMERCIAL USE (UNDEVELOPED LAND OR INCOMPLETE CONSTRUCTION) RESIDENTIAL HOMES i Q Z6 PARCELS RffU `7 TOTAL AREA OF 4.78 ACRES i i ACTIVE COMMERCIAL LOCATIONS PROJECT SITE APPROVED EMPTY LOT 12 PARCELS tPETOTAL AREA OF 12.83 ACRES u] l L PROJECT SITE RITEAID r 0 Q 'y 7 PARCELS w �, TOTAL AREA OF 13.64 ACRES RESIDENTIAL HOMES i APPROVED EMPTY LOT \ ASSISTED LIVING -- E C UL Lf M T TOTAL AREA:64 PARCELS ----� TOTAL AREA:37.35 ACRES Z 36.5%PROPERTY SITE J J APPROVED EMPTY LOT 34.4%COMMERCIAL 16.3%RESIDENTIAL 12.8%AVAILABLE , Z - 4W PRODUCT VARIIIY a mix • Varying roof lines blended throughout the community ,w for a custom home community feel • Up to 6 unique products • Three exterior color schemes Rich materials including cultured stone, +•e, g wood tone lap siding and architectural asphalt shingles R° Residential Units: • 1 bed/1 bath duplex (47%) - 62 units, �• -- • 2 bed/2bath single family homes (28%) - 37 units, _ = � ' 16 units with attached garage 21 units without garage " ' 3 bed/2bath single family homes - (6%) 8 units • Townhomes with garages - (18%) 24 units = • Detached Garages with Storage • 18 garage bays (3 buildings with 6 bays each) MODERN _ • 48 storage units (3 buildings with 16 storage units each) — CRAFTSMAN • RISIDINTIA16 1010 1 BATH DUPIIX y e 11 ,, k! • Two different rooflines • 62 units (47% of unit mix) • Three exterior color schemes • 692 sf MODERN CRAFTSMAN • B[SID[NIIAIG 2 a 3 BIBROON TOWNHOMIS I� a \t • 24 units (18% of unit mix) ' Three exterior color schemes • 1,213 - 1,352 sf • Two car garage for each unit MODERN - * CIUBHOUSI may, yr I 1 71 i whim MODERN - - CRAFTSMAN D[TACHID GARAB[S WITH STORABI `'■ i fir* I s 18 garage bays (3 bldgs w/ 6 bays each) Three exterior color • 48 storage units (3 bldgs w/ 16 storage units each) schemes MODERN - * COMMUNITY AMIN1111S • Spacious clubhouse with lounge, coffee bar, conference room, zoom room and state of the art - fitness center ,�, � - - • ; 4 u Large pool deck and pool with covered patio/grill area and high-end furniture • Community garden, playground, fenced dog park, _ _ ►� �:,� �I II gyp, Al and large open spaces • Package lockers a r • Wide sidewalks and connectivity throughout the k site to allow for social interaction }. , • Lush landscaping throughout the community '- s�i ,49rt • In-unit washer/dryers - • Smart security systems, smart thermostat and keyless entry y. MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN � x INTIRIOR ANINITIls Private patio, balcony or yard for each unit • Tuck under and attached garages in select units • 10-12 ceilings =� • Spacious, open living floor plans ! • Luxurious and modern finishes, stainless steel appliances, quartz countertops • In-unit washer/dryers • Smart security systems, smart thermostat and keyless entry MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN o , PARKING 11 ram, I ra�u mm�n�i��I` 11: 11:. �11 11: - 11 11 11 � 11 11 11 11 •�` �+� �� �■ �i�►n�CG�rmr ►►►noon 1 1 1 I I 1 1 ;: 1 I 1 1 yinm•+�• vi ��•i� 11 1= 11 11 � 11 11 11 11� �111� �1 ■■■■ � �� `'+' �� �� � ..■ 111� ��s � iii`CCO' ::■ rr 1111 ��/��nm��� IIA III 111 IIA••• 111 IIA••• 111 All IIA IIA••• � -■■•t•�►■■•■��� ..... �•■m -- 1 -- t - IIIIIr11 �;WEME 1111. con 1 .. o ■■■1■■1- -1 1■■■■: ■ 11 11 11 11 11 � �� � ., ■ ■ w e — t t J _- MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN u ii Jill OR E Jeiw DAF—C, El -—-—-—- R5 12 FT IIE- ---------- JoeIII �i — i", 1. - li i EEB LINEAR RARI<WAY LANC&CAPE STRIP LIDO 11-4-3-27 tA NTOOM - OMMON OPEN SPACE LT' 11-4-1-27 C - COMMON OPEN �PACE AREA I I I I � EIM ST LIDO 11-4-5-21 9-3 PRIVATE USaSLE OPEN SPACE _ � r .i' r�.�-T�- Z.f �`-- [• E T. PHaRWACY Exceeds Open Space Requirement Each unit has a private outdoor space OILS MODERN — CRAFTSMAN PATHES a e AA A A fA AI A ' ■ is Wa EllI .- - . a a as_ a s � 1�► 4 a ¢ as - as aa� ■ . m� � - 0 .......a .a ® ® owoo. o!000e:�::::::_:::_.®®ore:• m..m.. MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN Meridian Fire .3 miles from Station No. #4 Meridian Police Estimated response time 12 min or less Meridian Sewer and Water Meets Meridian Waste Water Master Plan Within Suez service area; service line is directly adjacent (Property is within the City's Urban Service Boundary) AC H D All conditions of approval are acceptable MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN ROADWAY _ MERIDIAN PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE FEBRUARV 2,2023 �� .a�o-•GonlaclM Citya120B884_SSJ'Nw Continuation of Streets Policy: District Policy 7207.2.4 Mates that an existing street, or a street in an approved preliminary plat, which ends at a boundary of a proposed development shall be extended in that development. The extension shall include provisions for continuation of storm drainage facilities. Benefits of connectivity include but are not limited to the following: • Reduces vehicle miles traveled. • Increases pedestrian and bicycle connectivity_ Increases access for emergency services. v ". * Reduces need for additional access points to the arterial street system. * Promotes the efficient delivery of services including trash, mail and deliveries, Promotes a ro iiate intra-neighborhood hborhood traffic circulation to schools, parks, `� r PP p 9 1« [r Mom' _ vRoaosm maEcr ioranaJ7: neighborhood commercial centers, transit stops, etc_ „ - ate`FF _ Promotes orderly development. >1 ��4i�," �L - �. EPUBUSHERBf The development will not be detrimental to the public health. safety or general welfare. and, �F Sta is Prot airare of any health, safety°, or env ro?n?rental problems associated frith theplatting Of this property. ACHD considers road sgrfei�! issues in their aiO37sis. - - EVOiORY ROAD MODERN - CRAFTSMAN e> r ° ' COMMIRCIA1 1 1 - - - Maximum of 18,100 sf of commercial �-- ' space fronting Eagle Road • Exceeds required parking Complementary architectural • • design and materials to adjacent residential units MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN CONDITIONS Of APPROVAI CITY AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS We agree with all of the staff conditions of approval with the exception of the following: Condition of Approval VIII.A.2.1.c Staff recommei... "The final plat shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for any structures within this development." Condition of Approval V111.13.2.9 Staff recommends, "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." MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN CONDITIONS Of APPROVAI continued VI I I.A.9 Comply with the private street standards in UDC 11-3F-4. The proposed private streets shall be in a common lot. If the private street is proposed to intersect Eagle Rd. apply for alternative compliance 15 days prior to the City Council hearing. MODERN _ CRAFTSMAN THANK YOU MODERN - CRAFTSMAN • RISIBINTIA1• 3 B[D 2 BATH ............ ... ....... i 1 mom- ra - � 1 r } }! :,r`�., �}{.(� {"C�:�y, 5 i�{ 'r��S����r�'.�' `j{�{'N' •' ��fb�.�t,� � i`t"�li�- "7i+4�S'i,�) ,t. :4G� n�,rv::,. . `i:, -i i a � '� � � \:•.%7. d,.ik }' '} �1•I�5'�r11 tr��'}���{�j�x'1�1, :.�`1��'�;' ��(.'�,, � 1 'G` ♦` � Y.� ,.,� 4,. J/.��.. t �4+ 't�,`$ .�b„- ��) yr,. �i�.a itif;'�i'} ��''j�.•,}} r`1.1y.;!,�4w ,� �, �� b` r;/h',f` ! ��. �e+r��;nuL� G . � S, f)I� ��. /r ,..✓ r# :.y''� Y—v .l\�wf: .,� �_..�, SSA �•it<„�, �i,i7 {?9_. ,d,Si�l�P'�s, tF,,�i +' "r .9YU�s 7IWO P' ✓ � a1,.�Y4�'� =/ - � r � �r eb � L '� 1, 1 � A 3, - -�►� i rt»x i;,1°�'.�T�..�.d,.;�n ;,ka!��"�nbro!x s�k 8 units (6% of unit mix) • Two different rooflines 1,302 sf • Three exterior color schemes MODERN CRAFTSMAN • B[SID[NIIA[• 2 010 2 BUH GARAGI z •.J I - ,�. 7 - i • 16 units (12% of unit mix) • Two different rooflines • 1,083 sf • Three exterior color schemes MODERN CRAFTSMAN I c�'), �40 - EXISTING BUILDINGS FOR COMMERCIAL USE S 30+Locations' !. •; APPROVED PARCELS FOR COMMERCIAL USE j (UNDEVELOPED LAND OR INCOMPLETE CONSTRUCTION) o,136 • 1 -• + - 92�� �i * 14+Parcels/Locations' i ACTIVE COMMERCIAL LOCATIONS 200+Parcels/Locations' - PROJECT LOCATION1- t / e �L \ 0 ❑ �/ rri , I hool Enrollment • , Ad Pepper Ridge Elementary 515 675 Lewis & Clark Middle School 885 11000 Mountain View High School 2461 2175 School of Choice Options To meet the need for additional school capacity in this area one or more of the following may need to be accomplished: • Transporting students to an alternate school with available classrooms. Christine Donnell Elementary—Arts 474 500 • Attendance area adjustments if there is availability in a nearby school. Spalding Elementary - STEM 678 750 • Portable classrooms placed on the property. IP Passage of a bond to build new schools to fit the enrollment needs. MODERN — R / 1 IMWMmm Table E5-2 -- Findings and Potential Mitigations The only fallinst movement is the eastbound thrclugh}left turning movement at the Eagle - 4 - Road/ Easy Jet Drive intersection in the AM peal( hou r- Findings A total of 26 crashes were recorded at study area intersections and roadway seciments in - �BS � t ❑flVi' �� the most recent five-year period resulting in 15 property damage only crashes, 9 injury ' - crashes, and 1 faiei crash. _ The eastbound and westbound approaches of the Eagle Road f Easy Jet could be re- Potential Mit ■ • striped to have a shared through/right turn lane and a left turn lane.This would mitigate all failing movements. '1� rF� �i�•�SFC� � 2025 Background �. - .: _�=.a,•;,. ; The only failing movement is the eastbound through/left turning movement at the Eagle Findings Road! Easy Jet Drive intersection in the AM peak hour. i No programmed roadway or intersection projects in the study area to be constructed byPlanned Improvements2026 + The eastbound and westbound approaches of the Eagle Road ! Easy Jet could be re- IF' l Potential Mitigationsstriped to have a shared throughlright turn lane and a left turn Iane- This would mitigate ' all failing movements. AN 2025 Plus Project Conditions + The only failing movement is the eastbound through}left turning movement at the Eagle Access A) Road! Easy Jet Drive intersection in the AM peak hour. + The only failing movements are th a eastbound through/left turning movement at the Findings(without Project Eagle Road/Easy Jet Drive intersection in the AM peak hour and the westbound Access A) through/left turning movement at the Eagle Road/Easy Jet Drive intersection in the AM - - _ - - — and PM peak hours. + The eastbound and westbound approaches of the Eagle Road / Easy Jet could be re- Potential Mitigations striped to have a shared throughfright turn lane and a left turn Iane- This would mitigate all failing movements. Turn Lane Analysis • No turn lanes are warranted. 1 • It is recommended that the eastbound and westbound approaches of the Eaqle Road f Victo Road Easy Jet be re-striped to have a shared through/right turn lane and a left turn lane. • � � 1 1