The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-05-23 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Joe Borton Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Brad Hoaglun Councilman John Overton Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PROCLAMATION 1. Older Americans Month Proclamation PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) by Riley Planning Services, located at 4135 W. Cherry Ln. Denied Application Materials: https://bit.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. Motion to deny made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilman Cavener Voting Nay: Councilwoman Perreault 3. Public Hearing for Chimney Peak Subdivision (SHP-2023-0002) by Centurion Engineers, Inc., located at 4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/SHP-2023-0002 A. Request: Short Plat to re-subdivide Lot 18, Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6 consisting of 1.45 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district into four (4) building lots and one (1) common lot. Motion to approve made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 4. Public Hearing for Promenade Cottages Subdivision (H-2022-0013) by Steve Arnold, A-Team Consultants, located at 403 E. Fairview Ave. Continued to June 20, 2023 Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0013 A. Request: Rezone approximately 6.819 and 0.326 acres of land from the R-8 and C-G zoning districts to the R-40 (6.61 acres) and C-G (0.535 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 30 single-family residential lots, 5 multi-family lots, 2 commercial lots and 8 common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the requested R-40 and C-G zoning districts. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct a 90-unit, multi-family development on approximately 2.8 acres in the requested R-40 zoning district. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct single-family, detached dwellings on the 10 of the 30 single-family residential lots in the requested R- 40 zoning district. E. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow the existing, non-conforming parking, landscaping and mobile home park to remain as is for an extended period of time in the C-G and requested R-40 zoning districts. Motion to continue to June 20, 2023 made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener 5. Public Hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 (H-2023-0024) by JUB Engineers, located at 6380 S. Cubola Way. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0024 A. Request: Vacation to vacate 0.5 feet of the 5-foot side yard public utility easement on Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Overton. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener FUTURE MEETING TOPICS EXECUTIVE SESSION 6. per Idaho Code 74-206 (1)(j) To consider labor contract matters authorized under section 74-206A (1)(a) and (b), Idaho Code Motion to enter executive session made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Borton, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Hoaglun, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener Into executive session: 8:50 PM Out of executive session: 9:53 PM ADJOURNMENT 9:54 PM Meridian City Council May 23, 2023. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6.09 p.m. Tuesday, May 23, 2023, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Brad Hoaglun, Luke Cavener, Jessica Perreault, Liz Strader and John Overton. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Stacy Hersh, Scott Colaianni, Jordan Reese and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader X Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_ John Overton _X_ Jessica Perreault _S_Luke Cavener X Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: All right. Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is May 23rd, 2023, at 6.09 p.m. We will begin this evening's City Council meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: Next up will be our community invocation, which this evening will be delivered by Pastor Troy Drake. If you would all, please, join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Pastor. Drake: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, would you join me? Lord God, we just appreciate this beautiful place that we get to live in and your grace upon us and, you know, our heart just breaks for those who are going through difficult times and we appreciate that you are always just as close as a prayer and so we appreciate that about you, God, that you are always inclining your ear towards us and so, God, I just lift up our -- our city, especially thinking about the citizens and that, you know, we would just treat one another with respect and kindness here and continue, you know, what's been -- what's been already -- the foundation that's been laid here in this town and, Lord, that you would just bless the work of our hands here. God, we pray for the -- those who protect us, the first responders, those who come to our aid when we need help and we just ask that you would protect them as they do and -- and, God, I'm also thinking about Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 2 of 49 everything that happens in this building. And we just appreciate all the thought and planning that goes into the buildings that we walk in and out of all the time, Lord, that they are safe. It's not that way everywhere and we just appreciate that it is here and that these folks do that hard work for us and that you would bless them and, then, last, but not least, God, I just ask that you bless this Council meeting, the Mayor and Council Members, the decisions they make, that you would just give them a lot of wisdom and grace as they, you know, tackle the small and big decisions here. So, we just thank you for them and asked that they would prosper. In your name we pray, amen. Thanks for the opportunity. Simison: Thank you. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I move that we adopt the agenda as published. Overton: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. PROCLAMATION 1. Older Americans Month Proclamation Simison: First item up will be a proclamation for Older Americans Month. Raul with the Area 3 Senior Services Agency, if you want to join me at the podium for this proclamation. So, we are going to be celebrating Older Americans Month this month of May. Raul reached out and asked us if we would do a proclamation this year. So, I will go ahead and read the proclamation and, then, turn it over to you for any additional comments that you would like to make in this regard. So, whereas every May the Administration for Community Living leads the nation's observance and celebration of Older Americans Month, OAM, and whereas the 2023 theme is Aging Unbound, which offers an opportunity to explore diverse aging experiences and discuss how communities can combat stereotypes and whereas the City of Meridian includes 26,690 older Americans, which is 21 percent of the city population who contribute their time, wisdom and experience to our community and whereas communities in Idaho benefit when people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds have the opportunity to participate and live independently and remain engaged and included and whereas the City of Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 3 of 49 Meridian recognizes the need to create a community that offers the services and supports older adults may need to make choices about how they age. Therefore, I, Mayor Robert E. Simpson, do hereby proclaim May 2023 as Older Americans Month in the City of Meridian and encourage all citizens to celebrate our older citizens, help to create inclusive society and accept the challenge of flexible thinking around aging. So, thank you and I'm happy to present this to you, Raul. Enriquez: So, we -- we are here in Meridian. I'm at the Southwest Idaho Area Agency on Aging. We have multiple senior services programs. We just wanted to take this opportunity to reach out and recognize the older population. If you go to southwestidahoa3ssa.com you can see all our programs and services that are there. So, thank you. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Okay. Next up is public forum. Mr. Clerk, did we have anyone sign up? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. ACTION ITEMS 2. 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. Simison: Okay. Then we will go into Action Items. Item 2 is public hearing for Crowley Park Subdivision, H-2023-0006. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Hersh: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. The applicant is here to present their project for the Crowley Park Subdivision. The applications that were submitted were annexation and zoning, preliminary plat and alternative compliance, which doesn't require Council action and I just wanted to note that the project was denied at the City Council hearing on April 6th. The site consists of 1.002 acres of land, zoned R-1 in Ada county, located at 4125 West Cherry Lane. There is no history on the -- for the project. The comprehensive FLUM designation is medium density residential and the summary of the request is -- this is an in-fill project. The applicant is proposing for 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 compliance requests at a gross density of 4.99 units per acre, Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 4 of 49 which is within the desired density range of the medium density residential designation for Crowley Park Subdivision. The proposed development offers lot sizes ranging from 4,011 square feet to 5,768 square feet, with the existing home on 9,744 square feet. Single family detached and attached homes are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district per the UDC. Future development is subject to the dimensional standards in the UDC for the R-8 zoning district. An existing home on the property is proposed to remain on Lot 1, Block 1, and is required to connect to city and water services within the 60 days of it becoming available. The outbuildings located on Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, should be removed with the development of this property and there are three alternative compliance requests. The first one is for the common driveway shall serve a maximum of four dwelling units. In no case show more than three dwelling units be located on one side of the driveway. The applicant is proposing five dwelling units take access off the common driveway. All five dwelling units are also located on one side of the driveway. Alternative compliance to the common driveway standards is requested due to the lot only having access from an arterial -- arterial roadway. There is no local street connection available to this site and based on the analysis the director is supportive of the request for alternative for the proposed five dwelling units taking access off the west side of the common driveway. And the next -- number two all alternative compliance request is 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 ten 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 alternative compliance for -- for the existing carport, with the addition of the Hardie board to match the existing house. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accordance with the standards listed in the UDC for single family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. Staff will confirm -- confirm compliance with these standards at the time of the building permit submittal for each residence. The applicant has provided an additional three parking 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 to west -- along West Cherry Lane in accordance with the UDC. Alternative compliance 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 alternative compliance with staffs recommendation to modify the plans. The applicant has submitted a revised landscape plan that looks to meet the UDC standards. In response to the Commission's concerns regarding the alternative compliance, the amount of numerous alternative compliance requests, staff has suggested utilizing the water conserving design specified in the UDC to eliminate one of the alternative compliance requests. This design allows for a potential reduction of up to 50 percent of the street landscape buffer. The applicant may intend to utilize the landscape design and propose a reduction of five feet to the buffer to accommodate the encroachment of the porch. Staff recommends that the -- that this condition be added to the staff report for the applicant to submit a revised landscape plan if they so choose to pick the water conserving design that adheres to the -- that design stated in the UDC Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 5 of 49 with the final plat submittal. Access is proposed from West Cherry Lane from common drive Lot 2, Block 1. Direct -- direct lot access from West 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 West Cherry Lane, meeting the street access requirements. Common open space and amenities are not required for properties less than five acres in size. And building -- conceptual -- one conceptual building elevation was submitted that demonstrates what future homes in this development will look like. Variations of two- story homes with a two car garage are proposed. The submitted elevations depict field materials of lap siding, different coloring accents, roof profiles and stone. The final design of the structure is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Commission did recommend denial. In favor of the project was Penelope Constantikes. In opposition was none. Commenting was Penelope again. Written testimonies. None. Key issues were none. Discussion of key issues by Commission was concerns with the amount of density proposed on the one acre lot. Concerns with emergency services ability to gain access in and out of the property. Not in agreement with the alternative compliance for the use of lattice on both sides of the existing attached carport as mitigation for an enclosed garage and concerns with the overall parking. And here is some pictures of the existing home and site. And that concludes Staff's presentation and I stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Stacy. Council, questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening. Constantikes: Good evening, Mayor, Council. For the record, Penelope Constantikes. Post Office Box 405, Boise, Idaho. 83701. Just a brief comment on staff's presentation. You did get to it at the end there, that they recommended denial. It wasn't a City Council hearing. So, I'm pleased to present Crowley Park Subdivision to you this evening. It is an in-fill development between Ten Mile and Black Cat Road. The applications before you, as you are aware, include annexation of an Ada county parcel, with a zoning designation of R-8, which is consistent with the Meridian future land use medium density residential designation. This subdivision creates four new mid-range housing options in this area of Meridian on individual lots available for purchase without expanding city services or adding roadway. The gross density of the proposed subdivision is identical to the adjacent Cherrywood Village Subdivision to the west. In the near proximity to the site are a number of services that are bikeable and walkable, including banking, groceries and pharmacy, coffee and casual meals. Church and golf. Golf is always important. As well as medical and veterinarian services. This proposal is com -- excuse me -- consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and complies with the standards and allowances that are provided in the UDC. Crowley Park will utilize existing infrastructure and will not add to the geography of fire, emergency, and police service areas. The applicant and project team have reviewed the staff report and concur. ACHD staff report approved access to the site and I would like to mention that staff is always very knowledgeable. They are always very informative and their professionalism is much appreciated. Contrary to what the Planning and Zoning Commission was concerned about, this access is 24 feet wide, which is two travel lanes, and it meets the City of Meridian Fire Department standards for emergency Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 6 of 49 access with enough width for two travel lanes. In three pre -- pre-application meetings the Fire Department's only question was about paving the shared driveway. A new fire hydrant is proposed for the site with -- with -- between Lots 1 and 2. Each of the new dwellings will have a two car garage and a driveway that provides two additional parking spaces. Although the parking provided is consistent with UDC, the site design includes three additional guest spaces and based on my discussions with Chief Deputy Bongiorno it may be possible to add a couple more. The existing residents will have a minimum of four parking spaces. The three in the -- in the three pre-application meetings that were held with staff we did try to create an appropriate site design and there were two neighborhood meetings. The adjacent neighbors came to the first neighborhood meeting to inquire about water delivery. No one attended the second meeting. But the neighbors were quite helpful when I reached out to them regarding historic irrigation water delivery information. The front porch of the residents intrudes as you know into the regular 25 foot wide landscape area. After the Planning and Zoning hearing the applicant opted to use the water conservation design option to reduce the landscape buffer five feet or about 20 percent to keep their front porch intact and I did on Monday submit an updated preliminary plat and an updated landscape plan that reflected that option. A revised preliminary plat landscape plan were submitted. I believe that the updated landscape plan does meet the intent of the code, but we will work with staff to make sure that the landscape plan is compliant. If Council prefers we would be happy to meander the common lot around the front porch and keep the bulk of it 25 feet. I would like to maybe keep that water conservation landscaping intact regardless of which way we go with that. It's just an easy drawing change. The existing home was constructed in 1938 and remodeled in 1958. The real river rock detailing on the front is quite charming. The home is well built and still has good life in it. The applicant has updated and refreshed the home to enhance the street view and the personal space features. An alternative compliant application was approved by the Planning Director for the carport. To mitigate the carport, the applicant has replaced the originally proposed lattice with Hardie board cladding on the visible sides, which is north and west, to match the residents. Access to the carport will be shifted to the south in combination with two additional parking spaces for a total of four. The application also includes a request for nonconforming use and the applicant does understand that if anything about that house was to change in the future it would require a conditional use permit. With the existing perimeter fencing and new fencing that will be installed between Lots 1 and 2, the rear entrance or the south entrance of the carport shouldn't be visible to anyone. The site design includes more than three -- more than the allowed three residents on the same side of the access drive, as you have -- staff has already discussed. In our discussions with staff it seemed like matching backyard to backyard -- thank you, Bill -- was a good idea to be sensitive to the adjacent neighbors. So, with the short access drive distance the applicant believed that matching backyards and being sensitive to the adjacent neighbors was more important than asking for an alternative compliance. The site does have irrigation water rights, but they can't be delivered. According to Settlers there is a private lateral that had at one time delivered water, but the lateral no longer functions. The residence does have a well with sufficient capacity to serve the irrigation needs of the entire site. Of course, the existing home will be connected to city water and sewer. The proposal is to use the well managed by the Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 7 of 49 HOA to serve all the irrigation needs for Crowley Park. Most of the existing trees are healthy and will be preserved and the project team will work with the city arborist for any needed mitigation and, finally, the parcel to the east of the site is also a candidate for in- fill development and the service drive could be utilized to combine access points if the city and ACHD are interested in that. It's just a five foot wide landscape buffer that we would need to make paving over, so -- and that keeps the consolidated access points. The team has reviewed the site specific conditions of approval and agree, including the requirement of a development agreement. I noticed the design changes that are requested for water service and I will bring this to the attention of the project engineer for corrections. I do hope that I have covered the important details and provided you with the information that you need. Your preference on the method for the landscape buffer would be appreciated and I respectfully request your approval of the annexation, zoning and the preliminary plat. This is an appropriate opportunity to add to complementary mid-range -- mid-range housing close to many retail and commercial amenities, without expanding services. I do thank you for your patience and your interest. Please let me know if you have any questions or directions on how to make this project better or if you would like me to get into greater detail. I would be happy to provide additional details or discuss any element of the project that you would like and with that I would stand for questions. Simison: Thank you, Penelope. Council, questions for the applicant? Constantikes: No questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Penelope, nice to see you. Constantikes: Thank you. Cavener: I always admire your tenacity for these kind of challenging projects. So, my question comes from kind of your opening comment and so do you feel that the Planning and Zoning Commission made an error -- Constantikes: No. It's just that in the beginning of the staff report it was stated that the Council denied the application. I just wanted to clarify that. That was all. Cavener: All right. Constantikes: Thank you. Cavener: But no questions at this time, Mr. Mayor. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 8 of 49 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you for your presentation. It was -- it's very helpful to understand exactly what has transpired. You had mentioned that the applicant would agree to any modifications to the existing structure to be approved through a conditional use permit in the future. Constantikes: Yes, ma'am. Perreault: Those are physical changes to the structure. Is there -- was there any conversation of -- of whether that could become a business at some point? Because if I recall correctly it was or has had a business in there in the past and so I'm -- I'm curious if the applicant is willing to agree to that limitation in the DA. I know that -- Constantikes: Go ahead. I'm sorry. Perreault: And -- and certainly I would like to hear from my fellow Council, their thoughts on that, but because this home faces -- because of the -- the orientation of it, it's -- it -- it is a natural good location for a business. Obviously, the parking is not going to allow for that if somebody were to choose to try to turn it into -- into a business. Constantikes: Mayor, Council Woman, I -- my understanding is that it's intended to remain residential and -- and it was -- I mean they put a lot of work into dressing the house up inside and bringing it up to code and whatnot. So, no, I -- I don't think that there would be a problem with that at all. It was a business -- I think there was a business in there at one time, but it's been quite some time ago. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Constantikes: Are you sure? Simison: I -- I don't think you are off the hook yet, but -- Constantikes: Okay. Simison: -- I think we will see if there is any from the community that would like to provide testimony. Constantikes: Thank you. Simison: Thanks. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody marked that they wanted to speak. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to come forward and provide testimony on this application or anybody online that would like to provide Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 9 of 49 testimony on this application, you can use to raise your hand feature. Seeing no one coming forward and no one raising their hand, would the applicant like to make any final comments to close or give Council time for any additional questions or comments? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I do have a quick question for the fire department? Hello. It seems you could get in. How would you get out? Reese: Council Women Strader, we do have many residences such as this and with access such as this we probably wouldn't be pulling all the way in, just due to proximity. So, most likely it's a back -- pull in, back out type of situation for us. Constantikes: Mr. Mayor, if I might address that? Simison: Council Woman Strader, do you have any follow up that you want to make with Captain Reese? Strader: Mr. Mayor, I don't have any follow up for you, but I have some follow up for the Fire Department, who are the experts on what they can and can't do. So, I'm going to stick with speaking with them. What were you -- can you just explore that. You wouldn't pull all the way in -- could you help me understand if that -- Reese: It would depend on what the incident was. If something was on fire we would need to keep a -- keep away from it enough so we don't melt our apparatus. So, if -- if -- if it was on fire. But if it was a medical call we could pretty easily get in there and, then, get out and not having looked at the plans I'm not sure if there is a proper place for a turnaround, but -- but there is a hammerhead, so it looks like we could pull in, turn around and, then, get out. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Penelope, would you like to comment? Constantikes: Yes, that would be great. Thank you, Mayor, Council Woman. Yeah, we -- we had pretty extensive discussions with Joe Bongiorno and we have got a -- the hammerhead in there and there will have to be no parking signs. But we did provide for fire department turnaround on the site. Strader: Mr. Mayor, thank you. Simison: Thank you. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 10 of 49 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader -- or Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Just to follow up on that, with the -- the hammerhead that was added, where do the three parking spots hit the three off -- off-site parking spots hit in relationship to that? Constantikes: They would be south of the -- of the end of the -- the southern leg of the hammerhead. So, they don't -- the parking spaces won't obstruct the fire truck. They are -- they are beyond the -- the depth that's required for the leg of the hammerhead, so -- and, again, we -- we presented that to Joe. Actually that was an outgrowth of my conversation with the Deputy Chief. Perreault: Thank you. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. Penelope, it sounds like the homeowner has already taken out the lattice and put in the Hardie board that was recommended. Is -- did I hear that correctly? Constantikes: Mayor, Councilman, no, not yet. But we will -- we will do that replacement and it will be painted and trimmed to match the house. Hoaglun: Okay. And one of the concerns the Commission expressed was the amount of density proposed for one acre and I think it has to do with, you know, the single -- single access point, but it is going to be wide enough per -- per code what's required and yet I thought -- and -- and maybe this is a question for -- for staff, but if used by one residence -- we aren't actually in compliance with our future land use map, but what they call for medium density. Is -- is that -- is that right or is it still within the ratio of what medium density residential would be? Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, the density should still be within the range, three to eight units per acre, so it -- I believe that it's 4.99, so it will still comply. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. And, Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah, Penelope, has there been discussion about that -- you know, it -- it sounds like there is access for fire department to -- to access the site. If -- if we don't have a business that -- that makes -- that we make sure that there is not a parking issue, which there would be if they tried to make it a business. So, I was just mentally Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 11 of 49 thinking, okay, if we reduce it there -- because one of the concerns the Commission also expressed was the overflow parking and it sounds like -- could you reiterate, do you -- you meet the required amount of parking necessary for having the original house, plus the four new residences, for -- for this site? Constantikes: Mayor, Councilman, actually we exceed the required parking. The Meridian standards require two parking spaces per residence and so we have that, plus we have enough depth on the driveways to provide two more parking spaces. So, each residence technically has four spaces and -- and, then, for the front house there is the two carport spaces. Then there will be a pad to provide two more spaces, because it's a three bedroom house. But they have quite a lengthy driveway. So, they could actually have a couple more cars at the front house and still not have a problem with overflow. With the -- with regard to the question about density, our density is identical to the density next door and as a former transportation planner I'm always excited actually, when -- when I can shepherd one of these difficult projects, which always seem to land in my office, because -- because it's -- I mean there is everything that you could possibly want on a daily basis just down the road. I mean everything -- more than normal in terms of the services that are available, so -- and it provides -- it's a demographic shift. So much of what's going on in that part of Meridian is the traditional single family detached dwellings and for someone like me who is a professional and single, these are identical -- or these are ideal for someone like me. So, I would hope that maybe we could keep the -- the density the way it's proposed. And we did initially propose to do the driveway so that we had three residences on one, so, actually, we are going to do two and two. So, they weren't on the same side. But, again, in discussions with staff -- and because this -- the backyards on the adjacent homes are so small, they are tiny, that we thought if we shifted and had all the homes with backyard to backyard, it would actually be better for our neighbors. So, we tried to put a lot of thought into how this was designed to make it as compatible as possible. Hoaglun: And, Mr. Mayor, I think I have one last -- Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: -- dealing with the porch and I -- I think the director -- you have got to do the water saving landscaping and whatnot and that's -- that's interesting -- not the water saving part, but we -- we need to have an alternative compliance when this road -- when -- when this house was originally built and I'm old enough to remember when Cherry Lane was just two lanes each way -- that road frontage was way out front. I mean -- so, it's a matter of the road expanding and coming closer, that way that -- you know, through no fault of the homeowners of that time, they were encroached upon and now it's not in compliance. So, that's kind of an interesting dynamic that we have to make sure we are aware of that you can't shift those houses. You can shift roads, but -- yeah, it's just one of those things that -- but I appreciate you trying to maintain as much of that -- that requirement as possible. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 12 of 49 Constantikes: Mayor, Councilman -- and, again, I would reiterate that either strategy for dealing with the landscape buffer is fine. We can -- we can just meander, circumvent the porch. It's not a perfect house and it's not historic register material, but it is charming and it is one of the original homes from Meridian. It was built in 1938 and that's not those wall things that you buy at a Home Depot and slap onto the side of your house, that's actually real river rock. Great big river rock. So, the materials that we submitted on Monday are for the 20 percent reduction in the landscape buffer and the water conserving design, but we will do it the other way. All you have to do is tell me. Whichever way you would prefer is fine. Thank you. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks, Penelope. Could you tell me about -- I'm a little intrigued by the prospect of combining with the service drive to the east that you mentioned. Can you talk to me about that or is that part of your proposal? Constantikes: Mayor, Council Woman, no, it's not. But I just am aware that that parcel next door is big enough to -- to be an in-fill development and I think it is also an enclaved Ada county parcel. Just, again, with the way we designed it there is a five foot wide landscape buffer in between us and the next door parcel and because of the classification of Cherry Lane it would be nice if everyone agreed to just add that traffic and have one consolidated access point. It's not part of the application, it's just one of those looking forward items that I wanted to bring up in the event that that parcel did redevelop and ACHD didn't want to have one more access drive close. They even have a -- they have a separation standard they like to maintain for driveways on arterial roadways. So, I was just looking ahead and tossing that out as a future potential. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Stacy, can you confirm -- I think that's annexed into the city? Hersh: Mr. Mayor, yes. So, the properties along the east are already annexed into the city with an R-4 zoning district. But I guess if they agreed to do some type of driveway along this side -- yeah. Simison: Primarily meaning it's not likely to redevelop for any purposes at this point in time in the near future. Constantikes: Correct. And I just wanted to -- you know, sometimes looking forward is beneficial and so I was just looking forward a little bit. Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 13 of 49 Strader: Mr. Mayor, yeah. I appreciate the clarification. Though it's not like that's a -- a prospect that's on the immediate horizon and it doesn't really solve some of the access and connectivity issues. I just want to be frank. I -- I appreciate the desire to do in-fill. I think if you could do some land assemblage here, you know, with that adjoining property and had something bigger to work with it would make more sense. I agreed with the Planning and Zoning Commission's reasoning. I -- I personally feel like there are too many variances here and this is a too small of a site for what you are trying to fit in it. It just doesn't feel like having this much access off of common driveway as practical to me. I appreciate -- I mean it's very hard to do these and it takes a lot of creativity. I also have concerns about using a private well in general. Our internal city staff have been trying to discourage people from continuing to use those and part of the reason is it actually can affect the water quality in our aquifer. Using a private well is allowed legally. It's fine. But it -- it does create concerns. So, that's something that you may wish to discuss with them, even if it's for irrigation purposes. And, finally, I -- in addition to the different requests for alternative compliance, the amount of density -- I also still have concerns about emergency services. I understand that it meets their requirements to -- to turn around. It's going to require -- to me there is no room to maneuver. Even if it's wide enough -- like what's required here -- hearing the feedback, it's like, well, the apparatus will melt if we get too close, so it's like, okay, then, I guess you are backed up past the -- the next building, you know, can -- do you really have sufficient access if there is a big -- a really big fire, you know, something catastrophic. Is -- is this really -- are we being honest? I mean understand what our requirements are, but is this really enough room to maneuver? Is this meeting the standard that we need? So, I -- I guess I would have follow-up questions about that, but I don't want to go down that rabbit hole, because I agreed with the Commission, I thought that their reasoning was correct. Some feedback from me. Thank you. Constantikes: Mayor -- Mayor, may I respond? Simison: Sure. Constantikes: Thank you. If you would like the well disconnected, that's fine. I -- I don't know -- that was new information, so thank you for sharing. I didn't realize that Public Works had flagged that as being problematic, so -- and, then, knowing the fire code a little bit the way I need to, I know that if you had a three story building and you had to bring in your ladder truck, the -- the vehicle -- the fire truck needs to be 15 feet away from the structure in order to provide I think the firefighters with some maneuvering space. So, the fire truck, if it uses this drive aisle, will be 20 feet away from the structure. So, I'm not -- you know, I'm not a fireman. I -- I do spend some time reading fire code, because I think it's an important part of my job, but I'm not -- I -- I don't know, I'm sorry that Joe isn't here. Am I correct in my analysis of that? Reese: You are correct. I'm not Joe. Constantikes: So -- Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 14 of 49 Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: If others are interested in further exploring the -- the fire department questions, I -- I would be okay with that, but I'm a no on this just based on the density and -- and one acre to me is not -- not sufficient for what they are trying to do. So, I appreciate the explanation, but I just -- I look at this practically -- even when we have very large subdivisions with a lot of room to maneuver, I -- I hate common driveways. Having a development that's exclusively a common driveway is really problematic to me, just being very up front. Simison: Council, additional questions or comments? Applicant technically hasn't had an opportunity to close yet, so we are going to give you that opportunity. I just want to make sure that everyone is -- not seeing any else, would the applicant like make any final comments? Constantikes: Not really. Thank you, Mayor. I always appreciate the opportunity to be at Meridian, because we have dialogues and I don't actually find that in a lot of other jurisdictions. So, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these things with you. It's -- it's very helpful and I don't have any closing comments, unless there are our final questions for me. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Move we close the public hearing on No. 2, Crowley Subdivision, H-2023- 0006. Strader: I would second. Simison: Motion and second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 15 of 49 Cavener: I think Council Member Strader summarized my -- many of my comments and feelings as well and I -- I agree with the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission and -- and support denial of this application. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I have lived near this home for a very long time and probably driven by it thousands of times and because of my intimate knowledge with it I -- I actually see this working well and there already is a lane that runs along the east side that I assume is used to access the back and there was a hair salon that was here, if I remember correctly. I think the house has been sold since then. So, their -- my main concern was that they would -- there would be an attempt to use it as a business again and as long as they are willing to put that into the DA there is not -- it's not permitted I suppose at all or without a CUP, whatever we think is best, but I -- I actually think that -- I agree that this is a -- many -- many alternative compliance request, but the applicant, from what I can tell, has addressed all of them in -- in every way that staff thought was appropriate. So, I'm actually a yes on this. I'm happy to make a motion if it's appropriate, but -- Parsons: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Parsons. Parsons: Again, I also appreciate the dialogue this evening, but I just want some clarification as to your definition of a business. If the Council does approve the annexation and the plat tonight, this property would technically be zoned R-8 in the city and a person could apply for a home occupation, which would allow you to use a portion of your home. So, I don't know if that's the business that was being operated out of the home or not, but that's pretty standard practice in Meridian. We do approve quite a few accessory use permits or home occupation permits to allow people to do that and that could even occur with the other four units that are -- that could potentially be built in here. So, if that's your intention to prohibit all businesses from operating here, then, I would make it clear in your -- the zoning is already going to limit what a commercial business can do on the property, just because it's a residential, but if it's truly your intent to limit customers coming here and, then, running an in-home business, then, I would suggest potentially adding that in your motion that no home occupation should be allowed to operate from this -- this site, so that it's clear for us to at least look at that DA and enforce that. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Home occupation business I think is -- is fine. The main concern is parking and -- and not having individuals come to the -- the homes. There was a salon there Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 16 of 49 prior, but, then, of course, there was plenty of space for parking and -- and as we know there is -- there is individuals who run businesses out of their homes that don't -- don't have permission to do so. My -- my thought was not so much an individual working from home themselves, but, you know, in the past we have had residents who have applied for daycare applications and those kinds of things which -- and anything, really, that would require parking. So, I don't know how that will -- the code would address that in regard to it being R-8 residential if there would be any limitation in the future for them to apply for something like that. Do you have a recommendation on how I would state that? Parsons: Mayor and Council, home occupations don't necessarily require more parking than what the UDC does. So, in this particular case if any one of these homes were to be approved, then, the planner that reviews that permit looks for parking and if it's a three bedroom -- four bedroom home, we are looking to make sure that it has the -- the four parking spaces per code. So, there is really nothing that can really address that. To your point, a lot of the in-home businesses are in-home daycares of six or fewer or a salon, a personal service. So, those are, again, permitted uses under that avenue for a property owner to pursue with us. And, again, if they meet code we approve them at staff level. So, to just kind of pinpoint that is -- it's -- it is going to be difficult for us to track some of that, to be honest with you, in a development agreement. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I kind of struggle with this one, because I know a lot of work has gone into it and I appreciate your presentation, but there is certain parts of it I can't get past. I'm really struggling with and I -- I understand that the density matches the development to the west. I see the development of the west has plenty of room for overflow parking and plenty of room for emergency vehicle access on multiple ways to get in and out and this doesn't. I think your density is still too high for the limited amount of room you have on this one acre lot and I don't think I could support it the way it stands. Simison: And, Council, I will just chime in, because I -- I think it has one too many, just from a practical standpoint and -- and that's -- you know, it is the zoning. It is the last piece of in-fill. If it's not -- if -- if this project -- it's like I think that's one of the questions is what -- if not this project what project? Would it require a tear down of the existing structure to be redesigned at a higher density? Would that be okay? Or if the existing structure were to remain what would be the density that would be allowed or is there something else. But it is a challenge and it's -- it's a struggle when it's the last in-fill piece, it's meeting the density of the area. You know, instead of just saying, okay, well, now we just think three is the right number, which is, then, outside of what you are -- what's okay. So, it's somewhere within here or it's don't come back unless you are willing to redevelop the entire property in a different way in the future and I -- I think that that would at least be -- if it -- if it's a no this evening -- a good thing for the applicant to Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 17 of 49 know is like what is it that would -- that it would take that they could legitimately do to this property if they say evidently want to be residents of the city of Meridian. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah. That's -- that's -- that was my line of thinking, you know, as I was asking Penelope those questions, because it -- it meets -- it meets our requirements, but at the same time I feel the same way, it's like -- it's just one too many. It's just too dense for that particular site and the layout. It -- it -- it would be -- it would be nice, but it was just like -- you just need a little more wiggle room, so -- but -- but it's hard, because, you know, going through those things -- and, you know, I -- I double checked under wastewater and water -- water quality concerns, there is none Public Works identified. You know, overflow parking, she does technically meet -- meet it. Changing out the -- the siding -- and to me the front porch it was -- it was the road that encroached not the house on the -- on the road type of thing. Emergency services can gain access. It is tight. You do have to -- have some forethought of responding to an emergency beforehand. But that's what they are trained to do. But at the same time it's just like Councilman Borton kind of -- Overton. Not -- not Borton. Sorry. Overton kind of expressed it, it's just that there is a quandary here. It's just kind of like, yes, it -- it does, but it doesn't, so -- and that's what makes it difficult and I -- and I would be -- if -- if there was one less -- one less residence on there, I -- I -- I think -- I -- I could -- I could support that, so -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I think that the challenge is -- we are always trying to find a yes, which is what I love about our council, try to find something that will work and we -- when it's apparent I think we do it. In this case, you know, this is part of the existing due diligence and site conditions on -- on a very limited piece of dirt and I don't think I could sit here and redesign it for them. I just know that this doesn't work and you are correct, it is not a comment by Public Works in this application, but Public Works -- at least when I covered them as a council liaison, had told me on a citywide basis we are trying to discourage people maintaining their private wells, because it impacts the water quality of the whole city. It's a citywide issue. It's not specific to this application. It wasn't a requirement that they made. So, I hope I didn't misrepresent that to you, but I'm -- I'm not hung up on that. That's -- that's not the main issue that I -- that I had. I think if -- I think if you came back and you had solved for some of the access concerns with a, you know, connection somehow to the service drive or if there was another way for an emergency vehicle to get in and out I think that would be a thing that would help. Perhaps reducing the density. But I -- I couldn't do that, you know, for the applicant, but perhaps that would help. It's hard to say without seeing it, you know, but that would certainly remove -- that has the potential to remove the, you know, alternative Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 18 of 49 compliance around common driveway variance if you were to redo that. Just some additional feedback. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: And just --just an additional, I know we had feedback from the fire department and I know that that's what the Commission was concerned about, but I can't help but go back to over 27 years working in public safety and the scenario that keeps running through my mind is the one where I have all three agencies and sometimes multiple from each agency on a situation where I have got not just one fire truck, but possibly also paramedics and possibly one to two police cars and there is no room for that response at this project, unless I'm blocking Cherry Lane, which, depending on how serious an incident is, I may be doing that. But that's my concern. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: First, I love the debate that goes on amongst this body for a one acre parcel. For our friends that are here in the audience I know it's -- it's standing room only, but I just love that we take each application as they come with the same level of critique and criticism no matter the size. But unless there is any other comments I'm happy to make a motion. Mr. Mayor, after reviewing tonight's application I move that we deny application No. 2, H-2023-0006, include all staff, applicant, and Council testimony. Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Okay. Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, nay; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: Five ayes, one nay, and the motion to deny carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. 3. Public Hearing for Chimney Peak Subdivision (SHP-2023-0002) by Centurion Engineers, Inc., located at 4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave. A. Request: Short Plat to re-subdivide Lot 18, Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6 consisting of 1.45 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district into four (4) building lots and one (1) common lot. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 19 of 49 Simison: With that we will move on to Item 3 this evening, which is a public hearing for Chimney Peak Subdivision, SHP-2023-0002. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a request for a short plat. This site consists of 1.45 acres of land. It's zoned R-8 and is located at 4853 North Chimney Peak Avenue. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight dwelling units per acre. A short plat is proposed to resubdivide Lot 18, Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6, consisting of 1.45 acres of land into four building lots and one common lot in the R-8 zoning district. The proposed density of 2.76 units per acre is consistent with the density desired of three to eight units per acre in the medium density residential future land use map designation for this site. There is an existing home and two accessory structures on the property that are proposed to remain on Lot 1 and those are shown there on that northern lot. The existing home is connected to city water and sewer service. The existing driveway via North Chimney Peak Avenue will be converted to a common driveway and will provide access to all of the proposed lots. Direct access via West McMillan Road is prohibited. The street buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of the site along West McMillan Road was constructed with the subdivision improvements for Fulfer Subdivision. There is existing landscaping, trees and lawn, along both sides of the existing driveway that complies with the standards for common driveways. Because the site is below five acres in size, common open space and site amenities are not required. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. There are no outstanding issues for Council tonight. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? All right. Would the applicant like to come forward. Good evening. Canning: Good evening, Mayor and Council. Nice to see you all. I am Anna Canning with Centurion Engineers and I did want to update the address, since it's wrong on our application there. It's 2323 South Vista Avenue, Suite 206, Boise, Idaho. 83705. Well, I'm a little nervous that I come to you with an in-fill project off of a common drive tonight, but, nonetheless, I am delighted to bring this in-fill subdivision to you for Chimney Peak Subdivision. I will say that there are four residential lots and one common lot. The residential lots are -- the largest is around 30,000 square feet and the smallest one is around 8,000 square feet. So, we are looking at different size lots than the previous application and the density is 2.76. So, quite a bit different there. As staff made her wonderful presentation -- and thank you, Sonya, for everything, as well as you all for tonight, but this seems to be perfectly set up for a short plat. You might have noticed that the driveway is the right width. It's 30 feet. It allows comfortably for the 20 foot drive aisle for the fire department and the turnaround is largely constructed already, they just need to kind of blow out a roundabout and straighten that out a little bit and it's -- the fire access is there. The reason that it works so seamlessly is because it was anticipated in the preliminary plat back in 2003. So, there was always contemplated that there would be additional lots on the south side of that emergency -- or that Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 20 of 49 common drive and, indeed, many years later -- 20 years later here it is, so it was nice to see that. I -- I remember struggling with these -- the out -- or the existing homes in this Kelly Creek Subdivision. There was two of them. This was the easier one. The other one was really difficult. So, it's nice to be here tonight -- tonight presenting this to you. That's why I said I was delighted to be here. So, with that I won't bother you with a lot of the details, because Sonya went through them already, but we are in agreement with all the conditions of approval and with that we respectfully ask for approval and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Canning: Thank you. Simison: Is there anybody here that would like to provide testimony on this item or is there anybody online that would like to provide testimony on this item? If so, use the raise your hand feature. Seeing no one coming forward or no one raising their hand, would the applicant like any final comments? Applicant has waived final comments. So, Council, what's your desire? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Don't have any comments -- I'm not seeing anybody standing up, so I move we close the public hearing on Item No. 3. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: Motion and second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Fairly straightforward request short plat. So, after considering all staff and -- staff and applicant testimony, I moved to approve File No. SHP-2023-0002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 23rd, 2023. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 21 of 49 Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 3. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. 4. Public Hearing for Promenade Cottages Subdivision (H-2022-0013) by Steve Arnold, A-Team Consultants, located at 403 E. Fairview Ave. A. Request: Rezone approximately 6.819 and 0.326 acres of land from the R-8 and C-G zoning districts to the R-40 (6.61 acres) and C-G (0.535 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 30 single-family residential lots, 5 multi-family lots, 2 commercial lots and 8 common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the requested R-40 and C-G zoning districts. C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct a 90-unit, multi-family development on approximately 2.8 acres in the requested R-40 zoning district. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct single-family, detached dwellings on the 10 of the 30 single-family residential lots in the requested R-40 zoning district. E. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow the existing, non- conforming parking, landscaping and mobile home park to remain as is for an extended period of time in the C-G and requested R-40 zoning districts. Simison: Next item up is Item 4, which is a public hearing for Promenade Cottage Subdivision, H-2022-0013. We will open this public hearing with staff comments from Mr. Parsons. It looks like it's Ms. Allen again. Allen: Allen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The next application before you is a request for a rezone, a preliminary plat, and three separate conditional use permits. This site consists of 7.64 acres of land. It's zoned R-8, medium density residential, and C-G, general retail and service commercial, and it's located at 403 East Fairview Avenue. This property was annexed into the city in 1969 without a development agreement. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is commercial, 2.12 acres, approximately, on the end and high density residential, approximately 5.52 Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 22 of 49 acres on the south end. The north portion of this property adjacent to Fairview Avenue is zoned R-8 and C-C and is developed with two commercial buildings, a multi-tenant building, with retail and restaurant uses where Idaho Pizza is located, a paint store, Rodda Paint, and associated parking. The portion of the site directly to the south is a mobile home park and further to the south is vacant undeveloped land, all zoned R-8. The applicant proposes to rezone 7.15 acres of land from the R-8 and C-G zoning districts to the R-40, 6.61 acres, and C-G, .54 acre zoning districts, consistent with the underlying future land use map designations of high density residential and commercial. The rezone to C-G will remove the nonconforming status of the retail store in the R-8 zoning district, as such use is a permitted use in the C-G district. The mobile home park is a prohibited use in the proposed R-40 zoning district. A conditional use permit is proposed to extend the nonconforming use until such time as the property redevelops in a minimum of four years. The proposed multi-family residential development is a conditional use in the R-40 district subject to the specific use standards for such in the UDC. The proposed single family residential attached dwellings are a principal permitted use and the single family residential detached dwellings are conditional use in the proposed R-40 district. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 45 building lots, 30 single family residential building lots, five multi-family residential building lots and two commercial lots and eight common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the R-40 and C-G zoning districts. A gross density of 20.51 units per acre is proposed overall in the residential portions of the development. The plat is proposed to develop in three phases as shown. The single family residential on the south end of the site is proposed to develop first with 30 single family residential attached and detached dwellings at a gross density of 16.5 units per acre with the multi-family residential development second, with a total of 90 apartment units at a gross density of 28 units per acre, for an overall gross density of 28 units per acre and rebuild the commercial area last, shortly after the second phase. The -- the -- excuse me. The phasing plan is based on the type of loan the applicant has on the property. Because the property is income producing, the loan will not allow the owners to disrupt the income being made off the existing commercial buildings and the mobile home park. Once the property is not encumbered by this loan condition the owner will move forward with phase two providing market conditions warrant it. Phase three will follow shortly thereafter. Due to the financing and timing the applicant requests an additional period of time of approximately four to five years, instead of the standard two years, to obtain the city engineer's signature on the second phase final plat. This will allow ample time to notice the existing residents of the mobile home park of the plan to redevelop the property. Staff recommends the second phase final plat application is not allowed to be submitted for a minimum period of four years from the date of approval of the preliminary plat to allow residents of the mobile home park ample time to find other housing prior to redevelopment. This will require at least one time extension to be obtained in order for the preliminary plat to remain valid. There are three existing access driveways via Fairview, an arterial street. One for the retail paint store on the west and two for the multi-tenant building. The western access is proposed to be removed and the eastern accesses are proposed to remain until redevelopment of that portion of the property occurs, as removal at this time would negatively affect existing uses. Upon redevelopment of the commercial portion of the site all accesses via Fairview shall Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 23 of 49 cease and access shall be provided via Northeast 3rd Street, the lesser classification of the two streets. There are nine existing access driveways via Northeast 3rd Street, a local street designated on the master street map as a collector street, two for the commercial, one ingress-egress driveway for the mobile home park and six driveway accesses for individual homes. The northern access via Northeast 3rd Street is proposed to be removed as it's too close to the intersection and doesn't conform to ACHD standards. The second access nearest Fairview is proposed to remain to serve the existing commercial retail store and a new driveway access is proposed 30 feet to the south of the aforementioned driveway as depicted on the site plan in alignment with the driveway on the west side of 3rd. Due to the traffic conflicts that will likely result with the two driveways so close together, staff is recommending these two accesses are combined and aligned with the driveway on the west side of 3rd in accord with the UDC, which limits access points to collector streets. The existing driveway in alignment with Gruber Avenue on the west side of 3rd is proposed to remain and be reconstructed as a 30 foot wide curb return driveway as -- has been approved by ACHD. The remainder of the accesses are proposed to be closed. No access exists via Badley Avenue, a local street along the southern boundary of the undeveloped portion of the site. Two new driveway accesses are proposed via Badley to the single family residential portion of the development, which also provides connectivity to the multi-family residential and commercial portions of the development. Private streets are proposed for internal access to the proposed single family and multi-family dwellings. With the subdivision cross-access ingress-egress easement should be granted between the single family and multi-family and commercial portions of the development via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded agreement. Alternative compliance to the off-street parking standards for single family dwellings, which requires parking pads to be located in front of the garage, to allow the parking pads for the three bedroom units to be located as close as possible to the corresponding unit was approved by the director. Additional right of way is required to be dedicated along Fairview, but no improvements are required with the -- with this development, as Fairview is listed in the CIP to be widened from five to seven travel lanes with on-street bike lanes between 2036 and 2040. With development the existing section of Northeast 3rd Street is required to be improved with an eight foot wide planter strip and a five foot wide detached sidewalk abutting the site in the unimproved section between Gruber and Badley constructed as a complete collector street in accord with the master street map and in general conformance with the city's downtown Meridian street cross-section master plan. Private streets are proposed for internal access to the proposed single family and multi-family units for addressing purposes. The pathways master plan depicts a ten foot wide multi-use pathway off site along the west side of Northeast 3rd Street and along East Fairview Avenue on this site. Internal pedestrian connections are required between the single family, multi-family and commercial portions of the development. A 25 foot wide street buffer is required along Fairview and a 20 foot wide buffer is required along Northeast 3rd Street, landscaped in accord with the UDC standards. Because the single family portion of the site is below five acres in size at 2.7 acres, the minimum common open space and site amenity standards do not apply. The southern portion of this project is within the Meridian floodplain overlay district, Zone AE, and will require a floodplain development permit. A conditional use permit is proposed to construct a 90 unit multi- Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 24 of 49 family development on approximately 2.8 acres of land in the requested R-40 Zoning District. Five three story 18-plex multi-family structures are proposed containing a mix of one, 45 units, and two-bedroom, 45 units, ranging from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size. The amount of common open space proposed for the development exceeds the minimum standards. A minimum of a half acre of common open space is required, .94 acre is proposed, which is almost twice the minimum required. A minimum of four site amenities are required, one from each category. The applicant proposes a swimming pool, clubhouse, dog park, community garden, a tot lot and charging stations for electric vehicles from the quality of life, open space, recreation and multi-modal categories as required. Off-street parking is proposed in excess of the minimum standards with nine extra spaces. Nine of the surface parking spaces need to be covered in order to meet the minimum standards for covered spaces. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the -- for the proposed single family structures as shown and for the multi- family structures as shown. The single family cottages are all proposed to be two stories in height, with two car garages, while the multi-family apartment buildings are proposed to be three stories in height. The clubhouse will be a single story in height. The applicant's narrative states the multi-family buildings will use similar accents as the cottage units. A conditional use permit is requested for the development of ten single family residential detached dwellings in the requested R-40 zoning district. Typically single family residential uses are not a desired use in the R-40 high density residential zoning district. However, they are allowed as a conditional use. There are existing single family residential dwellings to the west across Northeast 3rd Street and to the South across Badley Avenue. The proposed single family residential homes at a higher density of 16.5 units per acre will assist in providing a transition to the multi-family residential apartments planned in the second phase of this development and should be compatible with adjacent uses. For these reasons staff is supportive of the request. A conditional use permit is requested to allow the existing nonconforming parking, landscaping and mobile home park to remain as is for an extended period of time until redevelopment occurs with the second and third phases of the proposed development. The nonconforming use of a portion of the site as a mobile home park and the parking and landscaping in the commercial portion of the development will remain as is until the second and third phases of development respectively, which will be approximately four to five years. The Commission did recommend approval of these applications with the conditions in the staff report and I will just go over a summary of the Commission hearing. Steve Arnold, the applicant's representative, testified in favor. There was no one testifying in opposition. Kelly Jean Warner did comment on the application. There was no written testimony received. And the only issue of discussion was the question from the neighbor regarding how the proposed development would affect adjacent properties in the area. Key issues a discussion by the Commission are as follows: Concern pertaining to the extended time period for redevelopment of the mobile home park and commercial portions of the development and feasibility of the development -- developer's ability to refinance the property after the terms of the existing loan are satisfied. Concern pertaining to the upkeep of the mobile home park in the interim of people vacating the mobile homes prior to redevelopment of the site and inclusion of a requirement for the mobile homes to be removed as they are vacated. Concern pertaining to the uncertainty of what's involved with the construction of a complete street Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 25 of 49 section for Northeast 3rd Street between Gruber and Badley, i.e., if additional right of way is needed from the property to the west, if reimbursement for the cost of construction of the western portion of the street is possible from ACHD. And, finally, inclusion of a sunset requirement for the conditional use permit for extension of the nonconforming uses. Commission changes to the staff recommendation are as follows: A sunset requirement of four years was included for the conditional use permit for extension of the nonconforming uses, consistent with the preliminary plat requirement in the development agreement. The pedestrian pathway along the eastern boundary of the single family portion of the site shall be removed due to CPTED safety concerns. That is -- if I can just take a moment and point that out. It's this pathway right here where my pointer is. Staff is requesting Council allow this pathway as it provides access to the front of these units, which are accessed from the rear via the private street which functions as an alley and the applicant is also requesting that that condition for removal be stricken. And, finally, inclusion of a provision requiring the mobile homes and associated debris that are vacant at the beginning of phase two to be removed within 45 calendar days. If there are more than five vacant mobile homes that time period is extended to 90 calendar days. The only outstanding issue for Council tonight is -- as I just mentioned, that staff requests Condition A2.21F requiring the removal of the pedestrian pathway along the east side of the single family portion of the development is stricken. There has been no written testimony received since the Commission hearing. The applicant is here to present tonight. That's all staff has. Thank you. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, for the record it's Steve Arnold. I'm with A Team Land Consultants. 1785 Whisper Cove, Boise. 83709. 1 -- I think Sonya has pretty much covered the -- the project in its entirety. So, what I'm going to try to do is -- is give kind of an overview of a feel of what we are doing. The product that we are building here has only been built once before and we did it in Boise right next to -- it is Stones Throw, which was a Meridian project, and it's got -- what we are calling these units at the south end -- they are basically a cottage unit and they are a mix of attached townhomes and detached single family units and I will get to the pictures on these, but they essentially operate as a high density product. The one that we did at Irving and Mount Hood, it was three acres and we did roughly 60 units on it and 30 were the attached and 30 were the detached and I will get through some of these pictures here. Like I said, I think Sonya covered most of these. This is a pretty complicated application for the size of the project. I mean we are seven acres and we have got a ton of different applications that we are doing. We are not looking for variances, but because of the product type that we are doing, the -- the single family cottage unit, because it is single family, it's required to have the additional two parking stalls in -- in front of the garage and because these are all alley loaded we specifically prepared a -- a parking exhibit, so that Council and staff could see that, you know, this -- these parking spaces are reserved for these units. There is a good number of the units that we don't need parking in front of, because they are two bed, two bath. It's just the three bed, two bath that you need parking in front of the garage. So, basically, 15 units is what we are Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 26 of 49 asking for that is not in front of the garage. One of the things that was requested -- and I -- I think we can comply with everything that the Commission asked for. The one item that we do not want to have installed is the sidewalk along the southeast corner and, again, that was just for the reasons to access the front of the units. The concern that the Commission had at the time was basically there is -- there is an area there that there is not a lot of lighting. So, what we would propose is to put some pathway lighting along that, so that there is lighting and that helps address the concerns. Sonya did touch bases on the -- the -- the four years and, basically, how we can't touch anything that affects the income production on this property. Hence, we are asking for the longer time before we start relocating the -- the trailer homes and doing anything with the properties up front. We will have CC&Rs and they will basically govern the commercial portion, the multi-family portion and the -- the cottage portion. Each of them will maintain certain things, like their parking, their perspective drive aisles. They all will have access -- or at least the residential portion will all have access to the clubhouse and the other amenities. In the cottage areas we added several amenities there that will, again also be open to the multi-family. The -- the one thing that came up at the Commission hearing last time -- and it's -- it's still a question, but I think it's something that we can work through and I -- we raised the red flag about 3rd Street, because we thought that potential additional right of way would be required. In working with staff I think we can move the majority of the roadway onto our property, so that we can get it entirely built and it's -- we will take the burden from Badley to Gruber and, then, from Gruber north to Fairview Avenue. The highway district and staff is just looking for a half plus 12 and, then, modifying some of the buffers and stuff adjacent to us. We do have the Rodda Paint building that sits very close to the current right of way, so we have that existing building that we have got to work with and, then, we have got the pizza multi- tenant place that we have currently got to work with the existing configuration with the loop driveway to the far east and, then, the center driveway, but in the short term there are a couple nonconforming driveways that we can clean up there. This site has been a challenge for a long time and I'm hoping we can get to something that definitely looks a lot nicer. Just to go on record, we have read through all of the city conditions, the agency comments. We just got ACHD's report today, I believe, and we have gone through all those and we can comply with those. I won't go through the -- the plat too much, other than to just kind of give you an idea the -- the southern portion, again, although it looks like they are private roads, they actually function as an alley load. So, the -- the whole south portion of the -- the project is basically an alley load and, then, the green spaces in between are what are MEWs or paseos kind of a -- a common walking area that you can enter to the front of the home. This kind of shows the -- the site circulation and our -- it's our site plan that was submitted. I broke this slide out because I -- we -- we paid quite a bit of attention to parking on this. So, to give you an idea, we have -- on the multi-family we -- there are required to be 158 stalls and, then, nine guest parking. We are at 161 with 15 guest spaces. The cottages were basically right at what is all required. So, the cottage is at three two. That's basically saying it's a three bed, two bath, and it requires the 30 garages and, then, 30 parking spaces in front of the garage. The cottages that are two bed, two bath, only require just the parking. So, just the garages. But to give you an idea on the cottage guest area that we have shown around that, we have shown 20 additional parking stalls for those cottage units Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 27 of 49 and I'm sure some of the multi-family will be grabbing them, too, but we have quite a bit of additional parking and just go down to the commercial there is only -- between the two buildings, who are only required to do 33, we have got a total of 90. So, we are -- we are well parked on this site. This gives you just kind of an idea the -- the layout and the open space and, again, here at the southeast corner, which would be the far left lower end, we would request that we could keep the proposed sidewalk and just have lighting and, then, you could see the dog -- the center park here was planned out and the cottage units and that was mainly just to create a central focal area that had multi- uses and multi-amenities and you can see what we are doing here in the center in the multi-family. But, again, these will all happen in phases. The very first phase that we were going to do is the cottages at the south side. Before we could build there we have got a flood zone that we got to clean up, so there is quite a bit of cleaning on this piece, but we still see it as very feasible and ultimately we will probably get rid of a big headache for the police out there. This -- I put this slide together to give you an idea -- 3rd Street is -- as you can see doesn't connect. The -- I forget that east-west road. 3rd Street doesn't connect Badley to the Gruber. Gruber -- there is no right of way that exists there. And, then, eventually we will be extending Gruber as a private road to access the multi-family to the north. But it -- it -- 3rd Street could be a challenge, but I think it's -- it's -- with the help of staff and ACHD I think we can get through it. This gives you an idea. This is looking at Gruber Street due south of Gruber. Give you an idea of -- there may be a few trees that we are removing that could be a little bit of a challenge. This is getting into the cottage product and I will try to explain a little bit as we go through these, but this is a -- a corner home and as you can see on the -- the -- the face of the home faces the street and, then, in the back as you can see right behind the -- the building is the alley that essentially we are going to be doing on this product type and there, again, this gives you an idea of what the face of the buildings are and how they work with the roads. If you are looking far to the right-hand side of this that would be the public street. Here is the single family portion. They blend in very well with the duplexes. Here again this is the typical MEW that we do on a high density product and this being 11 units per acre it's fairly low. So, this one that we did over in Boise at 20 units an acre, the MEW and the paseos are much narrower. Here again is the alley looking from behind. This gives you an idea -- this -- we are going to be doing similar fencing like this in our open areas. Here is a sketch of the multi-family, because that's so far out I know we will be back in front of the -- the city with a design review of some sort for this and then, the -- the two discussion items -- the -- the one thing that we would like is -- and this isn't so much with the city, but if we can get backing from the city that would be great. Typically an agency, like ACHD, requires you to do half plus 12 of a road that you abut. In this particular case ACHD and the city is asking for the full street section of -- of 3rd Street between Badley and Gruber and in this situation it probably does make good sense to build the road at one particular time, because the likelihood of things redeveloping on the west side are very unlikely, but we -- we would like to entertain discussions about reimbursements of that and this property is in what's called an opportunity zone and it's also in the Meridian downtown development zone that I believe there is a process and funding mechanisms to do that. We -- we do ask for help on this. I -- I -- I do see this road as a challenge and with the city and ACHD's help I Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 28 of 49 think it can be done. And with that I will stand for any questions and I appreciate the opportunity to present in front of you tonight. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Two questions. Steve, the -- the nature of CPTED and why the Commission probably wanted to get rid of that pathway on that east side had to do with the lack of lighting. Arnold: Correct. Overton: The mitigation of that CPTED concern is putting in some type of bollard or pathway lighting. I hear you correctly that you would be willing to put that in. Arnold: We could do both. Overton: Okay. Okay. Thank you. Second question. The decision to wait four years on the trailer park is hinged to the loan; correct? Arnold: Yes. Mayor, Councilman Overton, that's correct. And it's also -- we are going to need some time to help relocate a bunch of people that are probably going to have a challenge. Overton: Well, that's my second part of that one. With that being said, four years, I got to say that gives people plenty of time to find a new place to call home. I don't know how many of those have been living there for a long time and had a lot of time in that trailer park over a career. My other question is during those four years are -- who is going to be in charge of maintaining that as we get closer to that four year mark to make sure up until the point of it redeveloping it doesn't just fall to pieces? Arnold: Mayor, Councilman Overton, the same group of people that's maintaining it now. I mean they -- they have got a maintenance group that comes in and -- and takes care of it, but the intent is we are -- not to let it go to pot in the time. The intent is to, one, I mean I shouldn't -- we shouldn't underscore the value of the loan, because that we can't do anything about. It's like -- as much as I would like to sound like a great neighbor, you know, the -- the four years is mainly based on the fact that we can't change the loan, not that we are -- that these people need four years to get out. I mean they could theoretically get out in, you know, six to nine months. But, yeah, during the -- the time frame between now and when we were redeveloped with the multi-family we will be maintaining that and we can add language in our CC&Rs if there's something specific that the Council would like to see in that. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 29 of 49 Overton: Thank you. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Arnold. I have some concerns. So, to me this opens the door to eliminating some of the very few amount of affordable housing we have in the city. I don't know where these folks would go. I mean -- so, I -- I have a real concern around that. How many people are in the existing mobile home park? That's my first question. And, then, I would like to know -- are you trying to address, you know, a need at a certain price point with your new product that you are bringing online? Do you want to talk about that a little bit? But just thinking about -- you know, we have a mobile home park and now we are going to be getting multi-family with charging stations and a dog park and it's going to be beautiful. But that sounds like Class A, you know, product to me. So, I just -- I want to kind of understand -- without getting into rents or anything, but what kind of part of the market are you addressing through your development? What's the maturity of your loan, if you can disclose that, because it sort of speaks to the timing as well. Those are kind of my three initial questions. Arnold: Okay. Mayor Simison, Council Woman Strader, the -- so, we -- we started out -- and Bill and I have been talking about this project for probably six years. So, the -- the -- it used to be six years that the loan was fully matured on that -- or they -- I shouldn't say that. It was six years until they could refinance that loan and I'm -- so that's not -- I'm not privy to their financial situation. The other question you had was -- if I interpret this correct -- was it were we providing affordable housing. There has not been any discussion on that, but the one thing that it is doing that -- and I have got kids renting right now -- is we are bringing more rental stuff onto the market. The multi- family. And that will help overall drive rent down. The -- so, that's the affordability part. The number of people that are living in there I don't have a head count, but there -- I do know for a fact that there are programs that take anywhere between six months to a year and a half for people to apply to get assisted housing and I know there is current programs for that, but I'm -- I -- I can't say this is going to be affordable. Anything like what it's at right now, I mean some of these things shouldn't be lived in. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. It -- it's a really sensitive topic; right? And so just to reflect back to you a little bit. So, it sounds like you are saying there is an issue with substandard housing at this mobile home park. I don't know if that's true or not; right? I mean we -- we do have, you know, standards in the city. But, you know, just because housing is different than maybe what our price point might be or what we might prefer, that doesn't mean that that isn't acceptable housing for someone else. So, I would need to understand a little bit more about the conditions at the site to agree or disagree with that. But I am Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 30 of 49 concerned, because you -- you know, from -- I actually have a friend who moved to a mobile home park like far outside of town, like over near Mountain Home and they were on a wait list for almost a year to get into that particular area from just -- as just an anecdotal conversation I had with somebody that I know. But from what I understand there is not any vacancy in the Treasure Valley for a mobile home and so four years seems like a long time, but I'm concerned that maybe the financing market will change or, you know, maybe the cottages component will be built quickly or, you know, maybe something will change and, then, that time frame to allow these folks to find new housing will be changed and they won't have a lot of time and, then, I think it sounds like they would need to go on public assistance is what you are saying. We don't know that. But, you know, that seems like a really problematic fact pattern. So, yeah, I'm just going to -- I'm -- I'm just struggling with the human element of this one. I don't think there is going to be a great answer for it, but -- and this is a big -- a big problem we are having -- we think supply and demand is what's driving rents and that may not be true. Like if we are just building Class A and everyone's coming from other states where they have, you know, a different cost of living and, then, they come here and the people that are moving in taking Class A apartments are displacing existing residents and -- so, that -- that's a concern I have. I -- but I don't know what the answer is. I mean, you know, you own this property, you have a right to develop it, but there is a real big elephant in the room of what will happen to the people that live here. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Steve, I didn't want -- I didn't want to step on your toes if you want a response. Sorry. Arnold: No. Go ahead. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Steve, a couple -- couple comments. One, I really like the cottage product. I think that's a nice fit for downtown Meridian. I have got a lot of -- a lot of love for the old Idaho Pizza Company -- the Idaho Pizza Company building. That was my -- let us -- make us all feel a little better -- that was my daycare when I was in kindergarten. It was like Greenleaf Academy. So, they had a great sandbox. So, I love that piece of property. A -- a couple things -- and -- and some of it is -- to Council Member Strader's questions about the -- the trailer park and it's not lost on me that many of those units are in disrepair and there is some -- some significant blight, but it's also not lost to me that that is housing for people. So, Council Member Strader I think asked around it and I -- I want to give you another chance maybe to respond, because I know -- I think that the -- the plan for the apartments is upscale premium I think is the terms that you use in your narrative. So, again, certainly not a place that these current residents are going to live. So, they will be displaced. And so I think it's important for this Council to have a good understanding as to what you or your business partner, employer, what their plan is to support those people. What is the plan you have got -- you -- you outlined four years because of the loan, although I think you do also indicate in your narrative that even after four years you may not move forth depending on -- on Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 31 of 49 the market. So, help the Council understand what is your plan for these people to move them out of their existing home? Arnold: Mayor Simison, Commissioner -- or Councilman Cavener, the specifics of the plan really has not come up yet. I mean we are -- Cavener: Okay. Arnold: -- that's something that's down the road, but it is something that we have thought about. I mean we have -- I have actually personally met with some of the -- the -- I guess they are not land owners. The -- the residents that live in there and I have learned more than I knew about mobile homes and apparently the mobile home industry -- there is a lot of places -- and I'm probably speaking out of turn -- that won't let you bring in a mobile home that is over a certain age -- Cavener: Yeah. Arnold: -- and, you know, that's news to me. So, some of these homes that are there they can't be -- I mean they can't physically be moved -- Cavener: Sure. Arnold: -- off site. Cavener: So that -- go ahead, Steve. Arnold: So, there is going to be some logistics there, you know, but you got to plan on how that's going to be taken care of. No. And, then, one of the -- the portion of that plan may be to look into the multi-family and affordable housing there. But that's not been looked into at all right now. Cavener: So -- Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Steve, I appreciate your -- your candidness on that. For me as a Council Member -- I think these are technically county residents, but these are people and so I -- I just want to be upfront with you, I like a lot of this project. I'm not going to support it tonight until you have got a plan about how we are going to handle those people, because that may be finding affordable housing or essentially becoming homelessness is a conversation nonstarter for me this evening. So, it sounds like you have thought about it. Again, you haven't heard from the rest of the Council, but I think that's an important piece that you are going to probably -- that's a big, big piece of the puzzle that I think that you have an obligation to address, because you are going to displace these people and you have got plenty of time to do it. So, bring us a plan that makes me feel comfortable that we are going to take care of these people. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 32 of 49 Arnold: Mayor Simison, Councilman Cavener, I do -- I believe my client is online tonight and they own several mobile homes. So, I -- I'm hoping that he raises his hands online and -- and can give you examples of what they have done in the past. Because I -- we have not -- he and I have not talked about that. Cavener: Sure. Mr. Mayor, I -- I invite that. I just think it's important. Ideas are fantastic, conceptual in nature. Until I see something that is either part of a development agreement or something that is tied to your -- to your rezone request, I -- I just -- I can't in good conscience be supportive of anything until that particular piece is answered, as much as I really really like what you are trying to do in downtown. Arnold: I appreciate that. Simison: And just to clarify, just -- I -- I want to make sure I heard or didn't hear correct. These -- I think you said these are county -- I think this was annexed into the city and these are city residents. Arnold: Yeah. Simison: Just so that was clear for yourself before moving forward, so -- Parsons: Mayor, if -- if I may just add some -- some commentary on this, because certainly the six years that Steve and I have been talking about this this has been part of our conversation, because same thing as a planner, that's something that we certainly don't strive to do is displace people. I can tell you that I have fielded many questions from the residents out here as well and assured them that they were not going to be kicked out of their home within the next three to six months. That was their concern is that there was adequate time for them to find a new location to move to. So, at least wanted to tell you that's the case. I mean they were concerned -- at P&Z they showed up. Those concerns were brought up at P&Z, as Sonya alluded to you tonight. But certainly to your point, Councilman Cavener, if it is your desire to have that plan, you have the ability to require the applicant to come forward -- don't let them move forward with phase two of the development unless they have that plan. Like it's an option. And let them get going on phase one and develop some of the undeveloped portion of the site and, then, with phase two part of them moving forward with any development on that site you want a secure plan on how that is to occur -- how that is going to occur, because I think it is a very important component of the complexity of this project, because there are so many different moving pieces. But just a couple of thoughts that I had and just share that commentary with you as well. Thank you. Simison: And the -- Mark did raise his hand and so he is available for comment. Would the Council like to hear at this point in time from him? Okay. So, Mark, you are -- Kelly: Yeah. Mark Kelly with the -- the owner -- one of the owners of the project. We -- we have a few ideas of how to mitigate it. We have had -- we have the same concern as the City Council Members have as far as displacing people and just to -- just to Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 33 of 49 reiterate, though, the -- the multi-family is not a -- I would not consider it a Class A. They are smaller one and two-bedroom units, so they will be more on the affordable side. They won't be nothing -- no discussions of deed restrictions or anything to this point, but we are actually building a mobile home park in Ontario, Oregon, which we are anticipating having completed this summer. It's a mobile home park -- a number of the -- the units out there at Elm Grove are -- are RVs, as well as the older mobile homes that Steve referenced. In some cases you can upgrade those older mobile homes and comply with the current codes. It just depends on how the -- the electrical and the various systems need updating. But we would be open to, you know, paying to move the existing homes that would be applicable that could be moved to -- to the park we are building there in Oregon. It is a bit of a logistics with our loan and, then, with moving people just from the standpoint -- you know, obviously, our lender doesn't want to see our cash flow evaporate on this site, so it -- it's a bit of a challenge, but we -- we would certainly be open to looking at a plan to move people and provide a certain amount of -- of funding. I don't believe the city has any criteria that is required for any of that that I'm aware of and in past discussions it wasn't mandated that the city had a particular program, but we are certainly open to all different ideas. I think we have a good solution. The park we are building is 50 spaces of mobile homes. We have about 20 homes that we are putting on there now that we are intending to rent and they are at affordable prices. So, we could offer people to move into those or we could offer to move their homes as well if -- if they can be brought up to the standards that allow them to be moved into Oregon. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Mark, that's helpful. I'm not quite sure I'm necessarily in agreement of those suggestions, but I -- I do appreciate that it sounds like that you have put some -- some thought into that. Again, I -- I want to be up front with you. I like a lot of this project. I struggle a little bit with the multi-family piece in its location in downtown and Fairview, but I think I can get -- get -- get around that. I guess -- and, again, I recognize I have spoken a lot about this tonight. I'm still not in a spot that I will be supportive of this application. I would encourage you to take feedback from the Council. We may make a decision tonight, but I guess I -- I would not be comfortable without you bringing something that is proposed to be tied to your application that provided option A, B and C to the residents that you are planning the phasing of that. So, just -- just food for thought from one Council Member this evening. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Kelly: Yes. Sorry. Sorry, Council Member Overton. I -- I got disconnected there. Simison: Councilman Cavener, do you want to repeat? Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 34 of 49 Cavener: Sure. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Mark, I just was just sharing that I appreciate you -- it was kind of laying out some conceptual ideas. I think it's important -- and, again, I -- I don't want to get above my skis and encourage you requesting continuance, because, again, that may be premature and -- and Council may have additional questions, but I -- I think it's important that you bring a plan to the Council that -- that lays out what your formalized intentions would be, at least before I would be supportive of looking at any type of rezone request. Kelly: Okay. I thought -- I -- I -- I think Bill has a good solution. We -- we all have been working on this project for several years, so I -- I like the idea of the phasing just to -- to put our perspective on the table. We are -- we are getting a little worn out on this project, to be honest with you, and it is in an opportunity zone and it's -- it's begging for some redevelopment there. Especially with the vacant land in the back, I think Bill has come up with a good solution as far as allowing that to move forward and letting us all come up with an agreeable solution to the relocation of the people that are living there. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Not a series of questions or maybe some comments, too. So, I appreciate your testimony and just being forthright about the situation. I did not realize that -- that it's possible that some of these homes cannot be moved, because they don't meet some standards that are out there. So, that -- that's important information. That -- that makes it worse than I realized and so, you know, this is an opportunity zone, so, you know, theoretically U.S. taxpayers are subsidizing these projects and, then, in addition it could displace Meridian residents, which would cause them to seek public assistance. So, it just feels like -- like layers of just -- like some ethical issues that I'm having. So, I share Councilman Cavener's perspective. I think what would be important -- because I view the rezone as kind of the leverage that we have in this situation and so I'm concerned that if we grant the rezone now, just contingent on having a plan and we don't see sufficient detail in that plan at that point, you know, we have already given you the ability to -- to move forward with some sort of a plan and I think having a plan that's adequate is going to be really important here. I love the ideas of Mr. Kelly about, you know, giving the residents a potential alternative in Ontario. Ontario is pretty far, you know, so that -- but that at least would be an alternative. So, I would encourage you to explore that. And, again, this is just a couple of Council Members. I don't know how the others will end up feeling about it, but if you do go down the road of coming up with a plan, you know, maybe another alternative would be -- and having been a lender myself for many years and understanding how that would work -- is you could certainly build the cottages. You could present your plan to us. If we agreed that would be great. You could go ahead and build your phase one and, then, you will hopefully have sufficient cash flow from that that at that point you could start, you know, implementing a plan to move the residents from the mobile home park. But I think another alternative you Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 35 of 49 could consider would be, you know, subsidizing some different rent point for them at the site on the multi-family portion as well, so that could be another alternative that would be within your control. But certainly it would impact your cash flow. This is a tough one. I -- I -- I personally need to see a plan, too. I -- I think there is a high likelihood that without a plan the folks that are at the mobile home park could be added to the homeless population here and that, you know, all of the Meridian and Treasure Valley ends up subsidizing that at the end of the day. So, that -- that's where I'm at as well. Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I agree with my -- my fellow Council with a couple of different thoughts. I actually have worked with displaced -- with individuals in this kind of situation in my vocation, displacing mobile home parks for development. I'm intimately aware with moving mobile homes. Been there. It's tough. But I agree that -- that it would be wonderful for us to be able to help the individuals that live in there and -- however, I realize that we can't condition that on you in the sense of requiring the specific ways that you go about it. So, definitely interested in hearing -- hearing your solutions on that. My question, to take it just a little bit different direction, on -- on sort of a -- a technicality was -- as you would be building phase one, with that little road network there, how -- where would construction vehicles come in and how would that -- is that going to interrupt or disrupt the residences in that area? Arnold: Mayor Simison, Commissioner -- or Council Woman Perreault, most likely they would be coming down 3rd Street from Fairview Avenue. Simison: Steve, can you get on one of the mics? Arnold: Yeah. Most likely they would be coming Fairview down 3rd to the site and, then, just work their way either in the right of way 3rd Street or just jump on site right away. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, I don't have the map in front of me, but if I remember correctly 3rd ends about where the bare ground part -- part of your development starts, so they would just move on to the dirt, then, at that point straight south of where 3rd ends and do a staging area there? Arnold: My guess is, yeah, if we didn't build 3rd first is they would put their staging area off of 3rd, just south of the mobile homes. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 36 of 49 Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Since it sounds like this won't be our last meeting, would you mind asking your client to, please, clarify how that will work if there is an intent to use only 3rd or if they had planned on coming up from the south and how that might affect the -- the residents? I think that's important given the size of vehicles that they will be driving and those -- those streets are narrow and short and we don't want construction vehicles really parking on any of those. So, I would like to hear more about that when you come back and -- and, then, the other question I have is related to the alley loads. So, I'm not a huge fan of alleys loads in general, because we find so many issues with parking and trash cans and -- and, you know, HVAC vehicles and just so many problems with alley loads from a --just practically and the concern I have with yours specifically is that there -- I just didn't see any area where a -- a furniture truck can come deliver furniture where, you know, any kind of -- of commercial vehicle can come in and -- and do what they need to do. They can't access it from the front and, then, the other comment I have on that is -- I find it a little bit odd that the front of these units -- yes, they will have a pathway on either side, but one is facing to the east, it's facing like, what, an apartment building? And, then, to the west it will be facing a street and so it just seems to me like the orientation of these -- it really isn't neighborhood feel. It's not a community feel. And I'm just kind of struggling with the fronts of the units facing west and east and not kind of turning in all toward one another. The -- the middle area is great the way it's set up with the grass and, then, you know, the -- the front of the units are facing toward one another and there is green space, but on the outsides it seems really disjointed. Arnold: Yeah. If I can follow up on that. On the outsides that's -- that's the way they are -- they are supposed to be. They are supposed to be kind of facing the street. That's the feel of this product type and that's why there is the alley that's behind them. But in regards to the commercial vehicles it's no different than a commercial vehicle in an apartment complex. We don't have really any dead end drive aisles, so a commercial vehicle can come in and -- and park and unload and load. So, it -- it's really no different than any other multi-family project. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: We are starting to see and request, but can't require sort of loading and unloading types of spaces for those -- for those vehicles that are coming through and I would like to see an option for that in this and, then, to clarify, I am understanding correctly that the garages on the -- the -- the east and west sides of these units are going to face the pavement; correct? And the front of the house will face the walkway -- Arnold: Correct. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 37 of 49 Perreault: -- is that right? So, the front of those homes to the east are going to face the side of a building and to the west they are going to face a street? Arnold: That's correct. To the east they are facing the -- the MEW or the paseo and, then, to the west they are facing 3rd Street. Perreault: Okay. Yeah. I just -- that design seems really disjointed to me in -- in relation to what's happening in the center area for those residents. It doesn't -- it -- doesn't really doesn't give it much of a community feel in my opinion. That's just a -- that's just a -- an observation based on what we see that comes through and the requests that we get from -- from the community on kind of how they want to live. When I look at the -- at the open space rendering I just see pavement -- just tons of pavement and mostly that's in the commercial area. I'm very familiar with that commercial area, but I -- I just -- this looks like a lot of blacktop. Kelly: Hey, Steve, do you mind if I respond to that? Arnold: Sure. Kelly: You know, this is an urban project with front door stoops and oriented to the front yards, trying to get people out on the front porches and on their front yards and interacting in the community. I agree with the commercial area, that's a lot of pavement, but in the cottages I -- I strongly urge you to go look at the project on Mount Hood and -- what's the cross street -- Irving and Mount Hood and that's done at 20 to the acre. This is half the density. We learned some things over there as far as your concerns with trash and parking and we are parked here twice the amount. We have a wider alley with five -- additional five feet on either side. We started this project at that same density, you know, where we had about 40 units or 50 units on this site and now we are down to 30 and we have the ability to leave the -- leave the garbage in the alleys and the garbage trucks can drive through. This is a really incredible product. I think you should try to walk it over there and get a better feel for it, because you don't have a sea of cars on a parking area with this product like you do with all the four-plexes and all the multi-family stuff. The -- the cottages is a great community feel with a lot of open space and green areas and it provides people that can't afford a larger home to live in a house that's like a larger house with glazing on two or three sides of each room and a lot of really great aspects to it. So, I encourage all the Council Members to go over there and look at that project and see it. We get nothing but compliments. Builder Magazine is about to write an article about that project over there for all of its great characteristics and I just encourage you to -- to go over there and see it and -- and try to understand that what we are doing in the City of Meridian is half that density and we have been working on this thing for a long time with -- with staff and, to be honest with you, we are getting worn out. We have got other projects that we need to focus on and I hope you will consider Bill Parson's suggestions as far as the phasing and dealing with the -- the mobile home park and the other issues, so that we can get moving with this project. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 38 of 49 Simison: Council, any further -- I think we have at least one person who is here to testify. Are there additional questions you would like to ask the applicant at this time or can we at least hear from the public? Okay. Thank you. Johnson: Mr. Mayor, Lucy Leavell. I apologize if I mispronounced that. Simison: Appreciate you being here this evening and when you get up to the mic if you can state your name and address for the record. Leavell: My name is Lucy Leavell. My home is just outside of the Meridian city limits at 2720 South Aerial Lane. However, I am the primary owner of the complex that is on the east side of this project, the Creekside Harbor Complex, which is on the east side of this and I do have concerns and my concerns are almost conflicting in a way, because I am very concerned and have been for years about the conditions in the trailer park and also the conditions of the trailers. I would submit to you that we have people already who are in substandard housing and I -- that concerns me. It also concerns me about the looks of the place. I don't know if you have driven through it or even driven down Badley, but it looks not like we want Meridian to look. It's not -- I won't say it's not kept up. I don't know what the -- how they keep it up, but there are all kinds of vehicles, both working and nonworking and various trailers and we have had to complain when they were stacking lumber next to our fence and making it pretty bad and that was the -- the tenants of the trailer park. That was not the owners doing that. I'm sure -- I talked to Mark several years ago about buying the first -- what is going to be their first phase. I personally could not see putting two-story buildings where I would have windows overlooking that portion of the trailer park. I'm sure that part of the trailer park is in better condition than some -- some other parts, but I couldn't -- I wouldn't ask tenants to rent an apartment that looked down on that and so that's a concern for me. It's also a concern I have for the people that are doing this project. I don't think that -- I just don't know if it's feasible to build just the phase one of their apartments, because there is a lot of infrastructure work that has to be done with that particular portion. I'm not sure if it's almost unfair to them to require that that's the only part they can build until they get this loan extended. I'm also unclear as to whether -- if they can't change the use of the trailer park, if they need that income for the four years of this -- the loan, I'm concerned that we are overlapping our four years. They need the income, they need people to stay there for those four years and, then, we are talking about giving people the four years to move out. That seems a conflict to me and I'm concerned about that. I have -- I have great respect for Mr. Arnold and for the owners of this property and I think they will do a very good job, but I'm very concerned about the conditions in the trailer park, both for the people that live there and the people that have to look at it. I thank you for your time. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody else signed up? I do still have one other person online. Johnson: We did not, Mr. Mayor. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 39 of 49 Simison: Okay. That may be somebody for our next application, but if you are online and want to provide testimony, please, use the raise your hand feature. Seeing no one, would the applicant like to come forward for any additional comments -- additional final comments, however you want to see them. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, again, Steve Arnold. You know, just looking at these pictures you can see that there is something there that needs to be cleaned up and the intent is -- and that's with this project was to do exactly that. The feasibility of development and whether it makes sense to do what they are doing financially, I leave that up to my clients and these guys have done several projects with, so I'm not worried about the feasibility. I think they have got their numbers figured out. I think the biggest thing that I hear tonight moving this forward is having a plan to help relocate our -- our neighbors that are living there so a lot of -- several Council Members can feel secure about making a decision on doing a rezone and that -- nothing wrong from the Council or the Mayor up until now. It's -- I know Mark expressed -- we have been working on it a long time. But we finally got it here, so that -- that's a good thing. But, yeah, we have been working on this a long time and anything that the Mayor and Council can do to help speed things along would be greatly appreciated. I do like Mr. Parsons' idea about the -- having a development agreement in place before phase two. Maybe we have a development agreement that includes the discussion for the relocation before we even sign something. I'm not getting warm and fuzzies from that, but I'm trying. But, yeah, anything that we can keep doing, even if it's to move us to the next agenda that -- and put us first, of course. But I will stand for any additional questions. I think I answered -- Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. I would be hesitant to ask you as an applicant to contribute or commit a certain amount of dollars to these residents individually. I -- I don't -- I don't feel like it's our -- that -- that we should ask that specific of -- of detail from you, but I'm curious -- that's just my opinion. I can't speak for fellow -- for my fellow Council. I do want to see -- so -- so, when we are asking you about -- about potentially helping folks relocate, we all might have different ideas about what that looks like and I don't think we can really truly condition that in -- in the sense of telling you how to go about that. The most important concern for me is that you be having conversations with these folks and it's a very, very big deal to talk to -- how many -- how many tenants are in there? Arnold: That question was asked before. I'm not a hundred percent sure. Perreault: Okay. Kelly: There is approximately 40 spaces. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 40 of 49 Perreault: It would be a big ask to ask you to individually go have conversations with each tenant about what their needs are, but I noticed that there was not any written testimony -- and I don't know what the neighborhood meetings were like. Maybe you can give us some feedback on that. But I would just encourage you to have additional conversations with the tenants individually. I assume Mr. Kelly owns this land and it's being managed. Did I understand that to be the case? Arnold: That's correct. Perreault: Okay. I think starting from there there may be solutions that you can help present to them that -- that are potentially even easier than we anticipate. So, I don't want to sit here and have us kind of, you know, throw out ideas. I -- I would be much more inclined to encourage you to just have conversations. I assume you probably already have had some and -- and just find out what -- what it is they would expect to have happen. Hopefully not the sun, moon, and stars. But the reality is is even if you were to provide them with some funds to move to a different location, they are still going to have to pay a little more rent in Meridian and there is no way no matter -- I mean we could build out everything that we have in the pipeline and we are still not going to come even close to the number of units we would need to start driving rental prices down. It's just not there. It's going to -- we are -- we are years out from that. So, the only thing to do is stop demand -- or slow demand; right? And we have no control over that whatsoever. So, my encouragement to you and what I would like to see happen when you come back before us is to see that you have had conversations with the folks that live there, get actual information about what it is they feel they need and, then, do your best to guide them in that and that's all I would expect me individually as a Council Member from you in that regard. But I can't speak for everyone else. But that's something that I will be watching for. Arnold: Council Woman Perreault, I think that would be great and I would like to hear from the rest of the Council as to what they are looking for as well. I -- I know there is no specifics that you want to ask as a requirement, but at least give us guidance of what the main concerns are. I will tell you, though, we did have two neighborhood meetings -- three and these guys were notified. There was -- no one showed up. So, it may be a challenge. Maybe we go out there with a board or something. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. Well, this is challenge. I think -- I -- I feel a little differently in terms of what -- I -- I think a good plan would involve some type of -- either relocation assistance or some sort of plan. I -- I think it's very fortunate that the owner is building this other park. It could be a tremendous option to help. I -- I don't know what form it needs to take, but it would have to be, you know, something along those lines for me personally. Another option -- and it's just exploring, but another option could be during -- if you were to take a continuance -- certainly the city has worked with our partners at Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 41 of 49 HUD and, you know, Idaho Housing and et cetera, you know, and maybe there is -- maybe there is something to be explored. We recently built the first affordable -- well, at least helped contribute to the first affordable housing project in Meridian that will be built. You know, perhaps there is appetite to explore some sort of a partnership between you and others to try to maybe set aside a portion of the future product as, you know, more affordable. Again that would be kind of trailblazing. So, it's sort of hard to like come up with an idea right now; right? And I understand you are frustrated. Well, the owner especially is frustrated, because of the amount of time you have been working on it. But I just sort of feel like Meridian should take care of its own people and so, you know, if we ever were going to expend resources to try to come up with some sort of a public and private partnership, this kind of a situation feels like one where we should look at how much would the city, you know, ultimately be subsidizing homelessness compared to actually contributing toward housing that's not substandard as it is now. So, I don't know. This is a big conversation. I just -- I think there could be more creative options besides just moving people to Ontario. I think that is a -- a viable option to explore, but it makes me sad that we would be sending people outside of our community. So, I don't know. So, that's just some feedback, though. I -- I appreciate you have been working on it for a long time and it's a -- it's a tricky project. I personally like the cottages. I don't -- I don't have any issue with the product at all. I think it's -- I think it's beautiful. I -- I think it -- it really reminds me of a starter home, something that we rarely see. I -- I like the approach to it and I -- so, I don't -- I don't have concerns around the product itself, I just more have continued concerns around the -- how we can try to navigate through the mobile park residents. That's my main concern. That's it for me. I -- I would recommend a continuance personally, because I couldn't get there tonight and, then, hopefully, city staff could also explore alternatives as well in that time. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just to add my thoughts on this. It is a difficult one. You have a situation where you have got vacant land and you can do in-fill. You have substandard housing and there really is no place for these people to go at the level of income that there is. I mean that -- there is no place to go. At the same time, if we do not do anything it will not change. It will continue to be what it is for a very long time and will continue to probably deteriorate. So, I -- I was intrigued by Bill's solution, you know, because that -- it -- there -- that's a plan of action. Okay. We are going to make something happen. What it is we don't know yet. But we will get there and we do have the element of time. It's not saying, oh, in three to six months we are going to do X. You have got four years, approximately, to figure out what that is. But you have to have a plan in place and begin that process to make it happen and -- and we know the retail is going to likely be retail, might be reconfigured in -- down the road in phase three. We can -- you know what's going to happen in phase one. We are going to have a good idea of phase three. What's phase two going to be like. Okay. We don't know. And that is what we would have to work on over that period of time to get to that -- get to that point. I mean are we ready to approve a trailer park in -- in Meridian for people to park trailers on? Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 42 of 49 No, because we don't have any zoning that would -- would allow that I -- I don't think. It's -- it's -- it's a situation that it remains status quo or it changes completely and -- and to leave it status quo isn't necessarily what we want to have. So, what do we do? That's my -- my dilemma that I'm trying to work through. And -- and I think Bill has -- gave us an option that I think that should be worth discussing. Now, if we want a continuance to think about it and maybe Steve and Mark, you know, mull things over a little bit, what would that look like? But at the same time we know funding is -- is the issue. How do you revenue stream this thing and make it work. I -- I don't know, but -- anyway, that -- that's where I am. We are either going to just not touch it and leave it until -- let somebody else on another council deal with it or we try to figure something out with the plan that's in front of us or we just wait for someone else -- they sell it and somebody new comes in and gives it another try. So, anyway, that's -- that's just my thinking, what's running through my head. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. Maybe a question for staff or a -- so, one of my concerns is that the refinancing market changes or the -- things change and that this displacement of folks could happen earlier than four years. Is that possible or is -- or is it no earlier than four years? Because I didn't see at least that -- that language. Simison: Just from a practical standpoint, displacement of these people could start in 30 days. I mean just so everyone's clear, I mean they -- they could cease to be a mobile home park in 30 days if they so chose to be. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? I understand, but I'm just trying -- I'm trying to think of like is there a practical way to go about this? If there were four years maybe the city would have time to try to work with the applicant on, you know, an affordable housing project in this location or something -- some -- setting aside a portion of the apartment units or something. I'm just concerned that we are going to approve the zoning change and, then, you know, we have no leverage and there is no plan and if there is a plan it's not flushed out and it just feels irresponsible to me to -- to go about it that way. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Allen: Mr. Mayor? Oh. Excuse me. Council Woman Strader, Council. There is a provision in the development agreement that the final plat for the second phase of development shall not be submitted to the planning division for a minimum period of four years from the date of approval. The preliminary plat to allow residents ample time to find other housing prior to redevelopment of the site. So, there is that provision, but -- but, like you say, the owner of the property could terminate the use before then. We can't control that. Thank you. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 43 of 49 Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I want to echo what Councilman Hoaglun said and also just kind of point out the obvious. This property owner can give these folks 30 to 90 days right now, regardless of anything we do tonight and, then, he can walk back in and say, okay, I don't have any residents. Here is what I want to do. I think we are getting hung up on something that's going to happen. When it happens I don't know. But I think we are getting hung up on something that's going to redevelop that's not in our control and we want the best for the people that are there, but, in reality, that's also still not in our control. It can just be our best wishes as we go forward. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, if I can just kind of vet that solution I proposed earlier. I think what Sonya just explained -- condition covers that. It kind of slows down that from happening. But to your point it is a complicated topic and there is a lot of moving parts to it and that's why I felt if we allow them to get something going on the first phase and that allows us adequate time to work with the applicant and get a lot of those I's dotted, T's crossed to try to find -- get a plan in place and make that happen. I don't think -- I think from staff's perspective a continuance for four to six weeks isn't going to get you a plan that you are looking for. This is going to take probably months or more. We have been working with this applicant for over a year on this application. We have been processing it and I have been talking with them about it for at least four or five years. So, to -- to the applicant's credit they are -- they are bringing forth their best effort. They understand this is a concern. They actually want to put the four year clause on themselves, because they want to make sure they do the right thing. But I think from -- from our perspective, getting something -- it's a trade-off; right? They are asking for a rezone. They are asking for a subdivision. We don't have 3rd Street constructed, so there is -- there is an incomplete street here that provides another public benefit here. So, there is a lot of good things happening, too. But there is always that -- that difficult conundrum that we put ourselves in when we look at redevelop and trying to -- to make things work. So, again, it was one solution, but certainly happy to allow you to continue having that dialogue. But, again, I don't -- I don't know if a two or three months continuance is going to get you what you want. Allen: Mr. Mayor, may I? Simison: Yes, Sonya. Allen: Another -- another option might be to go forward as Bill is proposing and, then, maybe require a modification to the development agreement prior to this -- that second phase redeveloping, so that the applicant can come before you again there and -- and explain, you know, maybe some options for -- for housing for these residents. Thank you. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 44 of 49 Perreault: Can you roll through that one more time, Sonya? Allen: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Council, what I was suggesting is going forward with Bill's proposal, allow them to go forward with the first phase of development and, then, prior to any development occurring in that second phase, have the applicant come back before you for a development agreement modification. Like, for instance, including a provision in the development agreement now that says that the applicant shall come back prior to redevelopment of the second phase of the project with a proposal for housing for these residents that will be displaced. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton just unmuted and so the wise -- Hoaglun: I will let Councilman Borton go ahead. Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, I appreciate the discussion and -- and particularly mindful of concerns of Council with regards to kind of a unique gentrification issue for the city and there are very well might be conditions like Sonya and -- and Bill are talking about, alternate ways to try and capture some control over a plan or even some context to -- protection for some of these concerns. I don't think it needs to be a month or two months and -- and Steve's a seasoned planner who probably in two weeks could outline and -- and pinpoint the specifics of two or three different ways you might -- as a Council we might capture this concern and be protected, whether that's through a DA mod, whether that's through approving everything except the CUP on the multi-family. There may be several different ways that we will have some -- some trigger to control these concerns. I don't know if you are going to solve it tonight necessarily. I just -- the discussion there is -- is -- I think it's well reasoned. It's making me pause and think about this application. I think these are concerns that sounds like the applicant's contemplated. Steve certainly thought -- thought about it and our planning staff's thought about it. But I envision in two weeks being able to provide to us a list of -- now that we understand the concerns with displacement and how this four year window might work, I bet Steve could put a fine point on it and say here is two or three different ways I think we can become comfortable with approving this, knowing there is some future review. I just think it's difficult to try and -- to try and articulate that language right now in light of this discussion, with one example and I will be quiet, but -- but Council Woman Strader brings up the -- the reality of, you know, providing a plan for how it will be addressed -- can mean a variety of different things and it could be a superficial plan that merely checks a box and this doesn't really address any of the concerns, but the horse is out of the barn, so -- that's not this applicant's intent, but there really is going to be some careful language needed however this is addressed, which is why I'm quiet and -- and pondering the concerns. So, I respect the -- the questions from my fellow Council Members on it. I think the mind and heart is in the right place. It might take a couple weeks to come up with some specific language, at least in my mind. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 45 of 49 Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I had a question for Sonya as you were talking and that is -- and it gets into -- I think what Councilman Borton raises -- is if we were to approve something and say, okay, we will do the rezone, but, then, we will -- we will allow phase one to proceed and, then, we will wait on phase two, you know, if we do that rezone, then, they have got ability to go forward and -- and how do we adequately condition or DA or however we do that and that's why I'm -- that's why I think -- I think Councilman Borton has good words of stepping back and, okay, thinking this through, having the applicant kind of look at this and consider some things, having staff -- we have started down a path of a possible solution, but then, how do we make sure the appropriate things take place at the right time in the right way, because I -- it is -- I don't know what those really are, to -- I don't want to miss something that is important, but -- so, Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: We -- we do have some options if we want to continue this. We have -- I don't know what the hearings are, but we have three hearings on June 6th. We don't have any hearings scheduled at this time for the 13th. That's certainly can change. And, then, we have four on the 20th. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I'd almost -- with that information share with Steve and Mark and kind of get some of their feedback as well. You have heard three dates kind of proposed. Is there any of those three that work better for you than others, recognizing you want to move quickly on this, but -- Arnold: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, you know, Councilman Cavener, the 13th I believe I have freed up. The 20th I have freed up. The 6th I believe I have another hearing at a different jurisdiction. So, the soonest that we could come back would be the 13th. Although maybe we don't need to come back. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor -- Arnold: This is the only issue. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I wanted to ask staff, though. How -- what -- what does that -- does the 13th work for you to come back and have further discussion on this and -- because I think you do other things on other nights, too. I -- I'm not sure. I don't know. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 46 of 49 Allen: The 20th might be better just to allow a little extra time for both parties and, then, to prepare a memo to get out to Council a week before the hearing as per the deadline. Hoaglun: Yeah. We -- we don't have a meeting next week and, then, we won't do the 6th and, then, the 13th, so that would be three weeks, but we can do the -- do the 20th. We do have four hearings, but I don't know what those hearings are, if they are nice simple short plats or long and involved other type of projects. Allen: They are pretty simple. There is a time extension, a final plat, and two vacations. Hoaglun: Oh. Allen: So, those should all be -- those are all mine. But they should all be pretty quick. Johnson: Mr. Mayor -- Allen: And this project, of course, be first. Arnold: Cool. Hoaglun: And, Steve, you were -- you were okay on the 20th; correct? It was the six that you had complications with? Arnold: Yeah. The only one was the 6th. Hoaglun: Okay. Arnold: 13th or 20th works. Hoaglun: Okay. Council, are we in agreement that -- then I -- I -- I would move that we continue -- Simison: Councilman Borton, were you -- looked like you were -- Borton: Yeah. But I was just going to -- I can comment after the motion, but just some comment for -- for Steve and the applicant. A couple of things. One we are -- we are mindful of the -- the multitude of variables that impact the -- the relocation of individuals and we are also mindful of the massive risk that you take in trying to get a project like this off the ground and do a rezone and are appreciative of those efforts. I think it's a -- it's a beautiful project with lots of challenges that we are -- we are wise to be cautious and appreciate your patience to make sure we don't get language that's -- that's well- intentioned, but actually screws it up and we are back trying to do a modification down the road. So, again, just appreciate the work. In-fill projects and -- and resumes are are tricky. This is one of them for sure. So, I -- I think what I heard us ask of you is and I think -- I think a timeline exhibit would be helpful as well to illustrate what you have talked about with the rollout of phase one versus two and where the lending gap Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 47 of 49 prohibits advancing phase two. I think that's going to help articulate the time frame that you are providing to these residents to prepare for relocation and however that might work. I think that will be helpful as well. Thanks. Simison: And maybe just to help. Are there any concerns with the underlying project that Council would like to raise or make sure it will be addressed? I didn't really hear any other than lights on the pathway, but we are going to put this first. Are there -- I just want to make sure that we are making sure everything is addressed coming back or is it just the plan at this point in time that Council is concerned about? I'm not asking for your -- to tell how you are going to vote, but anything else specifically? Okay. Hoaglun: So, Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I would move that we continue the public hearing for Promenade Cottages Subdivision, H-2022-0013 to June 20th. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to continue the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is continued. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. 5. Public Hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 (H-2023- 0024) by JUB Engineers, located at 6380 S. Cubola Way. A. Request: Vacation to vacate 0.5 feet of the 5-foot side yard public utility easement on Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. Simison: And just ask staff -- next item looks pretty quick, so -- seem accurate? Okay. So, we will go ahead and move on to Item 5, which is public hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1, H-2023-0024. We will open this hearing with staff comments. Allen: Pardon me, Mr. Mayor. Alrighty. The final application before you tonight is a -- am I sharing? Yes, I'm sharing. Okay. Is an easement vacation. This property is zoned R-4 and is located at 6372 South Cubola Way. This property is platted as Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. The applicant request to vacate the southerly .5 feet of the five foot wide side yard utility easement along the northern boundary of Lot 37, Block 1. A property boundary adjustment was recently approved that shifted the northerly side property line .5 feet to the north. The applicant states there are no underground or overhead utilities in the subject easement area. Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 48 of 49 Relinquishment letters have been received from all potential easement holders consenting to the partial vacation of the easement as proposed. Staff is recommending approval and no written testimony has been received on this application. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Would the applicant like to make any comments? Applicant has waived any comments. Is there anybody from the public who would like to make any comments? No one's online either, so that would be a no as well. Applicant waives final comments? Okay. Council, what's your direction? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we close the public hearing. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Seems straightforward. Thank you for hanging in this whole evening with us. We appreciate it. I would like to make a motion. After considering all staff, applicant -- and applicant testimony -- non-testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2023-0024 as presented to the staffing -- staff report for today's hearing date. Borton: Second. Strader: Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Meridian City Council May 23,2023 Page 49 of 49 Simison: Thank you. Have a good evening. Anything under our future meeting topics? EXECUTIVE SESSION 6. per Idaho Code 74-206 (1)0) To consider labor contract matters authorized under section 74-206A (1)(a) and (b), Idaho Code Simison: Or do I have a motion for Item 6? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I would move that we go into Executive Session for Idaho Code 74-206(1)(j). Cavener: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to go into Executive Session. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Hoaglun, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Perreault, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and we will go to Executive Session. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (8:50 p.m. to 9:53 p.m.) (Motion to return from Executive Session - Hoaglun. Seconded by Cavener.) (Motion to adjourn — Hoaglun.) MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:54 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: Approved 6-6-2023 CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Counicl may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. { I CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET Date: May 23, 2023 Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum: • DO NOT: o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum) Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Older Americans Month Proclamation E IDIAN ' ID �, H The Office of the Mayor PRO Cl AN ATION WHEREAS, every May, the Administration for Community Living leads the nation's observance and celebration of Older Americans Month (OAM); and, WHEREAS, the 2023 theme is Aging Unbound, which offers an opportunity to explore diverse aging experiences and discuss how communities can combat stereotypes; and, WHEREAS, the City of Meridian includes 26,690 older Americans, which is 21% of the city population, who contribute their time, wisdom, and experience to our community; and, WHEREAS, communities in Idaho benefit when people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds have the opportunity to participate and live independently, and remain engaged and included; and, WHEREAS, the City of Meridian recognizes the need to create a community that offers the services and supports older adults may need to make choices about how they age. THEREFORE, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, do hereby proclaim May 2023 as OCAcCer Americans Month in the City of Meridian and encourage all citizens to celebrate our older citizens, help to create an inclusive society, and accept the challenge of flexible thinking around aging. Dated this 23rd day of May, 2023 o ert E. imi on, Mayor Brad Hoagl , City Council President Joe Borton, City Council Vice-President Luke Cavener, City Council Jessica Perrault, City Council Liz Strader, City Council John Overton, City Council t■► � � ,sue le K ow Jork ,'; • i�Vll f Ill a "Illil�lhp t Illi��l . l"L n ■��IIII ■ II II ■IIIIIIY �+ URaw / I it r - r. L Ik � . h. f F ' i\ tit .' � � '!.�• Yfa',�. F, jA NTH < . �k * r � v Alm lNokr - r � 110lFRI E 6� � BRAD IIMOLUM I r !1 z 1 pA AT It 4oIr/'O :A I � VIA . 1.. eY auw wnnaM? � ui y � V ♦ +��Ed : �aeox — oF�wi — � �� luxe uvexa /1 t �I�III�� AIv P III a A�A, - � I I mil iu► ; IIIII 1 A. Am 401 AM aosi E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 City Council Meeting May 23, 2023Meeting Item #2: Crowley Park Subdivision AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP 0006-2023-HAnnexation, Preliminary Plat, Alternative Compliance – Annexation Exhibit Preliminary PlatRevised Preliminary Plat Landscape PlanRevised Landscape Plan Conceptual Building Elevations Existing House Changes to Agenda: None Item #2: Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) Application(s):  Annexation & Zoning  Preliminary Plat  Alternative Compliance (doesn’t require Council action) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.002 acres of land, zoned R1 in Ada County, located at 4125 W. Cherry Lane. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium-Density Residential (MDR) Summary of Request: This is an infill project the Applicant is proposing for 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, and 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. 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. 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 Hardie board to match the existing house 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 accordance 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. The Applicant has submitted a revised landscape plan that looks to meet the UDC standards. In response to the Commission's concerns regarding the numerous Alternative Compliance requests, the staff has suggested utilizing the water-conserving design specified in UDC 11-3B-7.O to eliminate one of the Alternative Compliance requests. This design allows for a potential reduction of up to fifty percent of the street landscape buffer. The Applicant may intend to utilize this landscape design and proposes a reduction of only 5 feet to the buffer to accommodate the encroachment of the front porch. Staff recommends that a condition be added to the Staff report for the Applicant to submit a revised landscape plan that adheres to the water-conserving design requirements stated in the UDC with the Final Plat submittal. 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: One (1) conceptual building elevation was submitted that demonstrates what future homes in this development will look like. 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. Commission Recommendation: Denial Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services, LLC ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Penelope Constantikes iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): None vi. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: Concerns with the amount of density proposed on the one (1) acre lot; Concerns with emergency services ability to gain access in and out of the property; Not in agreement with the Alternative Compliance for the use of lattice on both sides of lattice on both sides of the existing attached carport as mitigation for an enclosed garage; Concerns with overflow parking. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2023-0006, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 23, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2023-0006, as presented during the hearing on May 23, 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 May 23, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Item #3: Chimney Peak Subdivision (SHP-2023-0002) Application(s):  Short Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 1.45 acres of land, zoned R-8, located at 4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MDR (3-8 units/acre) Summary of Request: Short plat to re-subdivide Lot 18, Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6, consisting of 1.45 acres of land, into (4) building lots and (1) common lot in the R-8 zoning district. The proposed density of 2.76 units/acre is consistent with the density desired of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre in the MDR FLUM designation for this site. There is an existing home and (2) accessory structures on the property that are proposed to remain on Lot 1. The existing home is connected to City water & sewer service. The existing driveway via N. Chimney Peak Ave. will be converted to a common driveway and will provide access to all of the proposed lots; direct access via W. McMillan Rd. is prohibited. The street buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of the site along W. McMillan Rd. was constructed with the subdivision improvements for Fulfer Subdivision. There is existing landscaping (i.e. trees and lawn) along both sides of the existing driveway that complies with the standards for common driveways. Because the site is below 5 acres in size, common open space and site amenities are not required. Staff Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: None Written Testimony: None Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number SHP-2023-0002, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 23, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number SHP-2023-0002, as presented during the hearing on May 23, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number SHP-2023-0002 to the hearing date of May 23, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: Promenade Subdivision (H-2022-0013) Application(s):  Rezone  Preliminary Plat  (3) Conditional Use Permits Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 7.64 acres of land, zoned R-8 (MDR) & C-G (general retail & service commercial), located at 403 E. Fairview Ave. History: This property was annexed into the City in 1969 without a DA. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial (2.12+/- acres) & High Density Residential (5.52+/- acres) Summary of Request: The northern portion of this property adjacent to Fairview Ave. is zoned R-8 & C-C and is developed with (2) commercial buildings \[a multi-tenant building with retail and restaurant uses (Idaho Pizza), a paint store (Rodda Paint) and associated parking. The portion of the site directly to the south is a mobile home park, and further to the south is vacant/undeveloped land, all zoned R-8. The applicant proposes to rezone 7.15 acres of land from the R-8 & C-G zoning districts to the R-40 (6.61 acres) & C-G (0.54 acres) zoning districts consistent with the underlying FLUM designations of HDR & Commercial. The rezone to C-G will remove the nonconforming status of the retail store in the R-8 district as such use is permitted use in the C-G district. The mobile home park is a prohibited use in the proposed R-40 zoning district – a CUP is proposed to extend the nonconforming use until such time as the property redevelops (in a minimum of 4 years). The proposed MFR development is a conditional use in the R-40 district, subject to the specific use standards for such in the UDC. The proposed SFR attached dwellings are a principal permitted use & the SFR detached dwellings are a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 45 building lots \[30 SFR building lots, five (5) MFR building lots, two (2) commercial building lots\] and eight (8) common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the R-40 & C-G zoning districts. A gross density of 20.51 units/acre is proposed overall in the residential portions of the development. The plat is proposed to develop in (3) phases as shown. The SFR on the south end of the site is proposed to develop first with 30 SFR attached & detached dwellings at a gross density of 16.5 units/acre; with the MFR development 2nd with a total of 90 apartment units at a gross density of 28 units/acre (for an overall gross density of 28 units/acre); and rebuild of the commercial area last shortly after the 2nd phase. The phasing plan is based on the type of loan the Applicant has on the property. Because the property is income producing, the loan will not allow the owners to disrupt the income being made off the existing commercial buildings and the mobile home park. Once the property is not encumbered by this loan condition, the owner will move forward with Phase II, providing market conditions warrant it; Phase III will follow shortly after. Due to the financing and timing, the Applicant requests an additional period of time of approximately 4-5 years, instead of the standard 2-years, to obtain the City Engineer’s signature on the second phase file plat. This will also allow ample time to notice the existing residents of the mobile home park of the plan to redevelop the property. Staff recommends the 2nd phase final plat application is not allowed to be submitted for a minimum period of (4) years from the date of approval of the preliminary plat to allow residents of the mobile home park ample time to find other housing prior to redevelopment; this will require at least (1) time extension to be obtained in order for the preliminary plat to remain valid. There are (3) existing access driveways via Fairview, an arterial street – (1) for the retail paint store and (2) for the multi-tenant building – the western access is proposed to be removed and the eastern accesses are proposed to remain until redevelopment of that portion of the property occurs as removal at this time would negatively affect existing uses. Upon redevelopment of the commercial portion of the site, all access via Fairview shall cease and access should be provided via NE 3rd St., the lesser classification of the two streets. There are (9) existing access driveways via NE 3rd St., a local street designated on the MSM as a collector street – (2) for the commercial, (1) ingress-egress driveway for the mobile home park and (6) driveway accesses for individual homes. The northern access via NE 3rd St. is proposed to be removed as it’s too close to the intersection and doesn’t conform to ACHD standards. The second access nearest Fairview is proposed to remain to serve the existing commercial retail store and a new driveway access is proposed 30’ to the south of the aforementioned driveway as depicted on the site plan in alignment with the driveway on the west side of 3rd. Due to the traffic conflicts that will likely result with the two driveways so close together, Staff recommends these two (2) accesses are combined and aligned with the driveway on the west side of 3rd in accord with UDC 11-3A-3, which limits access points to collector streets. The existing driveway in alignment with Gruber Ave. on the west side of 3rd is proposed to remain and be reconstructed as a 30’ wide curb return type driveway and has been approved by ACHD. The remainder of the accesses are proposed to be closed. No access exists via Badley Ave., a local street along the southern boundary of the undeveloped portion of the site. Two (2) new accesses are proposed via E. Badley Ave. to the SFR portion of the development, which also provides connectivity to the MFR and commercial portions of the development. Private streets (PS) are proposed for internal access to the proposed single-family and multi-family dwellings. With the subdivision, cross-access/ingress-egress easements should be granted between the SFR, MFR and commercial portions of the development via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded agreement. Alternative Compliance to the off-street parking standards for single-family dwellings, which requires parking pads to be located in front of the garage, to allow the parking pads for the 3-bedroom units to be located as close as possible to the corresponding unit, was approved by the Director. Additional ROW is required to be dedicated along Fairview but no improvements are required with this development as Fairview is listed in the CIP to be widened from 5- to 7-travel lanes with on-street bike lanes between 2036 and 2040. With development, the existing section of NE 3rd St. is required to be improved with an 8’ wide planter strip & a 5’ wide detached sidewalk abutting the site and the unimproved section between E. Gruber Ave. and E. Badley Ave. constructed as a complete collector street in accord with the MSM and in general conformance with The City’s Downtown Meridian Street Cross-Section Master Plan. Private streets are proposed for internal access to the proposed SFR & MFR units for addressing purposes. The Pathways Master Plan depicts a 10’ wide multi-use pathway off-site along the west side of NE 3rd St. and along E. Fairview Ave. on this site. Internal pedestrian connections are required between the SFR, MFR and commercial portions of the development. A 25’ wide street buffer is required along Fairview & a 20’ buffer is required along NE 3rd St., landscaped in accord with UDC standards. Because the SFR portion of the site is below 5-acres in size at 2.7-acres, the minimum common open space & site amenity standards don’t apply. The southern portion of this project is within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District (zone AE) and will require a floodplain development permit. A CUP is proposed to construct a 90-unit multi-family development on approximately 2.8 acres of land in the requested R-40 district. Five (5) 3-story 18-plex MFR structures are proposed containing a mix of 1- (45) and 2-bedroom (45) units ranging from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size. The amount of common open space proposed for the development also exceeds the minimum standards. A minimum 0.5-acre of common open space is required, 0.94-acre is proposed, which is almost twice the minimum required. A minimum of (4) site amenities are required, one from each category. The applicant proposes a swimming pool, clubhouse, dog park, community garden, a tot lot and charging stations for electric vehicles from the quality of life, open space, recreation and multi-modal categories. Off-street parking is provided in excess of the minimum standards with (9) extra spaces; 9 of the surface parking spaces need to be covered in order to meet the minimum standard for covered spaces. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed SFR & MFR structures as shown. The single-family cottages are all proposed to be 2-stories in height with 2-car garages, while the multi-family apartment buildings are proposed to be 3-stories in height. The clubhouse will be a single-story in height. The Applicant’s narrative states the multi-family buildings will use similar accents as the cottage units. A CUP is requested for the development of 10 SFR detached dwellings in the requested R-40 zoning district. Typically, SFR uses are not a desired use in the R-40 (high-density residential) zoning district. However, they are allowed as a conditional use. There are existing SFR dwellings to the west across NE 3rd St. & to the south across E. Badley Ave. The proposed SFR homes at a higher density of 16.5 units per acre will assist in providing a transition to the MFR apartments planned in the second phase of this development and should be compatible with adjacent uses. For these reasons, Staff is supportive of the request. A CUP is requested to allow the existing nonconforming parking, landscaping, and mobile home park to remain as-is for an extended period of time until redevelopment occurs with the second & third phases of the proposed development. The nonconforming use of a portion of the site as a mobile home park and the parking and landscaping in the commercial portion of the development will remain as- is until the second and third phases of development respectively, which will be approximately 4-5 years. Commission Recommendation: Approval w/conditions Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Steve Arnold, Applicant’s Representative ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Kellee Jean Warner iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): Question from neighbor regarding how the proposed development would affect adjacent properties. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Concern pertaining to the extended time period for redevelopment of the mobile home park and commercial portions of the development and feasibility of the developer’s ability to refinance the property after the terms of the existing loan are satisfied; ii. Concern pertaining to the upkeep of the mobile home park in the interim of people vacating the mobile homes prior to redevelopment of the site and inclusion of a requirement for the mobile homes to be removed as they are vacated; iii. Concern pertaining to the uncertainty of what’s involved with the construction of a complete street section for NE 3rd St. between Gruber and Badley (i.e. if additional right-of-way is needed from the property to the west; if reimbursement for the cost of construction of the western portion of the street is possible from ACHD); iv. Inclusion of a sunset requirement for the CUP for extension of the nonconforming uses. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. A sunset requirement of 4 years was included for the CUP for extension of the nonconforming uses consistent with the preliminary plat requirement in the DA (see condition #A.4.1); ii. The pedestrian pathway along the eastern boundary of the single-family portion of the site shall be removed due to CPTED safety concerns (see condition #A.2.2f); Staff requests Council allow this pathway as it provides access to the front of these units which are accessed from the rear via the private street which functions as an alley. iii. Inclusion of a provision requiring the mobile homes & associated debris that are vacant at the beginning of Phase 2 to be removed within 45 calendar days; if there are more than 5 vacant mobile homes, that time period is extended to 90 calendar days (see DA provision #A.1.1i). Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Staff requests condition #A2.2f requiring the removal of the pedestrian pathway along the east side of the SFR portion of the development is stricken. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0013, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 23, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0013, as presented during the hearing on May 23, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0013 to the hearing date of May 23, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #5: Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 (H-2023-0024) Application(s):  Easement Vacation Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This property is zoned R-4 and is located at 6372 S. Cubola Way. History: Platted as Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Sub. 1 Summary of Request: Request to vacate the southerly 0.5-feet of the 5-foot wide side yard utility easement along the northern boundary of Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. A PBA was recently approved that shifted the northerly side property line 0.50-feet to the north. The Applicant states there are no underground or overhead utilities in the subject easement area. Relinquishment letters have been received from all potential easement holders consenting to the partial vacation of the easement as proposed. Staff Recommendation: Approval Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2023-0024, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 23, 2023: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2023-0024, as presented during the hearing on May 23, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2023-0024 to the hearing date of May 23, 2023 for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 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. i PUBLIC I I IN SHEET DATE: May 23, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 2 PROJECT NAME: Crowley Park Subdivision (H-2023-0006) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify I (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) if yes, please i provide HOA name i 1Q Vx i 3 53 � � , c e ►- 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT C�W IDIAN�-- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I D A H O HEARING May 23,2023 Legend DATE: Project Location 0 TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 ��o E SUBJECT: Crowley Park Subdivision lin " 0 u 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)/1 common 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 _♦ ■■■■■ �� rind'';! � - �_ ■■ ■■ .�■ AS ■■ ■■ ■� III _-- ' Ple � , i • 1 • � ,,ice ■■■■s ice■. �l;naP�-� . . � ■■■■s � � ■■■ � - -� ii�ii rr� MWNI �► ■■■ � - it `'�1�;,��r► �►�r�>r��i i ■■■ i ■■ �� 1111�� ■■ ■■ ■��11111 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/22/2023 5/7/2023 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 3/16/2023 5/5/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 3/27/2023 5/10/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 3/16/2023 5/5/2023 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. Infll 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, 1 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 proposes to install hardiboard to match the existing house has installed latt ee on the north face of the carport and will add additional lattiee 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 the carport and 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 lie hardiboard. Page 8 � I " AM M.r Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A twenty-five foot landscape buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane in accord with UDC 11-3B-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. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on April 6,2023.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject Annexation and Preliminary Plat request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Penelope Constantikes,Riley Planning Services,LLC; b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Penelope Constantikes; d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application:None Page 10 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Concerns with the amount of density_proposed on the one (1)acre lot; b. Concerns with emergency services ability to gain access in and out of the property; c. Not in agreement with the Alterntaive Compliance for the use of lattice on both sides of the existing attached carport as mitigation for an enclosed garage. d. Concerns with overflow parking. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None C. City Council: To be heard at future date. Page 11 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 to 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 12 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 13 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 14 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 15 D. Conceptual Building Elevations pw - ...1 T,,, Page 16 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`.;• _.,; '� _ - ,.�_ Page 19 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1 A Developraen4 Agfeeraen4(DA) is feqttifed as a provision of a+mexafion of this property. Prior-to approval of the afmexation >a PA shall be entered ifi4o between the City of Meridian, shall,the Guffer4ly, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the ApplieafA to the Plafming Division prior to eommeneeraefA of the PA. The PA shall be signed by the property owner and fetumed to the Planning Division within six(6)raeaths of the Git-y Getffleil gra-mfing the annexation. The DA M rainifwara,ineerpera4e the following provisions IF City Getffleil determines ame*afien is in the best ipAefest of the City: a. Future developmefft of this site shall be generally eensistent with the preliminary pla4, !a-ndseape b. The existing home on Lot 1,Bleek 1 shall be required to ewmeet to City water a-ad sewer ser-viee within 60 days ef it beeeraing a-vailable and diseenneet from private sef-,4ee, as set forth in MCC n 1 4 a-a 4 8 2. The final plat shall ifielude the followipp—q—p- a. Revise the plat to ineltide a 25 feet easement raea-adefing afetind the lropA pereh of the exisfin home fef the preposed eemmen let adjaeent to W. Cherry Lane. a. Revise the landseape pla-a to inelede a 25 feet easement meandering afetifid the ffeH4 pefeh 0 b. Revise the laridseape plan to depiet a variety of trees, shrubs, !a--,N%, or other vegetative greun eever ^g : -camerr T-anePer�PC l »zB 7r T� d. Mitigatien shall be fe"ifed for all existing trees f9iff ineh ealipef of greater that are rem f+om the site with equal replaeement of the total ealipers lost oft site up to an afneun�of one 4. The proposed plat and subseqttepA development are r-equifed to eemply with the dimensi standards listed n UPC Table 11 2A 6 f the he R 8-zeiliirg distriet. Engineer's5. Prior io the City not conform to the setbacks of the R-8 zoning district shall be removed. 6. 7. Off street par-king is r-eqt*ir-ed to be previded in aeeerd with the standards listed in UDG Table 11 3C 6 for single fimiily dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit, exeept for the existing r-equir-emefAs(UPC; 11 6C 3 P), off street park4fig requirements (UPC; 11 3 G 6), and landseape 8. The n..plieafA shall, ..,.,..,;th all Arun , ndit ns f appro , 9. Direet lot aeeess ftern W. Cherry La-me is prohibited. Page 20 10. A Design Review applieal4oa shall be submitted and approved for-the pr-oposed single family a4taehed homes prior-to stibmittal of a biAding per-mit applieation. The design sta-adafds listed in the !I. The applieapA and/or-assigns shall have the eontii+uifig obliga4ion to pr-ovide iFFiga4ion thM meets the UDC 11 3B 5 T r mr 1 3B 1 13 a-a T TDG 11 �T TT , -� r 7D 12. The pr-elimifiai=),plat appr-oval shall beeeme fitill and void if the appliecmt fails to either-.: 1) Obtain the D. PuB a WopKs 1. Site Speeffie Conditions of Approval >bushes,buildings, >tfash walls,taele > > ligh4 poles, 1.4 The well leeated en the site must be abandoned per-r-egttlatefy r-e"ir-ements and proof 0 aba-adonmefft must be provided!a the City tmiess the well will be used for-iffigatiefl. if used fe i.5 Instead of having multiple eemeetiens te Cheffy in(Thfee afe shewn)bring a single i.3 Sewer-ffmst be at least 10'from edge of easemefA. stubs, stub in4e pr-epef4y a-ad not in the ROW. i.7 Main > 1 O'beyead the m .bLmeto../1...,1,.,,,ft Lines should be eeffter-ed i the o ,4t pr-esstife dtHing peak water-iisage. Possible evaltiate iipsizing the sef-Viee line fr-E)M the Metef tE) the house to r-eduee pressure lose. i.9 Seme ef the sefviees afe vefy long. The desip eagineef to wfify that house will ha-ve adequa4e easement with the line eentefed in the easefflefft.NE)tfeeS, fenees or-any other-pefma-aent stmetefes afe allowed in the easement. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2.1 ApplieafA shall eoor-difi4e wa4er-a-ad sewer-main size and r-outing with the Publie WoFks sei=viee ou4side of a publie r-igh4 of way. N4ifiim*m eover-ever-sewer-mains is thfee feet,if eove 4-om top of pipe to sub gr-ade is less than dffee feet than altefn4e m4er-ials shall be used i 2.2 Per-Mer-idian City Code (MCC),the appliea-at shall be r-espensible to insta4l sewer-a-ad wa4e of way(ifielude all w4er-ser-viees and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20 feet wide fe a single utility, or-30 feet wide for-two. The easements shall not be dedieated via the pla4,b Page 21 utilized,rather-dedieated ou4side the-plat pf:oeess using the City of Mefidian's standard fE)Fms. The easement shall be gfaphieally depieted on the plat fef fefefen . . Submit an e�ieeu* easement(en the fofm a-vailable from Ptiblie Works), a legal deser-iptien prepared by an 1 Lieefised Pr-ofessional Land Surveyor-,whieh must ifielude the area of the easemen4(maf-ke review. Beth exhibits must be sealed, signed a-ad da ed by a Professional Land Sef-veyer, DO submitted,r-eviewed, and appf:oved prior-to development plan approval. well water-for-the primary soufee. if a suffaee or-well soufee is not available, a single poi prior-to r-eeeivifig development plan approval. 2.5 All existing stmetwes tha4 are r-equifed to be r-emoved shall be prior-to signatwe on the final p! by the City Eagineef. Any stmetffes that are allowed to femain shall be s4lieet te evaWa a-ad possible feassigmaent ef street addr-essing te be ift eemplimee with MCC. the developer-will be responsible for-the payment of assessmeffts fer-the eoffffnoo afeas pfief te and any othef:applieable law of:f:egula4iofi. 2.7 Any wells tha4 will fiet eepAifpae to be used ffms!be pr-oper-ly abandoned aeeor-difig to Mahe Well Developer's Engineer-shall provide a st4ement addressing whether-there are any existingwells- ift the developmefA, a-ad if so,how they will eef4ii+ue to be used, or-provide r-eeor-d of abandeament 2.9 Any e*isting septie systems within this pr-ejeet shall be r-emeved from sef-viee per-City 2.9 Street signs afe te be in plaee, sa-mitafy sewef a-ad watef system shall be approved and UTDC la 3A 6. In per-f-efming stteh work,the appliea-at shall eemply with Mahe Cede 42 shall be r-eeer-ded,prior-to applying for-building pemlits. read base appf:oved by the Ada CoufAy High-way Distr-iet a*d the Final PW for-this subdivisio will be r-equir-ed for-all tffleemplete fefte g, !a-adSeapi"rig,amenities, ete.,pr-ivrt6srgnature oft the fifial plat. 2.11 All impr-ovemeffts r-ela4ed to publie life, safety and health shall be eompleted prior-to oeeupa-aey siffety for-stieh impr-evemen4s in efder--*A- i-Aht-Rimi City Engineer signatufe en the final pla4 as = :r zrrUPC11 5c-343, approval lotto that ,be rod by the n..w,.,Corps of Efigifieer-s Page 22 7 T�1 C Developer-shall, mailbox difi a 1,....,tiens with;t the T et:i iaf POst 0 o z 2.16 Gempaefien test r-estilts shall be s4mit4ed te the Mer-idia-a Building Depaftment for-all bttildiag pads fee i i — —. -,red baekfill,w-hefe footing would sit a4ep fill meAer-ia 2.17 The design engifieer-shall be r-e"ked to eet4ify that the street eeR4er-lifie eleva4iens are set miniffmm of 3 feet above the highest established peak gr-oundwatef elev4iea. This is to ensure that the bottom eleveAien of the er-aw4 spaees of homes is at least 1 feet abe drainage faeilit-y within this pr-ejeet t44 do not fall undet:the jufisdietie or-AG14D. The design engineer-shall pfevide eei4ifieatiea tha4 the faeilities have been ifistalle in aeeefda-nee with the appr-eved design plans. This eei4ifieafiea will be fe"ir-ed befefe a eet4ifiea4e of oeoupaney is issued for-any stmetwes within the pr-ojeet. the City of Nier-idia-a At4eGAD standards. These feeer-d drawings mttst be feeeived a pr-ojee t. of 2.20 A street light plan will need te be ineWded in the eivil eenstfuefien plans. Street light p prior-to fifial p1a4 signature. This sufet-y will be verified by a line item eest estifna4e pr-evided b5 dur-ation of two years. This sufetywill be verified by a lifie item eest estimate pf:evided by t deposit or-bond.Apphean4 ffmst file a-a appliea4ioa for-stifety,W-hieh ea-a be fiatffid on the C. FIRE DEPARTMENT The entire driveway shall be signed"No Parking Fire Lane". D. POLICE DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLinkIDoeView.aspx?id=290739&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX Page 23 G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES(ACDS) https:llweblink.meridiancily.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.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=291408&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City&cr =1 J. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=291274&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancitE.or,g/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=290556&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianCitX 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; Commission 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;however the preliminary plat and site design is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Commision finds the proposed map amendment to R-8 and development generally does comply 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; Commission finds the proposed map amendment may be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential density is not 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 Commission 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 24 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Commission finds the proposed annexation is not in the best interest of the city based on the design of the plat and the proposed density. 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) Commission 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; Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development however Commission expressed concners with the imapcts of emergenecy service providers given the limited access and parking being proposed with the development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Commission 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; Commission 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 Commission finds the proposed development may be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare due to limited access for emegengency services. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) Commission 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 11-5B-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 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. Page 25 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and 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 26 w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Chimney Peak Subdivision (SHP-2023-0002) by Centurion Engineers, Inc., located at 4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/SHP-2023-0002 A. Request: Short Plat to re-subdivide Lot 18, Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6 consisting of 1.45 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district into four (4) building lots and one (1) common lot. PUBLIC HEARING SIGNIN SHEET DATE: May 23, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 3 3 PROJECT NAME: Chimney Peak Subdivision (SHP-2023-0002) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name 2 ' S 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 i I STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 5/23/2023 Legend DATE: lei Lorca*.'o� TO: Mayor&City Council oT FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner -- " KE ky 208-884-5533 = SUBJECT: SHP-2023-0002 Chimney Peak Subdivision Y4f*0i LL.AN=RD � -- LOCATION: 4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave., in the SEC of Section 26,TAN.,R.1 W. R-j S_ R- R-Ld I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Short plat to re-subdivide Lot 18,Block 24, Fulfer Subdivision No. 6, consisting of 1.45 acres of land,into four(4)building lots and one(1)common lot in the R-8 zoning district. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Tamee Bilbo,Centurion Engineers, Inc. —5505 W. Franklin Rd.,Boise, ID 83704 B. Owner: Colton and Leo Yasinski—4853 N. Chimney Peak Ave.,Meridian,ID 83646 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Legal notice published in newspaper 5/7/2023 Radius notice mailed to property owners within 500 feet 5/5/2023 Posted to Next Door 5/5/2023 IV. STAFF ANALYSIS The short plat proposes to re-subdivide Lot 18,Block 24,Fulfer Subdivision No. 6, consisting of 1.45 acres of land,into four(4)building lots and one(1) common lot in the R-8 zoning district. The Page 1 proposed density of 2.76 units per acre is consistent with the density desired of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre in the Medium Density Residential Future Land Use Map designation for this site. There is an existing home and two(2)accessory structures on the property that are proposed to remain on Lot 1. The smaller of the two structures consists of approximately 80 square feet(s.f.)and is located approximately 2-feet off the side yard property line; it's not required to comply with the setback requirements of the district as it's less 200 square feet in area. The larger structure is over 200 s.f. in area and complies with the setback standards. The existing home complies with the setback requirements of the district and is connected to City water and sewer service. Staff has reviewed the proposed short plat for compliance with the criteria set forth in UDC 11-6B-5 and deems the short plat in compliance with said requirements. Access to this property is provided via an existing paved driveway from N. Chimney Peak Ave., which will be platted as a common lot for a common driveway that will provide access to all lots in the proposed subdivision. Direct access via W. McMillan Rd. is prohibited. The Fire Department has approved the design of the proposed common driveway and turnaround. A common driveway exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VI.D that reflects compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. The street buffer adjacent to the southern boundary of the site along W. McMillan Rd. was constructed with the subdivision improvements for Fulfer Subdivision No. 6. There is existing landscaping(i.e. trees and lawn) along both sides of the existing driveway that complies with the standards for common driveways listed in UDC 11-6C-3D.5. Because the site is below 5 acres in size,the standards for common open space and site amenities do not apply per UDC 11-3G-2. There are a lot of existing trees on this site,many of which are proposed to be removed.A mitigation plan was submitted, included in Section VI.B,that depicts existing trees that are proposed to be removed vs. retained and mitigation requirements as determined by the City Arborist.Mitigation is proposed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC.5. Future development of the proposed lots should comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district and the common driveway exhibit in Section VI.D. V. DECISION Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed short plat with the conditions noted in Section VII of this report and in accord with the findings in Section VIII. Page 2 VI. EXHIBITS A. Short Plat(date: 2/15/23) k E ' 5�1'IEE ]1110C' k.lk�9a.l,de I p1} IS !S� j 9 I °JY DE MA YF59171 im-F § W.Pond Slone St, g ' fill flg ryMMik• �� Es fc 4n nnb ��_f.4. "3S'Y seT�H.:Oa twaar U 36 4;a' F g� s„ 4 �-l ;3 9 u$ Page 3 Chimney Peak Subdivision Notes Certificate of Owners M N Votes .em, m em o M4 IM1rcuen Seuin�n9uwn"mdwkt ai! Air.[1{e1p�„.w mi b.: Mk'rp Pued�1rt�PPf5EM5.M M upsfY�ea tlew nx.M w:vA'un mp n Nr erxr a e Mdn bod tl iml b ba mom m �'n e mlean du 1MY Ili m ieW ue IeEr9 aa,aee Np w ue p:k. rt m me[nmpy Pwr 5xeiMm imwwwn'aeeoaanen aea ne uwve d Pae W9buM re'IM n�iM;mWl M'1 p�tl:e'ieueueae w,M a?.P:m�iP,e°e,wP.wRNkeI Hll° poaroeon of C nera Cpaeme.oM xwumrt..,a,eau e: aan4.mne,M.IG-mm Poatuary prrlaN p muxa 5 m.Hk vetaiet pvam, mar, a. °m r,nn.n no my M omemm rmn eme m ume a �ne,nane�m r en am .�.�9 enr-..n..a+:zmr mmq,yuee'ene a arep n ua see d u.,seem»...sea.N' Imnwweq a IM wla oeavw romm a rok Snkm m,et'm ro,rs w9tt5e':aM,i.a15R ru im,e a..°,e..a>asen mrw p eta mp°m. ° .a em. �.'m'IDt,,1 wp pmq w e..n,ab Me,aay p wa sawn xk meow xeeaP'b'E,]OD1 Na p qw wkmM 1. �dkt.�,°na..�an°�P b.ertti�pvt Iw P�mnry Poo�t sumnien�m wu ue gpmde ee,,:q,eg,bn'ev d s. may n.�.m.ry etyma aeAa�,aw smwm-mow e m ue°le�.ka mner a wee�lB..ircn a w�Pwn tl BpMYq. '� eW ,.a,e.a�e,>..en v awi„om ue ream euue,ry Mnrc.<„ arb�.mm bl eam s..wny eeua.P p ese m,,a m ue n°:urea mm,p am W 1y e, ym��1�,a1 me xn.nor rm+ ak.enab®o ona ne,m,,..e M ue Ibma.en'aeaaeue.Inl s.e w+•aa. Mop SBP.M'16L f0A00 fwt derR>M re1Mb bwnanY N wk kot 11 m qr natlwrr area d.ttl W le swar'wY,rssat,.I aeee s.ay Mueam a m art 1e: e®,w,l ae.e..a�emw w e�-ve eb enwmu a Mm-eaw an..gy k+�•e Mep 5 A',6L 1mPs nea ame a.e.x,[wp1,,.e).wa.n.. m n[':mm*wk+eL° �r M��Y J.�Ld to m IM nenlml+M mns el e6f LR,e nN Me u m.e.aen°a merei[�uncmMw'e Mol�ve�la<e:wl na<uq..aemm:ae rpe eabm upa:,rid new-p-.q a Mnk a:m�Psk x..m 9 bm en„�:,e.me pa rarmy mmua m,oroa �a,n M1a pyy o ee.lwgwa avn ep44g m,N kR IW9 a Atea a Sim Ir.4 e.enw a/e p SrET.6',a Ma area •lo-tet a . -- Wq�0�51GE�.�dgma�raparwsa a'$}f Ixl e✓M tl:r wmsl mox oauimf a wA ut 11 olop M Ml-tl-q'a` 'n's4✓�WJ�m.m w.WYiMe rk..eWeoMa w®a.�M 4Pm.a a anv9 4 ue km omlP mMM a.d'ea e„a u,. inenp np9 me eamMni nawaary p me ket 15 m»weary xnmry»rcr,rm.ar pn a wu La le 5 ®.,w q m:map Ia,u�oe�n.e°eri,p�'�4 e w n se:egmay a ue u e.r.,.r.e..,,,�Pe�a:aM nwu sm�nY tls.e�aie:q ue.w.y nouwy a sae i.t,e M ue mu.�mu:a.P m aua b11e:um� sm�-reor,r�l m.am.a�pn:emW w M,m uarexlew,mom Ppl amo w.wuwro kwntlon a wea la 1e w e.aou a aa.er.� See Sheet 3 for Certificate of Owners Signature � 1 cl&70R�A CENTURION CNGINCCRS,INC. Consulting Engineer;Land Surveyors,Planner 2323&Vista Are.Ste.2061 Boise.l0 83705 208.343.3361 I wwx.cenhngr.com R~Q1NE.Eps pllmnvY PsmN Subakriaian snaax z m a Page 4 B. Landscape Plan(dated: 2/21/23)&Mitigation Plan ao PLANT PALETTE .............. �s,.. ��s,.. -� e�� ,one E� ��M�,.�::ti� 44 IT, M2 2� C� TREE PLAWNC CHIMNEY PEAK SUBDIVISION OLIVA Page 5 e I — 1 III 0 RIM �u ro- T ME ME M mw � _ 12 , m - - on Ston 02 4 13 25 8 E 03 a � 1 -.z:.�:n.... _________________________ o rrn,n.ra a.c __� r 0—;AppPP— L2 Page 6 C. Site Plan(dated: 1/10/23) ____-=-_ II ,I ------- W.Apgar Creek Dr. a g rt 1� rl i' I li o pgE�$ rit I '11 I II'I P II I I ! E I I I II I l if Ill I II x II I !l+ I 1 I j it rI ''r I I II II I -!l lfl 1 f1I 11 I 1 I�I II I ® 3 II II II rl [ g it � u r! I e�.•knoa E' F'VS x., F I i � I I Irl pppp II 11 i IIZ�I III >° ii 0 1 !M I�I � 6"s v3 � Iii I I I yy`___ I i 8O V f Vg a! atl r j Iu i r !I aaai4 1" @ , I Ell PROM F � R�A$$��a�d .III •o•s x�lr ma.m — _'�____ --`r--- McM111mf RQ�— ---- -- --- q # 4 4,1 Ell y g Rensions Preliminary Site Plan riTPq Chimney Peak Subdivision CENiUR1ON ENGINEERS.INC. O y qy al F� cer,snlun¢enslnaea tans sarremm,xlanrcm !—h �� - sarou yr arrwu zaza s.nx,ere.sa.xoxlam:e.loea+os �,, rn n.s.r ears un xu 4 F' " zoB-aaaBael I�-ce�ngnmm ___ xae, �waw�w�wo�I.mrvvx,c �nCPa'` �ianv �'kOlnEE9b Page 7 D. Common Driveway Exhibit Driveway Exhibit For: ,. ,w — �• — - .a - Chinmey Peak Subdivisim LL ____ __ A RE-Sp[IpNEIQN OF La 5 61DfM 24 OF F1ILFER SO®NSM W.E AS _ __ — L sHOWx s� Pu1 ar PoL6REWRpS aF �- y V M COU Tf.ICWVO SIRUIE IN THE SW N—OF THE SWMFJSI QU— m¢m1 HJ y OF SEGIION 26,TOM HIP 4 xOKH.WOE 1 wESr.WSE MMID x,CP OF 10 eEHIpVW.ep4 COONII',ICMHa. 1, OF "'i AN...". HwImIrtN.scut.I=vo � ____ I I i I I I II II II I II I I GNxXC FENCE O rm,cu�r II I k f-`' NAAEI SF ____ � I y II j III I I r r---- d h I I I r — J - �,s I I I m Mx nwllen a 0., - 'HN III �i III uxr sul a c�¢xr CC5 III ONIEN—N OF I I ul r lu I ----- I �� i ilili z lu I I ---- : n 4 GS \ Nx oexnxx na � i x _—_—_—_—_ Mu 8 r ,,.�----� __��- - -- -- -- -- - -- -- N.Pond Stone St I ,R1E - ---- OF I IIIm arl �M - r' I O I I I I a, i li i I p umr� j o � I I of IunM:euwxc I I a�O as - I 1 I I e I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I v xv rvxt,mrx I I I II I I I I I I I I 1 I o GN7p Rey CENTURION ENGINEERS.INC. Ling Engineers,UMSurveyors,Planners 2323 rz 23235.V to Ave.5fi. MIMMue 1083I0$ 200 343 3351 I wvn ceateagr,cam �NOlNEEaS Page 8 E. Fire Department Approved Turnaround Chimney Peak Subdivision Turnaround Sketch I I III ai III Q 20' I II I 1 '1 ASPHALT I III a E»InK HONE,TO MM I II I � I III v �l z 8R I �I I pr l �ti 24'ASPHALT — —_— — I _ _ _ 20' ASPHALT l �1 115, INSTALL "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" SIGN PER APPENDIX D of THE 2018 ~— IFC AND INSTALLED PER ACHD i STANDARDS. (TYPICAL} 0 I°ti Note ALL COMMON DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEYS SHALL BE CENTURION ENGINEERS. INC. MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES FOR ACCESS BY FIRE, Consulting Engineers, Land Surveyors,Planners POLICE, AND EMAS AT ALL TIMES OF THE YEAR. 2323 S.Vista Ave.Ste.2061 Boise, ID 83705 208.343.3381 1 www.centengr.com 30 O 30 ��vGINO& HORIZONTAL SCALE: Page 9 VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS&CONDITIONS A. Planning Division Site Specific Conditions: 1. The Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approval associated with this development: AZ-03-013 (Development Agreement Inst. #103181095), CUP-03-028,PP-03- 014 (Kelley Creek Subdivision); and FP-05-036 (Fulfer Subdivision No. 6),as applicable. 2. If the City Engineer's signature has not been obtained within two(2)years of the City Council's approval of the short plat,the short plat shall become null and void unless a time extension is obtained,per UDC 11-6B-7. 3. The short plat prepared by Joseph D. Canning, Centurion Engineering on 2/15/2023, included in Section VI.A, shall be revised as follows: a. Note#2: Include the recorded instrument number of the CC&R's. b. Note#4: "Building setbacks and dimensional standards in this subdivision shall be in compliance with the applicable zoning regulations of the City of Meridian md,,endit;,,,.� of the staff r-epeft for-Ghiffmey Peak Sttb&visie*." c. Note#5: "Lots shall not be reduced in size without prior approval from the health authority and the City of Meridian." d. Note#6: "Lots 5,Block 1;is designated as a common drive lot to be owned and maintained by the Homeowners' Association. Lot 5 will provide ingress/egress to all the lots within Chimney Peak Subdivision. The common drive shall have a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment." e. Note#9: Include side and subdivision boundary PUDI easements if applicable. f. Note#10: Delete note pertaining to direct lot access via McMillan Rd. (access is prohibited). 4. Future development shall comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table I1-2A- 6 for the R-8 zoning district and the common driveway exhibit in Section VI.D. 5. All existing structures that don't comply with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.Note:All structures less than 200 square feet in area are not required to comply with the minimum setback standards. 6. Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions from the previous approvals noted above does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. B. Public Works Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Common Driveways with 4 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". 2. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches 3. Ensure no permanent structures (trees, bushes, buildings, carports, trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.) are built within the utility easement. Page 10 General Conditions: 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. 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. Water service to this site is available via extension of existing mains adjacent to the development. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 3. 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. 4. Upon installation of the landscaping and prior to inspection by Planning Department staff,the applicant shall provide a written certificate of completion as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14A. 5. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all incomplete fencing,landscaping, amenities,pressurized irrigation,prior to signature on the final plat. 6. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post with the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water 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 applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Surety Agreement with the City of Meridian. 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. 7. 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, and water infrastructure for a duration of two years. This surety amount will be verified by a line item final cost invoicing 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. 8. In the event that an applicant and/or owner cannot complete non-life,non-safety and non-health improvements, prior to City Engineer signature on the final plat and/or prior to occupancy, a surety agreement may be approved as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3C. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 12. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 13. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-1-4B. Page 11 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. 15. The 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. 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. 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. 18. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-7 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting (http://www.meridiancity.org/public_works.aspx?id=272). All street lights shall be installed at developer's expense. Final design shall be submitted as part of the development plan set for approval, which must include the location of any existing street lights. The contractor's work and materials shall conform to the ISPWC and the City of Meridian Supplemental Specifications to the ISPWC. Contact the City of Meridian Transportation and Utility Coordinator at 898-5500 for information on the locations of existing street lighting. 19. 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 signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 20. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 21. 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. 22. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact the Central District Health Department for abandonment procedures and inspections. 23. 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 Page 12 utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to development plan approval. 24. 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. C. Fire Department https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=295088&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCi D. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orkIWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=295691&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCity&cry I E. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=297271&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCi VIII. REQUIRED FINDINGS FROM THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE In consideration of a short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with the Unified Development Code; The Comprehensive Plan designates the future land use of this property as Medium Density Residential and the current zoning district of the site is R-8. Staff finds the proposed short plat complies with the short plat standards listed in UDC 11-613-5. Future development should comply with the dimensional standards for the R-8 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A- 6. B. 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 and are adequate to serve the proposed lots. C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvements program; Staff finds all required utilities will be provided with lot development at the developer's expense. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds that the development will not require major expenditures for providing supporting services as services are already being provided in this area. E. 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. Page 13 F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is not aware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features associated with short platting the structure on this site. Page 14 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Promenade Cottages Subdivision (H-2022-0013) by Steve Arnold, A-Team Consultants, located at 403 E. Fairview Ave. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/H-2022-0013 A. Request: Rezone approximately 6.819 and 0.326 acres of land from the R-8 and C-G zoning districts to the R-40 (6.61 acres) and C-G (0.535 acres) zoning districts.B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 30 single-family residential lots, 5 multi-family lots, 2 commercial lots and 8 common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the requested R-40 and C-G zoning districts.C. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct a 90-unit, multi-family development on approximately 2.8 acres in the requested R-40 zoning district.D. Request: Conditional Use Permit to construct single-family, detached dwellings on the 10 of the 30 single-family residential lots in the requested R-40 zoning district.E. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow the existing, non- conforming parking, landscaping and mobile home park to remain as is for an extended period of time in the C-G and requested R-40 zoning districts. 1 I I PUBLIC I I IN SHEET DATE: May 23, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 PROJECT NAME: Promenade Cottages Subdivision (H-2022-0013) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name 2 i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 i STAFF REPORT E T*,- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTfor r A M O HEARING 5/23/2023 Legend DATE: F Project Location � o TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 --- � - r b SUBJECT: H-2022-0013 - ' i Promenade Cottages Subdivision m LOCATION: 403 E. Fairview Ave., in the NW 1/4 of ., ® ® _E Section 7,Township 3N,Range 1E. (Parcel#S 1107212707) I�4 ,--T I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted requests for the following: • Rezone of 6.82 and 0.33 acres of land from the R-8 and C-G zoning districts to the R-40 (6.61 acres)and C-G(0.54 acres)zoning districts; • Preliminary plat consisting of 45 building lots [30 single-family residential building lots, five (5)multi-family building lots,two(2)commercial building lots] and eight(8) common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the R-40 and C-G zoning districts; • Conditional Use Permit(CUP)to construct a 90-unit multi-family development on approximately 2.8 acres of land in the requested R-40 zone; • CUP to construct single-family detached dwellings on 10 of the 30 single-family residential lots in the requested R-40 zone; • CUP to allow the existing nonconforming parking, landscaping, and mobile home park to remain as-is for an extended period of time in the C-G and requested R-40 zoning districts; • Private streets(PS)are proposed for internal access to the proposed single-family and multi- family units; and, • Alternative Compliance(ALT)to the off-street parking standards for single-family dwellings listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6,which requires parking pads to be located in front of the garage,to allow the parking pads for the 3-bedroom units to be located as close as possible to the corresponding unit. Page 1 II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 7.64 acres Future Land Use Designation Commercial 2.12+/-acres and High Density Residential(HDR)(5.52+/-acres Existing Land Use(s) Commercial(retail/restaurant/multi-tenant),mobile home park,and vacant/undeveloped land. Proposed Land Use(s) Existing commercial(retail/restaurant)uses to remain, single-family residential (SFR)attached/detached and multi-family residential(MFR)apartments proposed. Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 45 total lots(30 SFR building lots,5 MFR building lots,2 commercial building lots,and 8 common lots Phases 3 Number of Residential Units 120 Density 20.51 units/acre overall in R-40 zoned area Open Space(acres,total See Section VI [%]/buffer/qualified) Amenities Swimming pool,clubhouse,dog park,community garden and a tot lot Neighborhood meeting date December 8,2021 History(previous approvals) Ross's Elm Grove Annexation(Ord.#183);Ross's Elm Grove Annexation No. 2(Ord.#185)(1969) B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • Traffic Impact Study No(not required) es/no Access There are currently three(3)access driveways via E.Fairview Ave.,an arterial street, (Arterial/Collectors/State &nine(9)access driveways via NE 31 Street,a local street(planned to be a collector). Hwy/Local)(Existing and The three(3)access driveways via Fairview are proposed to remain until Proposed) redevelopment of the commercial area;three(3)access driveways are proposed via NE 3rd St. Stub Gruber Ave. stubs to NE 31 St.to the west of this property but does not exist on the Street/Interconnectivity/Cross property to the east where multi-family apartments exist.East Badley Ave.runs along Access the south boundary of the site.No stub streets exist to this property. Existing Road Network NE 31 St.is a 2-lane local street along the northern portion of the west boundary of the site that dead-ends at Gruber Ave. (it's unimproved between Gruber and Badley abutting the site);E.Fairview Ave.is a 5-lane arterial street along the north boundary of the site;and Badley Ave. is a 2-lane local street along the south boundary of the site. Condition of Area Roadways Fairview Ave.: Better than"E",which is an acceptable level of service for a 5-lane (Level of Service) principal arterial. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is an existing detached 5-foot wide sidewalk along E.Fairview Ave. A 9+/-foot Buffers wide landscaped street buffer exists along Fairview between the western and the middle access driveway;the remainder of the site has no street buffer. A 4+/-foot wide attached sidewalk exists along NE 3'St.There is not a street buffer along NE 3' St.No sidewalk or street buffer exists along Badley Ave. Page 2 Description Details Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)t Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): Improvements . Fairview Avenue is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 7-lanes from Locust Grove Road to SH-55(Eagle Road)in 2025. Locust Grove Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from Fairview Avenue to Ustick Road with the design year in 2026 and the construction year in the future. • The intersection of Fairview Avenue and Locust Grove Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 7-lanes on the north leg, 7-lanes on the south, 9-lanes on the east, and 9-lanes on the west leg, plus enhanced pedestrian and bike facilities and intersection lighting in 2025. • Fairview Avenue is listed in the CIP to be widened to 7-lanes from Meridian Road to Locust Grove Road between 2036 and 2040. Fire Service • Distance to Fire 1.8 miles from Fire Station#1. Station • Fire Response Time Within 5-minute response time goal area. • Resource Reliability Fire Station#1 reliability is 76%(below the targeted goal of 80%) • Accessibility Proposed project meets all required road widths,access,and turnaround dimensions. • Risk Identification 4(current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project) Police Service Distance to Police 2.1 miles Station Police Response Time 3:30 minutes(expected);3:45 minutes(average) Calls for Service 7,199 within a mile of the development %of calls for service split by priority Accessibility If this project includes climate-controlled hallways,PD requests further discussions with developer on plans for emergency police access into each building entry point using a multi-technology keypad. Specialty/resource needs PD already serves this area Crimes 734 Crashes 238 Other Reports West Ada School District Distance(elem,ms,hs) Meridian Elementary,Meridian Middle,Meridian High Capacity of Schools These schools can adequately support the students from this development. #of Students Enrolled #of Students Predicted 18 from this development Wastewater Distance to Sewer Connect to existing sewer main in E.Badley Ave Services Sewer Shed Estimated Project Sewer Additional 1585 GPD committed to model ERU's WRRF Declining WRRF declining balance is 14.35 MGD Balance Project Consistent with Yes WW Master Plan/Facility Plan Water Distance to Water Connect to existing water mains on NE. 31 St. and E.Badley Ave Services Pressure Zone 2 Page 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •IIIiA nl 1■n1■� IIIII•IIIII■1►�■ ��L � �.-,;. I F' - s - • 1 __ i IIn - • - • - ■ a ■11��1�1► r 'y ■oo■■o r■IUlprym ! _k �■�O►`yunllsonnnnnnaGG N_m,• ,i,. � � -. "r r re� - ° p-_ - unuml ■ ■ is Y ! ° — L G3 - • - e r' x rs ry ! I CHERRY IRY3EW _= CHERRY: • jrM ='1IRVIEW O t1-1 �� ■ / ■qpu nai 0 s� IN ■�L W• �■ •1 :I_e ■ _-GIIh Inn Gi= • - • i y [.-p r_'ll s -�� "- si. �- p lnllll.Il niG■II II IS all, �:, -■ lly ,�E [F!'t l a.` 1�...1i s E ; �� II IIIII III niI! --_ Ili IIII IGG III ■ +! 5, 1 4➢Mhl�nVnVnn'■��I�1 I �� I' I J -IA, liM�- Inl W°0 R �_■11■■!=-■ nun a unI ml. IF-- r LPINE:w ! I I T �I�e= --Ili.:,. s•' � '„�111�1 mo■ ":IGG IIIII■�1■P,IIII.1■■r`■...: tC'•�r+- :.�,1 ,GI It - 1 -J ii Fi�t �. 1 11..rL'�■.■�91�F 1111111 O�IIIII IIIII WIND 1 F17-O:IIII'�Ip l—EI■■!: IIIII IIII!IIGI�■ 'F A'T I J:. 1 lIG G■I11111G I!J•EI■I{I Gm 111111(IIIII.1111 VI" 4 1f i i MIN=! o Fiii��ii iL - • - • = nln G MINE i - • - • '(IIIII III► i G w1■ wr■ ■ �.- Inglr■ ■ ■U� Ilmn ■ ■■■ o o■i Ingtillnm pn nn ■n n111� 1■unnnnnm 1:dn:a c: IN nnnunni nl umm�la y _ 111��_ 11 �■1111111 I� II�am rr -. ��a ■■ �Qi�e :■ / .■1 ■■p'n�■-■ o o■o■a,' ':ni:GS-.� O ■i i�'a qf� I►� � ' I ■rF:::::��e�OGJ��w.p�-■■-=a 1.1��■■■1 •n•n - G'YJa��p■� =�G C I nnn■MI�IIII w e Z � ■ 11 , ...... = 7 N_ �FIII(t�7f1i11 umi.I l., -•.i - ■in■•nF■IFi�f�711. ■.i■�-_ �� ■ � n II`� -�1■In ■ -..n II=I q ■ iw - ■ •••�••�---11!!C �Illl III q O1 Ii■!�wi•-L■ _■ � um n= milli n==■r- � ■■ pmw�3 - ;FIG III Ihl s G'.p.nna n\ C IIIIIIII■iI niG■II Me Ill l i G =nm■pR� ■ O 'Ifln IIII IIII r■ ■ II IIIII 11■NINE IIIII mill ill ■ O_ IIIFIC'IGG GI O ■- F G- :II IIII IIII!■111 Illllp I11G-Illy �ll�ill �F■-■- :(IIIII IIII ■11■�� ,i■ (IIIII:lhi IIIII" _ 11 IIIII PINE- 1 11 �uu_1._-■- I.nm■aP"I`N E �4 111116�� 1 ' Itll O °'iYil IIIII■■IIII®� 1 11..uL'■■..GII■Ii glllllll n�:IIIII IIIII■■IUIIIq �I -- 1�_ -�'1 IIG� 1 ll---:II_II:!=CFI 1■1:,Ill 1_I_III IIII!IIGL �� _I ■'- :+ IIII ,11,1 111■7p 111111!I!�:161N G�IIGIII GIIIII.111E III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Steve Arnold,A-Team Land Consultants— 1785 Whisper Cove Avenue,Boise,ID 83709 B. Owner: Mark Kelly,Lesley's Mobile Estates, LLC 313 N. Main Street, Hailey, ID 83333 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 11/30/23, 1/4/23 5/7/2023 Radius notification mailed to properties within 500 feet 11/13,22, 12/30/22 5/5/2023 Site Posting 10/19/22 5/l/2023 Nextdoor posting 11/28/22, 12/20/22 5/5/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN—STAFF ANALYSIS A. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.or /�compplan) Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates most of this property as High Density Residential(HDR) (5.52+/-acres)with some Commercial (2.12+/-acres) along E. Fairview Ave. The HDR designation allows for the development of multi-family homes in areas where high levels of urban services are provided and where residential gross densities exceed twelve dwelling units per acre. Development might include duplexes, apartment buildings,townhouses, and other multi-unit structures. A desirable project would consider the placement of parking areas, fences,berms, and other landscaping features to serve as transitions between neighboring uses. These areas are compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high-quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place; they should incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping,gathering spaces and amenities, and a project identity. The Commercial designation will provide a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and visitors. Desired uses may include retail,restaurants,personal and professional services, and office uses, as well as appropriate public and quasi-public uses. Multi-family residential may be allowed in some cases,but should be careful to promote a high quality of life through thoughtful site design, connectivity, and amenities. Sample zoning include: C-N, C-C, and C-G. The Applicant proposes to develop the southern HDR designated portion of the property with a mix of single-family attached(20)and detached(10)homes and multi-family apartments(90) at an overall gross density of 20.51 units per acres consistent with the density desired in HDR designated areas. The gross density of the multi-family development is 28 units/acre; with 11 units/acre for the single-family development. Although single-family detached units are not Page 5 specifically listed as a desired use in the HDR designation,the UDC does allow them with a conditional use permit in the R-40 zoning district. The southern 5.85 acres of land(6.61 acres including adjacent right-of-way to the centerline of the road) is proposed to be rezoned to R-40 consistent with the HDR designation. The proposed development should be compatible with the abutting multi-family development on the property to the east. A 15-foot wide landscaped buffer is proposed along the shared property line with the southern portion containing a pedestrian pathway. The southern and western portions of the property abut public streets(NE 3'St. and E. Badley Ave.). The existing retail store and restaurant/multi-tenant building/uses on the northern portion of the property in the C-G zoning district are proposed to remain. These uses provide services to area residents as desired in the Commercial designation. Transportation:Northeast 3'Street exists along the west boundary of the site and is a planned residential collector street per ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) and north/south corridor through the City from Franklin Rd. to Fairview Ave. Preservation and dedication of right-of-way for the expanded street section and pathway is required with development [see Downtown Meridian City Core Street Cross-Section Master Plan (pg. 4-9)and the Comprehensive Plan (pg. 6-3)]. See analysis below in Section VI.B for more information. Comprehensive Plan Policies(https.11www.meridiancity.orklcompplan): The applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are cited below with Staff s analysis in italics. • "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). As discussed above, the subject property is proposed to develop with a mix of single family attached and detached dwellings and multi family apartment units, which will contribute to the diversity of housing types in this area. • "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"(2.02.01A). The Pathways Master Plan depicts a segment of the City's multi-use pathway system along the west side of NE 3rd Street adjacent to the west boundary of this site; an existing sidewalk provides an on-street route for the pathway along the northern boundary of the site along Fairview Ave. Internal pathways are proposed from the perimeter sidewalks along E. Badley Ave. and E. 3rd Street to the central common area within the residential portion of the site. Qualified open space and site amenities will be required with development of the residential portion of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-4-3-27C, D. • "Pursue the extension of Idaho Ave. and/or Broadway Ave. to Commercial Dr. and the extension of East 3rd St. from Fairview Ave. to Pine Ave. in Downtown."(6.01.021) Development of this site will facilitate the extension of NE 3rd Street from E. Badley Ave. to E. Fairview Ave. in general accordance with the Downtown Meridian Street Cross-section Master Plan. • "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 currently provided to the existing uses and can be provided to Page 6 future uses within this development. Police and Fire protection is already provided to this property and will continue to be provided. • "Work with transportation agencies and private property owners to preserve transportation corridors, future transit routes and infrastructure,road, and highway extensions,and to facilitate access management."(6.01.02M) Dedication of additional right-of-way and improvements for the expansion and extension of the NE 3.d Street corridor, a planned residential collector street, is required with this development in accord with ACHD's requirements. • "Encourage the development of high quality, dense residential and mixed-use areas near in and around Downtown,near employment, large shopping centers,public open spaces and parks, and along major transportation corridors, as shown on the Future Land Use Map." (2.02.01E) The proposed high-density development is in close proximity to the downtown area and shopping along the Fairview Ave. transportation corridor. Stafffinds this development to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as noted above. VI. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE—STAFF ANALYSIS Note: The Applicant submitted this application on February 18, 2022; therefore, the UDC standards in effect at that time, dated November 30, 2021, apply to development of this site, not the current standards. A. Rezone(RZ): A Rezone of 6.28 and 0.33 acres of land from the R-8 (medium-density residential) and C-G (general retail and service commercial)zoning districts to the R-40(high-density residential) (6.61 acres)and C-G(0.54 acres)zoning districts is proposed for the existing commercial and proposed residential development in accord with the associated Commercial and HDR FLUM designations for this property. Legal descriptions and exhibit maps for the rezone areas are included in Section VIII.A of this report. There are two(2)commercial buildings (a retail store and a multi-tenant building with a restaurant) on the northern portion of this site along Fairview Ave. that are proposed to remain until the third phase of development; a redevelopment plan was not submitted for this area. A mobile home park exists to the south of the commercial area that is proposed to be removed and redeveloped with 90 multi-family apartments with the second phase of development. The southern portion of the site consists of vacant/undeveloped land that is proposed to develop with a mix of single-family attached(20) and detached(10)homes with the first phase of development. The existing retail store(Rodda Paint)and mobile home park are considered nonconforming uses in the R-8 zoning district, as defined in UDC 11-IA-1,as such uses are prohibited in the R-8 zoning district. See conceptual development plan included in Section VIII.D. The rezone to C-G will remove the nonconforming status of the retail store as such use is a principal permitted use in the C-G zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2. The mobile home park is a prohibited use in the proposed R-40 zoning district; a conditional use permit is proposed to extend the nonconforming use in the R-40 district until such time as the property redevelops. The proposed multi-family development is listed as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district per UDC Table 11-2B-2 and is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. The proposed single-family attached dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use and the single- family detached dwellings are listed as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district per UDC Page 7 Table 11-2A-2. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone 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. There is no development agreement currently in effect for this property. B. Preliminary Plat(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 30 residential building lots for 20 single-family attached dwellings and 10 single-family detached dwellings, five(5)multi-family building lots, two (2)commercial building lots, and eight(8) common lots on 7.64 acres of land in the R-40 and C-G zoning districts. This property is within the Northern Gateway Urban Renewal District and within the Opportunity Zone. If approved,the tax increment from this project would go toward making public improvements in the area. The Applicant plans to develop the property in three(3)phases as shown on the preliminary plat. The single-family on the south end of the site is proposed to develop first with the multi-family second, and rebuild of the commercial area last shortly after the second phase. The phasing plan is based on the type of loan the Applicant has on the property. Because the property is income producing,the loan will not allow the owners to disrupt the income being made off the existing commercial buildings and the mobile home park. Once the property is not encumbered by this loan condition,the owner will move forward with Phase II,providing market conditions warrant it; Phase III will follow shortly after. Due to the financing and timing,the Applicant requests an additional period of time of approximately 4-5 years, instead of the standard 2-years,to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the second phase file plat. This will also allow ample time to notice the existing residents of the mobile home park of the plan to redevelop the property. Staff recommends the second phase final plat application is not allowed to be submitted for a minimum period of four(4)years from the date of approval of the preliminary plat to allow residents of the mobile home park ample time to find other housing prior to redevelopment; this will require at least one (1)time extension to be obtained in order for the preliminary plat to remain valid. Dimensional Standards: Future development should comply with the dimensional standards for the R-40 zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 and for the C-G zoning district listed in UDC Table I1-2B-3. Subdivision Design and Improvement Standards(UDC 11-6C-3): Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): There are three(3)existing access driveways via E. Fairview Ave.,a principal arterial, designated on the Master Street Map(MSM)as a mobility arterial—one(1)for the retail store and two(2) for the multi-tenant building where a restaurant(i.e. Idaho Pizza) is located. There are nine(9) existing access driveways via NE 3rd St., a local street,designated on the MSM as a residential collector street—two (2) for the commercial, one(1)ingress/egress driveway for the mobile home park, and six(6)driveway accesses for individual homes.No access exists via E.Badley Ave., a local street along the southern portion of the property as that portion of the site is undeveloped. Page 8 The two(2)eastern accesses via Fairview for the multi-tenant building are proposed to remain until redevelopment of that portion of the commercial property occurs as removal at this time would negatively affect the existing uses; the western access is proposed to be removed as it's too close to the intersection and doesn't conform to ACHD standards. ACHD is supportive of both of the eastern accesses remaining until such time as the property redevelops. Staff recommends a DA provision requiring all access via Fairview Ave.to cease upon redevelopment of the commercial portion of the property and sole access to be taken via NE 3rd St.,the lesser classification of the two streets,in accord with UDC 11-3A-3 and ACHD Policy. The topography of the eastern portion of the commercial site where the multi-tenant building and the eastern two(2)accesses are located is approximately 3-feet higher than the western portion of the site where the retail building and single access is located and there is no cross-access driveway between the two areas. The northern access via NE 3'St. is proposed to be removed as it's too close to the intersection and doesn't conform to ACHD standards. The second access nearest Fairview is proposed to remain to serve the existing commercial retail store and a new driveway access is proposed 30- feet to the south of the aforementioned driveway as depicted on the site plan in alignment with the driveway on the west side of 3rd. Due to the traffic conflicts that will likely result with the two driveways so close together, Staff recommends these two(2) accesses are combined and aligned with the driveway on the west side of 3rd in accord with UDC 11-3A-3,which limits access points to collector streets.The existing driveway in alignment with Gruber Ave. on the west side of 3'is proposed to remain and be reconstructed as a 30-foot wide curb return type driveway and has been approved by ACHD. The remainder of the accesses are proposed to be closed. Two(2)new accesses are proposed via E. Badley Ave. to the single-family portion of the development,which also provides connectivity to the multi-family and commercial portions of the development. With the subdivision, cross-access/ingress-egress easements should be granted between the single-family,multi-family and commercial portions of the development via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded agreement in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. Street Improvements: An additional 21-feet of right-of-way is required to be dedicated along Fairview Ave. consistent with the MSM; however,no street improvements are required with this application. Fairview is listed in the CIP to be widened from 5-to 7-travel lanes with on-street bike lanes between 2036 and 2040. With development,the existing section of NE 3rd St.is required to be reconstructed and the unimproved section between E. Gruber Ave. and E.Badley Ave. constructed as a collector street in accord with the MSM and in general conformance with The City's Downtown Meridian Street Cross-Section Master Plan, as follows: Page 9 {7 P e..rrvnnn �f >88 IL (i ParllnA „} m e m �1 SA...Ika � Pe,kwev � 4�,,,• � f F 3tnelavnpa Buflvr � � d Parkway Buflvr '� y ; Z Ea V ti r Furmhre 1 E S LiAhling - �' "C15 4 Lb Y4fi '' FnennpeEkedlmN a w Note:Staff is working with ACHD on an appropriate cross-section for this street that generally conforms to the above street section. In accord with the right-of-way referenced in the East 3rd Street Alignment Study and the stated need in the Cross-section Master Plan, Staff recommends the following complete street section for NE 3rd St.between Badley and Gruber is constructed with the first phase of development: Buffer Sidewalk Parkway Curb Bikelane Lane Lane Bikelane Curb Parkway Sidewalk Buffer Total 10 a 2 0 13 13 0 .2 a 5 1 66 For the street section between Gruber and Fairview to be constructed with the second phase of development,the existing section of 3rd St.should be reconstructed as V2 of a 40-foot street section with an 11-foot wide travel lane, an 8-foot wide planter strip and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk abutting the site. Private Streets: Private streets are proposed for internal access to the proposed single-family and multi-family units for addressing purposes and are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F- 4. Twenty-four(24)foot wide streets are proposed in the single-family portion of the development to serve the 2-story structures and 26-foot wide streets are proposed in the multi- family portion of the development to serve the 3-story structures in accord with Fire Dept. requirements. The private streets should be delineated from the parking areas on the common lot. The Director finds the proposed private streets comply with the aforementioned standards and the required Findings for approval(see Section X.F below). Therefore,the Director tentatively approves the private streets subject to completion of the tasks noted in UDC 11-3F-3B within one (1)year in accord with the Findings in Section X.F.Upon completion of these tasks and submittal of the required documents, final approval will be issued. Parking: Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for the use. Alternative Compliance is requested to the off-street parking standards for single-family dwellings listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 (note#2),which requires parking pads to be located in front of the garage,to allow the parking pads for the 3-bedroom units on Lots 2, 5,9, 11, 12, 14, 19,22,24,26,28 to and 32 to be located as close as possible to the corresponding unit as shown on the parking exhibit in Section VIII.F. Page 10 Although this request is irregular and not ideal, it still provides the required parking in fairly close proximity to the associated dwelling units. The walking distance from the parking spaces to the units they serve varies from 65 to 130 feet. Due to the proposed site design with alley-loaded units accessed by private streets,the Applicant states it's not feasible to comply with the required standards. Staff finds revisions could be made to the plan to comply but it would change the design of the project. Because the proposed alternative means of compliance meets the intent of the requirement by providing an equal means of compliance and shouldn't be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties in accord with the required Findings for such,the Director has approved the request(see Findings in Section X.G). Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 : The UDC requires detached sidewalks along collector and arterial streets; attached sidewalks may be provided along local streets. There is an existing 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along E. Fairview Ave. and a 4+/-foot wide attached sidewalk along NE 3rd St.; no sidewalk exists along Badley Ave. When NE 3'St., a future collector street, is reconstructed and extended, a detached sidewalk will be provided. An attached sidewalk will be required along Badley Ave., a local street. A multi-use pathway is designated on the Pathways Master Plan along Fairview Ave. on this site. If on-street bike lanes are not constructed by ACHD with the Fairview road widening project, a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk will likely be constructed by ACHD in lieu of the bike lanes. The Applicant should coordinate with ACHD to ensure a 10-foot wide detached pathway is constructed rather than a pathway of lesser width in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): The Pathways Master Plan(PMP)depicts a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway off-site along the west side of NE 3'St. and an on-street route along E. Fairview Ave. on this site.All pathways should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-8. Accommodating the East 3rd Street Pathway is of the upmost importance. Meridian road does not have bike lanes or parkways separating the sidewalk from a 5-lane roadway. Similarly,Main Street does not have bike lanes and the narrow sidewalks do not accommodate bike use so close to storefronts. The City's only opportunity for a family-friendly strong north-south pathway is on 3rd Street which has one of the few rail crossings. This Pathway alignment is adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan,Pathway Master Plan, and Street Cross-section Master Plan. Portions of East 3rd Street to the South(Carlton to Franklin)are programmed for widening and will incorporate the pathway. The pathway location on the west side has been identified as the safest option and needs to be kept in this alignment on one-side of the street to enhance appeal and promote its use in a pedestrian and bike-friendly downtown. Internal pedestrian pathways are proposed from the perimeter sidewalks to the main building entrances of the commercial buildings and within the single-family residential portion of the development to the central common area. Revisions should be made to the pedestrian plan to provide pedestrian connections between the single-family,multi-family and commercial portion of the development. The pedestrian access to Badley Ave. will provide a connection to the multi-use pathway along the Five Mile Creek to the east. A detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway should be provided within the street buffer along Fairview with redevelopment of the commercial portion of the site in Phase 3 in accord with the Page 11 PMP.ACHD may construct this pathway with the Fairview road widening project in 2036-2040 if on-street bike lanes are not constructed. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): A 9+/-foot wide landscaped street buffer exists along Fairview between the western and the middle access driveway; the remainder of the site has no street buffer. No street buffer exists along NE 3rd St. or Badley Ave. A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along E. Fairview Ave.,an arterial street, and a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along NE 3'St.,to be improved as a collector street,per UDC Tables 11-2A-8 and 11-2B-3.No street buffer is required along Badley Ave. Landscaping is required to be installed within the street buffers in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 7C. The buffer on the commercial portion of the property will be required with the third phase of development which should follow the Fairview Ave.road widening project. All residential subdivision street buffers are required to be on a common lot,maintained by the homeowner's association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. All commercial street buffers are required to be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer,maintained by the property owner or business owner's association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2b. Landscaping is required adjacent to all pathways within the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. There are existing trees on this site that are proposed to be removed with development. Mitigation is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC.S. Mitigation information should be included on the landscape plan in accord with UDC standards. Common Open Space: The UDC(11-3G-2)does not include minimum open space standards for single-family developments in the R-40 zoning district that are under 5 acres in size. Because the single-family portion of the development is only 2.7+/-acres in size,open space is not required. Common open space is proposed as shown on the landscape plan. Common open space for multi-family developments is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C(see CUP analysis below for more information). Site Amenities: The UDC(11-3G-2)does not include minimum site amenity standards for single-family developments in the R-40 zoning district that are under 5 acres in size. Because the single-family portion of the development is only 2.7+/-acres in size, site amenities are not required. Site amenities are proposed consisting of a 1,260 square foot clubhouse, a plaza area with seating, a community garden,tot lot and a dog park. Site amenity standards for multi-family developments are listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D(see CUP analysis below for more information). In the commercial area, a gazebo and plaza areas are proposed for each building. Storm Drainage: An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction is required to follow Best Management Practices as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical En ing eeringeport for the subdivision. Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11 C. Pressure Irrigation: Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the Page 12 subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. This property lies within the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District boundary. Utilities: 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: There are no waterways of significant size that cross this site. All waterways on this site shall be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. The southern portion of this project is within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District(zone AE). A floodplain development permit is required before land disturbance begins.All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the system.New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwaters.The lowest finished floor of the buildings must be elevated to flood protection levels with BFE and lowest finished floor noted on final grading plans. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7.No fencing is depicted on the landscape plan. However,the Applicant intends to construct 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing along the eastern and northern boundaries of the residential portion of the development to screen the residential from the commercial uses. Fencing details should be included on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). C. Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Multi-family Development: A CUP is requested for a multi-family development consisting of 90 residential units on approximately 2.8 acres of land in the requested R-40 zoning district in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-2. Five(5) 3-story 18-plex multi-family structures are proposed containing a mix of 1-(45) and 2-bedroom(45)units ranging from 712 to 1,278 square feet in size. Note: The Applicant doesn't expect the 2nd phase of development in which the multi family development lies, to develop for approximately 4-5 years due to the type of loan they have on the property and restrictions associated with it. 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 VII.D depicts buildings at a minimum setback of 10 feet; no greater setback is required. 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. Page 13 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 each dwelling unit will have a minimum 80 square foot patio or balcony, which meets this standard. 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 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.Based on (45) 1-bedroom and(45) 2-bedroom units, a minimum of 167 off-street vehicle parking spaces are required, including nine(9)guest parking spaces, with 90 of those being in a covered carport or garage per UDC Table 11-3C-6.A minimum of two (2) additional parking spaces are required for the 1,260 square foot clubhouse per UDC 11-3C-6B.1. Total off-street parking required for the multi family development is 169 spaces with 90 covered spaces. The site plan depicts a total of 176 spaces with 81 of those being covered, which is nine(9)more than the minimum required but nine(9)fewer covered spaces than required.A minimum of nine(9) of the parking spaces proposed should be covered. Based on the number of vehicle parking spaces proposed(i.e. 176), a minimum of seven (7)bicycle parking spaces are required per UDC 11-3C-6G that comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi family building and the amenity building. Bicycle parking should be included on the site plan in accord with these standards. 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 location of these items 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.Because the site is only 2.8 acres in area, this standard does not apply. Common open space areas are 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 Page 14 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.Pathways should be provided to the central common open space area for pedestrian access. 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 site plan depicts a central common open space area of 8,907sf. that meets this requirement. In addition to the baseline open space requirement,which doesn't apply in this instance, 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.All of the proposed 90 units contain between 500 and 1,200 s.f of living area; therefore, a minimum of 22,500 sf. (or 0.5 acre) of common open space is required. c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.None of the units contain more than 1,200 square feet. 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 qualified areas meet this standard. The qualified open space exhibit depicts 0.94-acre of qualified open space, which is 0.44- acre above the required amount. 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 multi family portion of the development is proposed to be constructed in one phase as the second overall phase of development. 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) Some of the qualified open space is located adjacent to a collector street(i.e.NE Yd St.). As such, a berm or constructed barrier should be provided in accord with this standard. Site Development Amenities: Page 15 1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows: a. Quality of life: (1) Clubhouse. (2) Fitness facilities. (3) Enclosed bike storage. (4) Public art such as a statue. (5) Dog park with waste station. (6) Commercial outdoor kitchen. (7) Fitness course. (8) Enclosed storage. b. Open space: (1) Community garden. (2) Ponds or water features. (3) Plaza. (4) Picnic area including tables,benches,landscaping and a structure for shade. c. Recreation: (1) Pool. (2) Walking trails. (3) Children's play structures. (4) Sports courts. d. Multi-modal amenity standards: (1) Bicycle repair station. (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. Page 16 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) Based on 90 multi family units, a minimum offour(4)amenities are required with at least one from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-2 7D.1. The site plan depicts the following amenities: a swimming pool, clubhouse, dog park, community garden, bike lockers and a tot lot from the quality of life, open space and recreation categories.An additional amenity should be provided from the multi-modal category. E. Landscaping Requirements: 1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title. 2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards: a. The landscaped area shall be at least three feet(Y)wide. b. For every three(3)linear feet of foundation,an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted. c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area. The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should depict landscaping in accord with these standards. F. Maintenance and Ownership Responsibilities: All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures,parking, common areas, and other development features. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Street buffer landscaping is required to be installed with the subdivision improvements(see analysis above in Section V.B). Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 12C.A mix of trees,shrubs,lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one(1)tree per 100 linear feet of pathway. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A 6-foot tall solid screen fence is proposed along the northern&western boundaries of the multi-family development. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed structures multi-family as well as the single-family structures, included in Section VII.G. The single-family cottages are all proposed to be 2-stories in height with 2-car garages,while the multi-family apartment buildings are proposed to be 3-stories in height. The clubhouse will be a single-story in height. The Applicant's narrative states the multi-family buildings will use similar accents that the cottage units will have. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application is required to be submitted for approval of the multi-family development and re-development of the commercial development to ensure compliance with UDC standards and development provisions associated with this application.A Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the single-family attached and multi-family structures and future commercial structures or Page 17 changes to existing commercial structures.Final design of all structures must comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. D. Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Single-family Dwellings in R-40 District: A CUP to requested for the development of 10 single-family detached dwellings in the requested R-40 zoning district as required by UDC Table 11-2A-2. Typically, single-family detached residential uses are not a desired use in the R-40 (high-density residential)zoning district. However,they are allowed as a conditional use. There are existing single-family residential dwellings to the west across NE 3rd St. and to the south across E.Badley Ave. The proposed single-family homes at a higher density of 16.5 units per acre will assist in providing a transition to the multi-family apartments planned in the second phase of this development and should be compatible with adjacent uses. For these reasons, Staff is supportive of the request. E. Conditional Use Permit(CUP)—Nonconforming Use: A CUP is requested to allow the existing nonconforming parking, landscaping, and mobile home park to remain as-is for an extended period of time until redevelopment occurs with the second and third phases of the proposed development. Per UDC 11-1A-1, a nonconforming use is defined as,"A use that lawfully existed prior to the effective date of this title but that does not now conform to the allowed uses for the district in which it is located. For the purpose of this title,nonconforming parking lot design and landscaping shall be deemed a nonconforming use."A nonconforming use may be extended through approval of a CUP as set forth in UDC 11-1B-4A.Ia. The nonconforming use of a portion of the site as a mobile home park and the parking and landscaping in the commercial portion of the development will remain as-is until the second and third phases of development respectively,which will be approximately 4-5 years. The reason for the lengthy request is so that the Applicant may proceed with development of the southern vacant portion of the site with Phase I,while allowing the residents of the mobile home park adequate time to find other housing options prior to redevelopment of that portion of the site with Phase 11. Redevelopment of the commercial portion of the site isn't proposed until the third phase of development. The extended time period for redevelopment of the mobile home park also accommodates the type of loan the Applicant has on the property and the income generating uses in the interim. The extended time period for the commercial portion of the development where the nonconforming parking and landscaping are located will allow the Fairview Ave.road widening project to be completed. For these reasons, Staff is supportive of the Applicant's request. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested Rezone,Preliminary Plat and(3)Conditional Use Permit applications per the Findings in Section IX of this staff report. The Director has approved the requested Private Street and Alternative Compliance administrative applications associated with this project. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on April 20,2023. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject RZ,PP and CUP requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Steve Arnold,Applicant's Representative Page 18 b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Kellee Jean Warner d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. Question from neighbor regarding how the proposed development would affect adjacent properties. 3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Concern pertaining to the extended time period for redevelopment of the mobile home park and commercial portions of the development and feasibility of the developer's ability to refinance the property after the terms of the existing loan are satisfied; b. Concern pertaining to the upkeep of the mobile home park in the interim of people vacating the mobile homes prior to redevelopment of the site and inclusion of a requirement for the mobile homes to be removed as they are vacated; c. Concern pertaining to the uncertainty of what's involved with the construction of a complete street section for NE 3'St.between Gruber and Badle(i.e. if additional right-of-way is needed from the property to the west; if reimbursement for the cost of construction of the western portion of the street is possible from ACHD); d. Inclusion of a sunset requirement for the CUP for extension of the nonconforming uses. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. A sunset requirement was included for the CUP for extension of the nonconforming uses consistent with the preliminM plat requirement in the DA(see condition#A.4.1), b. The pedestrian pathway along the eastern boundary of the single-family portion of the site shall be removed due to CPTED safety concerns (see condition#A.2.2f); c. Inclusion of a provision requiring the mobile homes &associated debris that are vacant at the be ig nning of Phase 2 to be removed within 45 calendar days, if there are more than 5 vacant mobile homes,that time period is extended to 90 calendar days (,see DA provision#A.1.1i). 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 19 VIIL EXHIBITS A. Rezone Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Maps Descrption for R-40 Zane September 2,2022 A parcel of land located in the Northeast 114 of the Northwest 114 of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Bolse Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 1/4 corner common to Sections 6 and 7,T.3N., R.1 E., B.M.,from which the Section corner common to Sections 1 and 12,T.3N., RAW.. B.M., and said Sections 6 and 7 bears South 88035'29"West,2,404.77 feet;thence on the centerline of E. Fairview Avenue,South 89011'04"West,629.99 feet;thence leaving said centerline,South 0003512'West,310.09 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 00'35'12'West,686.83 feet to the centerline of E. Badley Avenue; thence on said centerline, North 69130'43"West,393.75 feet to the intersection of E. Badley Avenue and NE 3rd Street; thence on the centerline of NE 3rd Street,North O0a28'17'East,730.12 feet; thence leaving said centerline, South 89028'01" East, 90.00 feet to the exterior line of the City of Meridian C-G Zone; thence on said exterior boundary line the following two(2)courses and distances: South 00°28'17"West, 50.16 feet; North 89`11'04' East,305.21 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 6.284 acres,more or less. End of Description. fl Kk. LAND �J ENS 11779 0 at' tia� f4f, Ali rC p, Page I of I Page 20 ' Sccle: 1"=20:7' ❑ 50 100 200 40.. Basis of Bearings _ 58815'29"W 2404,77'' ......... fe 51 56 S89'11'04`W 629.99' 1 S6 - r 57 S12 57 - -_�_— --- - Ui lA I N � d O O D W k7 O L1 I ' Real Paint __`__ of Beginning n N89'11'04"E 305.21' iv e* ±fi.284 W Acres E. Gruber Ave. Co gv Line Table in z a Line Bearing Length v L1 S89'28'01"E 90,00' 1-2 S❑4'28'17'W 50.16' —E. Badley Ave. _ FN89'3fl'43'W 393,75' E N S � 11779 11779 w �QQ� � OFIO�p� hfcGA�'� Aedik—d Tope 21.211 V-%)o.vie R-5 kn R-40 t.d,u V112022&�tl3 iw o. IDAHC Exhibit for 216 21 SURVEY W,S,6.E R'`nsF R-40 Zone Sheet No. BOIfiE,S1p.M¢S3/94 (2as)�m 1 {GROUP LLC Locoed In the NE1/4 of the NWIf4 of Section 7, owg. Date ' T.3N., ME. BAA., Crty of Werldlon, Ada County, Idaho. 9 f2f2022 Page 21 Description for R-40 Zone September 2, 2022 A parcel of land located in the Northeast 114 of the Northwest 114 of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range t East of the Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 1{4 corner common to Sections B and 7, TAN., R.1 E., B.M.,from which the Section corner common to Sections 1 and 12, T.3N., RAW., B.M.,and said Sections 6 and 7 bears South 88'35'29" West, 2,404.77 feet:thence on the centerline of E. Fairview Avenue, South 8901 T04' West, 629.99 feet;thence leaving said centerline, South 00'35'12"West, 267.11 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 01Y35'12"West, 42.98 Feet to the exterior boundary line of the City of Meridian C-G Zone; thence on said exterior boundary line the following two(2)courses and distances: South 89Q11'04'West,305.21 feet; North 0002817' East,50.16 feet; thence leaning said exterior boundary line, South 89`28'fl1" East,305.22 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.326 acres,more or less. End of Description. N- LAND S ENSt 1 779 X Iz4z- � 00. OF k P q McC� � Page IofI Page 22 Scale: 1"=20V 0 50 100 200 400 Basis Of Bearings i� w S88-35'29"W 2404.77- ......... Of E. Fairview Ave. Sl S$• ..,.. 599'11 U4"w 629.99 •''1�4 S fi 512 57 --_-- Section ---��— S7 line 3 kiH n u3 M C N a I I la Real Point 58fD,9'28'O7"E 305.22' of Beginning �� I � 32B Acres � 59911'64"W 305.21, — i I I I Ln r� Ln w 2 Line Table E. Gruber Ave. I Line Searing Length 0 SOO.35'1 ZW 42.9t3' L2 NOD-28'17"E 50.16' I I I 1 I E. Badley Ave. ——— 1pt�4+k L NO 4�Gt N g 1 779 •�c.e.o I,f1l and i�r:xi ni\e.gy.-xw+• �-c le R_no r..a� 3/zln7 s�.o-r PrA Jah No- IDAHO Exhibit for 21-21+ SURVEY Mssn EMEIWo4 R-40 Zone Sheet No- B41Sk,IUAHO�170 i PCOME;WC GROUP, LLC Located in the NE1/4 of the NW/4 of Section 7, owv. Cuis T-31N., R.1E., B.M., My of Merldian, Ada County, Idtiho- 9/2/2022 Page 23 Description for C-G Zone September 2, 2022 A parcel of land located in the Northeast 114 of the Northwest 114 of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range I East of the Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 1/4 corner common to Sections 6 and 7, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., from which the Section corner common to Sections 1 and 12, T.3N., R.1 W., B.M., and said Sections 6 and 7 bears South B803529" West, 2,404.77 feet; thence on the centerline of E. Fairview Avenue, South 8V11'04' West, 935.83 feet to the exterior boundary line of the City of Meridian C-G Zone and the MEAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence on said exterior boundary line, South 00°28'17" West, 259.92 feet: thence leaving said exterior boundary line, North 89'28'01" West, 9 0.00 feet to the centerline of NE 3rd Street; thence an said centerline, North 00°28'17' East, 257.80 feet to centerline of E. Fairview Avenue; thence on said centerline, North 89'11'04" East, 90.02 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.535 acres, more or less. End of Description. NO h s� Apr OF 4� q Page 1 of 1 Page 24 Sea€e: 1n{200' 0 50 t00 200 400 Sosis of 8earir€gs _ w 588'35'29"W 2404.77' ............... . . . . E. Fairview Ave. a (if ( _!_ 9'11'04"W 935.$3' _ 14r1k 56 51 56 L2 58 heal Paint _ 57 S12 57 elion�kw g of Beginning f - k t line C, m a C-j kn aN Z a a J + N m I I L1 En I I En °C Line Fable Ir i Line Bearing Length • I E. Gruber Ave, L1 N89'28'01"WW 90,00' L2 N8911WE 90.02' I {I I I II I r —E. Bod€ey Ave. -— - - ` N,, LAND � 410,1GN� Cr _ 4 11779 74 � �O� rE O F l9�dz �4t p, 3 kc c. aaeW—1 rpe c-c e.a� 9/7p21vz 4 M]s IDAHO Exhibit for 216 21 SURVEQQ �/ DHSSW.Ey1ERAl1}ST [�`—V UC1e Sheet 4", Y 9018E�ILUM�93704 GROUP, LLC located In th. NE1/4 of the Nw1/4 of Seotion 7, cwg- Pot. T.3N., R.1E., 9.M., CIly of 1d idion, Ada County, Idaho- 9/2/2022 Page 25 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 4/7/2023) - 1 'PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT FEATURES LRLI,. �.�g — B ioiss�.r wrtx:e a o.OiuEerm .o.asw.merc _ a x� iA��4� I �•�cx� �eR 1r�L g" JLR o PROJECT LOCATION —e LEGEND P I i xano sEcnow PBUAIEBABE C017ABES SUBBlVISfBB rxruarxaervurear %ANPIIl EEtlRA4T lV1HWfR r SHFEf1OF1 Page 26 C. Landscape Plan(date: 4/7/2023) _ L 4 AiIe,�=oA� ICI s. ,I f T. II PROMENADE COMITES SUROIEISlOA ��' �® '" ort uxoscaxvux PLANT PALLETT-94I1469 LANDSCAPE NOTES LAND-',GAPE CALCULATIGN& ISOMETRIC VIEW PLANT Ill-TREES ID o 6•LmAI!cWLE DETAIL DEVEI..OPMENT DATA' ruc. --T- a_ a PRUAMRARECUTEARESSUM MIU 1R�PLNIIMGlBTAKMG �41"IEL PLPNRJG ��'" ��. PLV COIEI TEAM Page 27 D. Site Plan(dated: 4/7/2023) PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT FEATURES c NOTES. B �nE inw�nx.,omm MULTIFAMILY COTTAGES �I LEGEND PROJECT LOCATION WJ ..E W.a. .. O .._...:-.. _E — o�a�K �wa.aF.cm�nrwxxo ° "E " mxufrex PROMENADE COTTAGES SUBDIVISWN SUEPLANAW wa�anr�n •TeM,..,, Page 28 E. Open Space Exhibit(dated: 4/7/23) E,srso sr ———— e A. cap E nrv„E s —0-S MIVE PHASE! { PHASE3 R-40 f-S GG S rHuuaas ori� ,_' IIIIL�JjI COTTAGES OPEN SPACE CALCS TOTAL AREA=32.72 AC LEGEND' QUALIFYING OPEN SPACE=3.69 AC(25.4%) MULTIFAMILY OPEN SPACE CALS TOTAL AREA=t3.13 AC QUALIFYING OPEN SPACE=t.94 AC(30.03%) COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE CALCS w.�wx PROMENADE CUiTASE$SUBOlVUrYUM TOTAL AREA=t1.78 AC aR n OM SPA PI A OPEN SPACE(NO REQUIREMENTS)=f25 AC(14.04%) Page 29 F. Parking Exhibit(dated: 4/7/2023) PARKING FEATURES RESERVED PARKING ! I II I I II COLONNADE DRIVE _ COTTAGES L—_J L__ _J PH [ [ [ — R-4040 rc d ❑ a ,6, o _ PROJECT LOCATION - II 9 I I 11 I ALAMFDA DRIVE xww.T f [ I I I I I � - [ ViciwrvonaP -COTTAGES ® s V aawu �� awuEron Po PMOMEMAOEEOTTAME$SUMOMMOM a`"`^'m nurwuear�er •TEAM.... Page 30 G. Conceptual Building Elevations Cottages: - �r's'a�r"�P41p.•,''Ei 1 It R,"s�p�� II fps - r ICI ma' 0-M� JAI� CompoSI west elevation Y mnn Composite Noslh ElevWion ll Composite South Elevolion �._slich t@f k - L Meln.-Lr HOUSING fir Imo' WhM,C1I dSubdWI,I- woe wee woe eeo coe Compmlle Elevvlbns SUD3 Composte East ElevaXon n „„ P-1/P-3 SOUTH(1 P-10-3 EAST(1 $I7_ L � { slgchtes� ®® M ®® ®® Mum PMULv HOUSING ®® �'rvhf CI0.d SUbdMston Elevallons Hnlh P•1/P•] P•1/P•3 NOMTX 3 _ P•1/P.3WM �A3.02 Page 31 ®® ©©� ®® ©©® ®® ®®® P•2 SOUTH q P•2 EAST/2, _- shchtes� e� � I�IIh��1�yy]�tI O i MULTI-F-Y HOUSING Mile Cloud Subdivhlon ElevaXons P-2 P-2-NORTH� P-]WESf/, LJ lsms �A3.03 P-4/P-5 SOUTH 4 P•4/P•5 FASi 2 , shchterl �® ®� `. MurnaAMlLr xousExG ®® Whr.Cloud Subdhlslen EL ElevaXons P.4/P-S P-4/P-5 NORTX(mil P-4/P-5 WEST�1 15-003 A3.04 Page 32 fFF91LF N01FS; -- LI - ��' i � ©6 �. l L � P-6 SOUTH P-6 EAST oo� III I III �®� �Mum-raMfFT xolmPfc ®®® WhU Cloutl SubtlNlslon ElevaSons P-d P•6 NOPTH/1 P•6 WEST/1 13-0L3 A3.03 P-4/P-3 PAST zA - S sllchterl or l moo Mum--LYHOD— ®®® ®®� =CloutlSubdWld- ElcvaHons P�/P•4 P-4/P-3 NORTH 3 P-4/P-3WEST n KA3.06 Page 33 ®® U ® ®® EL P-1/P•4 SOUTH �� P•1/P.4 EAST 8 �t a f sllvn, � pow ��. _ ®®® _ ®®® �MULII•IAAULY HOUSING Mr.Cloud SebdMslon El.v ...P-I/P.4 P-1/P-4 NORTX n P-I/P-4 WEST�nl �A3.07 Floor Plans: https:llweblink.meridiancioy.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=274096&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty Page 34 Apartments(18-plex): REAR ELEVATION �. G- 7- - FRONT ELEVATION I _ - SIDE ELEVATION UNIT 2x2-1 UNIT 1 x 1-1 UNIT ix1-2 UNIT 2x1-1 UNIT x1-2 UNIT2x1-2 FF --1 ELM GROVE APARTMENTS Page 35 Clubhouse: 'NISI ELEVAHON 50UEH L-LEVp310N .: cif..," .. .. .,i�. ra SO'#' OCNCRETE WALK IVALIS ■ I I I I I I I I I ry I:C.,..L t� f , I I ■ I � I I I I I I I I ' I POOL ENTRY) I C FF. 411ITrE ■ 7•k J I 707 I L————————————————————————————J Page 36 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. Rezone 1.1 A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of rezone of this property. Prior to approval of the rezone ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of rezone 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 rezone. The DA shall,at minimum, incorporate the following provisions if City Council determines the rezone is in the best interest of the City: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the site plan, landscape plan,phasing plan and building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. b. The final plat application for the second phase of development shall not be submitted to the Planning Division for a minimum period of four(4)years from the date of approval of the preliminary plat to allow residents ample time to find other housing prior to redevelopment of the site. c. All access via E. Fairview Ave. for the subject property shall cease upon redevelopment of the commercial portion of the property and sole access shall be taken via NE 3rd St.,the lesser classification of the two streets,in accord with UDC 11-3A-3 and ACHD Policy. d. With the first phase of development,the developer shall street section for NE 3rd St. between Badley and Gruber to be constructed with the first phase of development: e. With the first phase of development,the Developer shall construct NE 3'St.between E. Badley Ave. and E. Gruber Ave. as a complete street section(from west to east abutting the site), as follows: 4-foot wide buffer, 10-foot wide sidewalk/pathway, 8- foot wide parkway, 2-foot wide curb,two (2) 13-foot wide travel lanes,2-foot wide curb, 8-foot wide parkway, 5-foot wide sidewalk and 1-foot wide buffer within 66- feet of right-of-way. f. With the second phase of development,the Developer shall reconstruct NE 3'St. between E. Gruber Ave. and E. Fairview Ave., as half of a 40-foot wide street section with an 11-foot wide travel lane, an 8-foot wide planter strip and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk abutting the site. g. The existing nonconforming parking and landscaping in the commercial portion of the development and the mobile home park in the R-40 zoning district,is allowed to remain until redevelopment of the site in accord with the phasing plan as approved with the conditional use permit for extension of these nonconforming uses. h. Depict pedestrian connections between the single-family,multi-family and commercial portions of the development. All pathways should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-8. i. The mobile homes and associated debris that are vacant at the beginning of Phase 2 shall be removed within 45 calendar days; if there are more than five(5)vacant Page 37 mobile homes,that time period is extended to 90 calendar days. 2. Preliminary Plat 2.1 The final plat(s) shall include the following revisions: a. Depict a 25-foot wide street buffer along E. Fairview Ave., an arterial street,and a 20-foot wide street buffer along NE 3'St.,to be improved as a collector street, within a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business owners' association,per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. b. Remove the western-most driveway access driveway via E. Fairview Ave. on the commercial portion of the property as it does not meet ACHD policy. c. Remove one of the two driveway accesses via E. Fairview Ave. in front of the existing multi-tenant building in accord with UDC 11-3A-3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. d. Combine the two (2)northern access driveways via NE 3'St. and align the driveway with the driveway on the west side of NW 3'St. e. A cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be provided between the single-family, multi-family and commercial lots via a note on the final plat or a separate recorded agreement in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. f. Delineate the privates from parking areas on the common lot. 2.2 The landscape plan included in Section VII.0 shall be revised as follows: a. Depict a 25-foot wide street buffer along E. Fairview Ave., an arterial street, and a 20-foot wide street buffer along NE 3'St.,to be improved as a collector street,with landscaping in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. b. Landscaping is required adjacent to all pathways within the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. c. Mitigation information should be included on the landscape plan for all existing trees that are being removed with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC 5. d. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk with an 8-foot wide parkway along the east side of NW 3'Street in accord with the Downtown Meridian Street Cross- Section Master Plan(see pg. 4-11). e. Depict a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk/pathway along E. Fairview Ave. within the street buffer if not constructed by ACHD with the Fairview Ave. road widening project. £ Remove the pedestrian pathway along the eastern boundary of the single-family portion of the site at the direction of the Commission. 2.3 Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district and UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G zoning district. 2.4 All private streets within the development shall comply with the design and construction standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Page 38 2.5 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. Alternative Compliance was approved for Lots 2, 5,9, 11, 12, 14, 19, 22,24,26,28 to and 32,to allow the parking pads to be in alternate locations as depicted on the parking exhibit in Section VIII.F instead of in front of the garages. 2.6 The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 2.7 Provide a pressurized irrigation system consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15,UDC 11-3B-6 and MCC 9-1-28. 2.8 Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. 2.9 A Design Review application shall be submitted for approval of the single-family attached structures. Final design shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. 2.10 The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or 2)obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 3. Conditional Use Permit(multi-family development): 3.1 Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27: Multi-Family Development and the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-8 is required. 3.2 The site/landscape plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised as follows: a. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities,and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street,or shall be fully screened from view from a public street in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.2. b. Depict the location of the property management office;maintenance storage area; central mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access; and a directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient location for those entering the development in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. c. Depict landscaping along all the foundation of all street facing elevations in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27E. d. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.A mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover with a minimum of one(1) tree per 100 linear feet of pathway. e. Depict a minimum of 176 off-street parking spaces as proposed with at least 90 of those being in a covered carport or garage per UDC Table 11-3C-6. f. Depict a minimum of 7 bicycle parking spaces(based on 176 vehicle parking spaces proposed)per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bike racks should be provided in central locations for each multi-family building and the amenity building. Page 39 g. Pathways should be provided to the central common open space area for pedestrian access in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.2b. h. Depict an additional site amenity from the multi-modal category listed in UDC 11-4- 3-27D.Id in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27D.2c. i. Depict minimum 7-foot wide sidewalks where parking abuts sidewalks if wheel stops aren't proposed to prevent vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11-3C-5B4; if 7- foot sidewalks are proposed,the length of the stall may be reduced to 17 feet. j. Depict a berm or constructed barrier at least four feet(4') in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access,along NE Yd St. in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.7. 3.3 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. 3.4 Submit a floor plan(s)for the multi-family structures that depict a minimum of 80 square feet of private,usable open space for each unit in accord with UDC 11-4-3-2 7B.3. 3.5 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. 3.6 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted for approval of the multi-family 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. 3.7 The conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of two(2)years unless otherwise approved by the city. During this time,the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsection(F)(1) of this section,the director may authorize a single extension of time to commence the use not to exceed one(1)two-year period. Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the commission may be granted. With all extensions,the director or commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of this chapter. 4. Conditional Use Permit(Extension of Non-Conforming Uses) 4.1 The conditional use permit for the extension of the non-conforming uses stated herein is valid for a period of four(4)years from the date of approval. A time extension ma,, b�quested in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-5B-6F.3. 5. Conditional Use Permit(Single-family Detached Residential in the R-40 Zoning District) 5_1 The developer is allowed to construct up to ten(10) single-family detached dwelling units in the R-40 zoning district as allowed by UDC Table 11-2A-2 with a conditional use permit. Page 40 B. PUBLIC WORKS 1. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1.1 Ensure no sewer services cross infiltration trenches. 1.2 End of line requires a minimum of 0.6% slope. 1.3 Minimum angle into/out of a manhole in the direction of flow is 90 degrees. This is not met for tie in from the apartments to NE 3rd St. 1.4 Water or sewer mains requires a 20'easement with main centered in the middle. Sewer and water in parallel require a 30'easement with 10'separation between mains and edge of pavement. Sewer crossing the common lot as well as within the apartments do not meet these requirements. 1.5 Provide 20'easements for water services up to water meters and 10'beyond. 1.6 Provide 20'easements for fire hydrant laterals and 10'beyond. 1.7 Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings, carports,trash receptacle walls, fences,infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.) are built within the utility easement. 1.8 Water main stubs to future phases must have a blow-off 1.9 Provide a water valve halfway through the apartment loop. 1.10 A portion of this project is within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. A floodplain development permit is required before land disturbance begins.All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the system.New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwaters. The lowest finished floor of the buildings must be elevated to flood protection levels with BFE and lowest finished floor noted on final grading plans. 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 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- Page 41 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. 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 Page 42 — 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. 2.19 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 https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=274173&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=274178&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr=1 E. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=277899&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty F. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=276640&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity&cr--I https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=285893&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty G. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=282985&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC https://weblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=278368&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky H. WEST ADA SCHOOL DISTRICT(WASD) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=279665&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Page 43 hty I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT—SCHOOL IMPACT https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=278904&dbid=0&repo=Meridian C ky J. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=283103&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr--I K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.gyp x?id=285917&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC fty https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=274103&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty L. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=293798&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC fty M. MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORP. https://weblink.meridiancitE.org,/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=294143&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC X. FINDINGS A. Rezone: 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: l. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment to R-40 and C-G and subsequent development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the underlying FLUM designations of Commercial and High-Density Residential. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment will alleviate the existing nonconforming use of the commercial retail use in the R-8 zoning district and allow 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; The Commission 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 44 The Commission 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. This finding is not applicable as the application is for a rezone, not annexation. 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; The Commission finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use, density, transportation, and pedestrian connectivity with the condition in this report. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section V of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Section IX of the StaffReport for more details from public service providers.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, the Commission finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire,ACHD, etc) in Section IX. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, The Commission is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental issues associated with the platting of this property that would be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. C. Conditional Use Permit(multi-family development): The city council 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 development of 90 Page 45 apartment units and meet all of the dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 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 multi family development will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the standards in the UDC. 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 multi family development will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, if all conditions of approval are met. 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 the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property 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. The Commission finds the proposed use will be adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 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. Because all public facilities and services are readily available, the Commission finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 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. Although traffic will increase in the vicinity with approval of the proposed multi family development, the Commission finds it shouldn't be excessive or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare. 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 approval of the proposed use shouldn't result in the destruction, loss or dame of any such features D. Conditional Use Permit(single-family dwellings in R-40 district): The city council shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: Page 46 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 use and meet all of the dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 zoning district except for the off- street parking standards, of which the Applicant requests approval of alternative compliance (see Section VI.D). 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 use(i.e. single-family dwellings) will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in it they will provide a transition in density and uses to the proposed multi family development and complies with UDC standards with approval of a conditional use permit. 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, and proposed operation and maintenance of the single-family dwellings will be compatible with other such uses in the neighborhood to the west and south and should not adversely change the essential character of the same 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 the proposed use will not 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. The Commission finds the proposed use will be adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 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. Although traffic will increase in the vicinity with approval of the proposed residential units, the Commission finds it shouldn't be excessive or detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare. 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 approval of the proposed use shouldn't result in the destruction, loss Page 47 or dame of any such features. E. Conditional Use Permit(nonconforming use): The city council 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 this finding does not apply to the proposed extension of the nonconforming uses. 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 this finding does not apply to the extension of the nonconforming uses as the proposed uses do not comply with certain UDC standards, thus the reason for the request. 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 extension of the nonconforming uses is compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood that are yet to redevelop and comply with current UDC standards 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. The Commission finds the extension of the nonconforming uses will not adversely affect other property 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. The Commission finds the extension of the nonconforming uses will continue to be adequately served by the facilities and services noted. 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 extension of the nonconforming uses will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. 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 extension of the proposed nonconforming uses will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare as noted. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of a natural, Page 48 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 a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. 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 The Commission finds the proposed extension of the nonconforming uses do not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area. 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. The Commission finds the proposed extension of nonconforming uses are comparable to adjacent properties in the area that are yet to redevelop. F. Private Street: 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 design of the proposed private streets complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. See analysis in Section VI.B 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; and The Director finds that granting approval of the proposed private streets would not cause any hazard, nuisance or other detriment to persons,property or uses in the vicinity if the streets are designed as proposed and constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F- 4B. 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 private streets does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and/or the regional transportation plan as they are proposed to connect to local(E. Badley Ave) and collector(NE 3Yd St)streets consistent with private street standards. 4. The proposed residential development(if applicable)is a mew or gated development. The Director finds the proposed residential development incorporates a mew in the site design as desired. G. Alternative Compliance: In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the following: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or The Director finds with the proposed site design, strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; however; revisions to the site plan could be made to comply. Page 49 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The Director finds the proposed alternative means of compliance provides an equal means for meeting requirement. 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 the proposed alternative means of compliance to the parking standards will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare of impair the intended use and character of surrounding properties. Page 50 Charlene Way From:Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, June 9, 2023 5:57 PM To:Bill Parsons Cc:Bruce Freckleton; City Clerk; Luke Cavener; Sonya Allen Subject:Re: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Thanks for looking at this for us. On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 3:34 PM Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> wrote: Good Afternoon Liz, Erin and I finally connected this week to discuss the Promenade Cottages project. Erin was a great resource on all things affordable housing. I did share with her the concerns that were raised during the public hearing for this project. During our conversation, we discussed the many parameters around this topic. Currently, the Housing Company doesn’t have a waitlist for the Woodrose Apartment project but there will be one when this project is under construction. Once a waitlist is available it can be accessed by using The Housing Company link below. She did acknowledge that it would be difficult to guarantee any units to these residents due to the guidelines required by HUD and not knowing each individual’s needs. However, she did provide me with some local resources (links below) that we can share with the developer and hopefully, he can pass along this information to the residents in the mobile home park. She also informed me that her current projects are coming in above budget so partnering with others at this time is unlikely. I think it would be a fair question to ask the developer if he was willing to subsidize some of the rent for these residents but it is something the City shouldn’t require. 1. https://housingidaho.com/ 2. https://bcacha.org/ 3. https://www.thehousingcompany.org/ If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me. Have a great weekend, Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor City of Meridian | Community Development Dept. 33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 1 Phone: 208-884-5533 | Direct: 208-489-0571 Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. From: Bill Parsons Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 4:30 PM To: 'Elizabeth Strader' <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com>; Luke Cavener <lcavener@meridiancity.org> Cc: Bruce Freckleton <bfreckleton@meridiancity.org>; City Clerk <CityClerk@meridiancity.org> Subject: RE: Ideas for Mobile home folks Good Afternoon Liz, I will reach out to Erin as requested. I think her project may be completed and occupied by the end of the 4-year sunset the developer is proposing for the Promenade project. I do think she is a great resource to help educate us on how to navigate the affordable housing market. Thank you for the suggestions and I look forward to sharing the information with you. Take Care, Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor City of Meridian | Community Development Dept. 33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-884-5533 | Direct: 208-489-0571 Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. 2 From: Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 1:04 PM To: Luke Cavener <lcavener@meridiancity.org>; Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> Cc: Bruce Freckleton <bfreckleton@meridiancity.org>; City Clerk <CityClerk@meridiancity.org> Subject: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Hi Bill Can we call Erin on the Wood Rose apartments project and explore if there is a way for these (soon to be displaced) residents to have a priority to get into those new buildings when they are completed? Given the city of Meridian contributed to make that project happen… Makes a lot of sense - these are existing Meridian residents who have a high likelihood of homelessness if their homes cannot be relocated. Would they have any interest in teaming with this developer on future projects? Would the developer have any interest in building their cottage product as affordable or a portion of them? Even if this project moves forward or doesn’t it looked like we have people living in substandard housing and some longer term needs. Liz 3 Charlene Way From:Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 24, 2023 5:49 PM To:Bill Parsons Cc:Bruce Freckleton; City Clerk; Luke Cavener Subject:Re: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Thanks - maybe it could be offered ahead of that timeframe? If there are people in substandard / inhumane conditions I don’t know that waiting four years to address it makes sense anyway. Probably best to check in and see what her latest timing is and if she would be open to something like that. Thank you Liz On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 4:29 PM Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> wrote: Good Afternoon Liz, I will reach out to Erin as requested. I think her project may be completed and occupied by the end of the 4-year sunset the developer is proposing for the Promenade project. I do think she is a great resource to help educate us on how to navigate the affordable housing market. Thank you for the suggestions and I look forward to sharing the information with you. Take Care, Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor City of Meridian | Community Development Dept. 33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-884-5533 | Direct: 208-489-0571 Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. 1 From: Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 1:04 PM To: Luke Cavener <lcavener@meridiancity.org>; Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> Cc: Bruce Freckleton <bfreckleton@meridiancity.org>; City Clerk <CityClerk@meridiancity.org> Subject: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Hi Bill Can we call Erin on the Wood Rose apartments project and explore if there is a way for these (soon to be displaced) residents to have a priority to get into those new buildings when they are completed? Given the city of Meridian contributed to make that project happen… Makes a lot of sense - these are existing Meridian residents who have a high likelihood of homelessness if their homes cannot be relocated. Would they have any interest in teaming with this developer on future projects? Would the developer have any interest in building their cottage product as affordable or a portion of them? Even if this project moves forward or doesn’t it looked like we have people living in substandard housing and some longer term needs. Liz 2 E IDIAN.;--- Public Presentations and Documents Charlene Way From:Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 24, 2023 5:49 PM To:Bill Parsons Cc:Bruce Freckleton; City Clerk; Luke Cavener Subject:Re: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Thanks - maybe it could be offered ahead of that timeframe? If there are people in substandard / inhumane conditions I don’t know that waiting four years to address it makes sense anyway. Probably best to check in and see what her latest timing is and if she would be open to something like that. Thank you Liz On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 4:29 PM Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> wrote: Good Afternoon Liz, I will reach out to Erin as requested. I think her project may be completed and occupied by the end of the 4-year sunset the developer is proposing for the Promenade project. I do think she is a great resource to help educate us on how to navigate the affordable housing market. Thank you for the suggestions and I look forward to sharing the information with you. Take Care, Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor City of Meridian | Community Development Dept. 33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-884-5533 | Direct: 208-489-0571 Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. 1 From: Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2023 1:04 PM To: Luke Cavener <lcavener@meridiancity.org>; Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> Cc: Bruce Freckleton <bfreckleton@meridiancity.org>; City Clerk <CityClerk@meridiancity.org> Subject: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Hi Bill Can we call Erin on the Wood Rose apartments project and explore if there is a way for these (soon to be displaced) residents to have a priority to get into those new buildings when they are completed? Given the city of Meridian contributed to make that project happen… Makes a lot of sense - these are existing Meridian residents who have a high likelihood of homelessness if their homes cannot be relocated. Would they have any interest in teaming with this developer on future projects? Would the developer have any interest in building their cottage product as affordable or a portion of them? Even if this project moves forward or doesn’t it looked like we have people living in substandard housing and some longer term needs. Liz 2 Charlene Way From:Chris Johnson Sent:Wednesday, May 24, 2023 1:19 PM To:Charlene Way Subject:Fwd: Ideas for Mobile home folks Please add to the record. Thank you. Chris Begin forwarded message: From: Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Date: May 24, 2023 at 1:05:39 PM MDT To: Chris Johnson <cjohnson@meridiancity.org> Subject: Fwd: Ideas for Mobile home folks External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Hi Chris to add to the record from last night ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Elizabeth Strader <strader.elizabeth@gmail.com> Date: Wed, May 24, 2023 at 1:04 PM Subject: Ideas for Mobile home folks To: Luke Cavener <lcavener@meridiancity.org>, bparsons@meridiancity.org <bparsons@meridiancity.org> CC: Bruce Freckleton <bfreckleton@meridiancity.org>, Meridian City Clerk <MeridianCityClerk@meridiancity.org> Hi Bill Can we call Erin on the Wood Rose apartments project and explore if there is a way for these (soon to be displaced) residents to have a priority to get into those new buildings when they are completed? Given the city of Meridian contributed to make that project happen… Makes a lot of sense - these are existing Meridian residents who have a high likelihood of homelessness if their homes cannot be relocated. Would they have any interest in teaming with this developer on future projects? Would the developer have any interest in building their cottage product as affordable or a portion of them? Even if this project moves forward or doesn’t it looked like we have people living in substandard housing and some longer term needs. Liz 1 E IDIAN.;--- Applicant's Presentation Page 4 Application Request agency conditions.Street reimbursement and the sidewalk, we can comply with all rd With the exception of 316.lighting to address the Commission’s Concerns. Sidewalk elimination at the southeast, that sidewalk is needed for the buildings, we can add 15.ACHD to purchase additional ROW if needed.Street but we request reimbursement for the west side and help from rd We can construct all of 314.CC&R’s along with an HOA will control the development and will be provided for each use.13.The existing loan on the property does not allow for modifying the income production. 12.Timing: three phases, cottages first, multifamily 4 years later, then the commercial11.8 and mobile home.-The applications will correct a nonconforming use for commercial in R10.and not construct the entire width rd We ask to comply with ACHD on 39.We will add the additional covered parking as requested.8.Areas, and pathways.Amenities: club house and pool, bike lockers, dog park, tot lot, gazebos and plazas, garden 7.Utilities: all are available and we will be correcting the mobile home issues with that phase6.Road.Applications submitted: Rezone, Preliminary Plat, 3 CUP’s, Alternative Compliance, and a Private 5.40 and Commercial, the site complies.-Comp Plan calls for R4.)sp. Lower density for amenities and open(Density: Cottage (11/acre) Multifamily (28/acre)3.Existing uses are mobile homes and two commercial buildings with vacant land2.Residential Count: 30 cottage homes and 90 multifamily units, and 2 commercial on 7.64 acres.1. Preliminary Plat Map Site Plan Parking Requirements Landscape Plan Looking South 3Badley rd Looking South on 3 rd Cottage Building Cottage Building Cottage Building Cottage Paseo Cottage Alley Typical Fencing Around some buildings Typical Multifamily Building: Reviewed at DR Discussion Items:2. Sidewalk at the southeast corner of the site. ImprovementsStreet rd 1. Reimbursement/Coordination for 3 In Closing: Please Help ! w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 (H-2023-0024) by JUB Engineers, located at 6380 S. Cubola Way. Application Materials: https:Hbit.ly/H-2023-0024 A. Request: Vacation to vacate 0.5 feet of the 5-foot side yard public utility easement on Lot 37, Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: May 23, 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 5 PROJECT NAME: Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 (H-2023-0024) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name { 1 2 i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING 5/23/2023 0 Legend DATE: R-8 lei PFajeat Lava-iar u TO: Mayor&City Council R-4 a: FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ALL' 208-489-0573 SUBJECT: H-2023-0024 - � Sky Mesa Highlands No. 1 (Lot 37, Block 1) -VAC E=L-1 ft--1iA L,RD 1111 LOCATION: 6372 S. Cubola Way, in the SE 1/4 of RUT Section 32,T.3N., R.1 E. R 1 RUT R-8 R-8 4 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request to vacate the southerly 0.5-feet of the 5-foot wide side yard utility easement along the northern boundary of Lot 37,Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Terry O'Brien,J-U-B Engineering,Inc.—2760 W. Excursion Ln., Ste. 400,Meridian,ID 83642 B. Owner: Sky Mesa Development,LLC—923 S. Bridgeway Pl.,Eagle,ID 83616 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Per UDC Table 11-5A-2,vacation of a utility easement falls under"all others", which requires approval from City Council at a public hearing. IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Newspaper Notification 5/7/2023 Pagel Radius notification mailed to 5/5/2023 properties within 300 feet Next Door posting 5/5/2023 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The Applicant requests approval to vacate the southerly 0.5-feet of the 5-foot wide side yard utility easement along the northern boundary of Lot 37,Block 1, Sky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1. Note:New easements cannot be dedicated through the vacation process.A separate recorded easement is necessary to dedicate a new easement. A property boundary adjustment(PBA-2023-0002)was recently approved that shifted the northerly side property line 0.50-feet to the north. A legal description and exhibit map of the portion of the easement proposed to be vacated is included in Section VI below. The Applicant states there are no underground or overhead utilities in the subject easement area. Relinquishment letters were received from Lumen(fka Century Link),Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District, Idaho Power, Intermountain Gas Company, Boise Project Board of Control on behalf of New York Irrigation District and Boise-Kuna Irrigation District, Sparklight,Veolia and TDS Telecom for the portion of the easement proposed to be vacated. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the partial vacation of the public utility easement as proposed by the Applicant and as agreed upon by the easement holders. Page 2 VII. EXHIBIT Legal Description&Exhibit Map of the Portion of the Utility Easement Proposed to be Vacated JVM 010NlY�.MIL'. .a..wiirns[nwuNFt Exhibit"A" Sky Mesa Highlands;Subdivision No. I Lot 37,Block I—Partial Easement Vacation Legal Description Project No. 10-20-082 January 19,2023 A tract o£land being a portion of Lot 37 or Block 1 as shown on the Plat ofSky Mesa Highlands Subdivision No. 1 recorded in Hook 121 of Plats at Pages 19016 through 19028, Ada County Records, hereinafter referred to as"Sky Mesa Highlands No. 1", situate in the southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 3 North,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,County of Ada,State of Idaho,and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the south sixteenth corner on the east line of said Section 32;thence from said Point of Commencement„ South 00'13'37"West,coincident with the east line of said Section 32, a distance of 1,338.07 feet to the southeast comer of said Section 32; thence leaving said east line,North 89'56'45" West,coincident with the south line of said Section 12,a distance of 275.07 feet;thence leaving said south line,the following two(2)consecutive courses and distances; I_ North 00°03'15"East,a distance of 40.00 feet to a 5J8-inch rebar marking an angle point in the houndary lino of said Sky Mesa Highlands No. I,and 2. continuing North O0a03'15"Nast,coincident with said boundary line,a distance of 16.00 feel to a 1/2-inch rebar marking an angle point in the southerly line of Lot 38 of Block 1 as shown an said Sky Mesa Highlands No. 1; thence leaving said boundary,coincident with the respective southerly and easterly lines of said Lot 38,the following three(3)consecutive courses and distances: 1. South 89°5645"East,a distance of 191.11 feet to a 112-inch rebar, 2. North 45'08'26"East,a distance of 39,83 feet to a 1/2-inch rebar,and 3, North 00113'37"East,a distance of 112.44 feet; thence leaving the easterly line of said Lot 38,North 89146'23"West, a distance of 25.00 feet to the northeasterly corner of the aforesaid Lot 37;thence South 00°13'37"West,coincident with the easterly line of said Lot 37,a distance or 5.00 feet to a point on a line lying 5.00-feet southerly of,measured at right angles,and parallel with the northerly I ine of said Lot 37;thence leaving said easterly line,North 89°46'23" West, coincident with said parallel line, a distance of 10.00 feet to the Point of Beginning of this description; thence from said Point of Beginning,continuing North 89°46'23"West,coincident with said parallel line, a distance of 103.23 feet;thence North 48°27'41"West,a distance of0.76 feet to a point on a line lying 4.50-feet southerly of,measured at right angles,and parallel with the northerly lint of said Lot 37;thence laauary 19,2023 lG-2M82_Lot17 E:mtVac.docx Page I oft 2760 West Excursion Lane,&dte400„Meridian,11) 836,42S752 if www.iub_com 208.376.733a Page 3 South 89"46'23"East,wincident with said parallel line,a distance of 103.80 feet to a point on aline lying l OM-feet westerly of; mi!asured at right angles,and parallel with the easterly line of said Lot 37; thence South 00013'3T'West,a distance of 0.50 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing an area of 52 square feet of land,more or less. The above-described tract of Iand is shown on Exhibit"B"attached hereto and made a part hereof: End of Description. J,U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. This description was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. If any portion of this description is modified or removed(including,but not limited to,the graphic portion shown on Exhibit"B')without the express written consent of Timothy Ilarrigan, PLS,all professional liability associated with this dcx Llmont is hereby declared null and void, r ENS Timothy Harrig PLS 17665 � 17665 � hate January 19,2023 10-20-082_lot37_BmtVac.dacx M 2 of 2 Page 4 LINE TABLE PQC S. CUBOLA WAY - . NO- f3EARJNG ❑fST. L1 N45'08'26"E 39,83' 8 L2 N&746'23"W 25.00' I I 'lll I - {f� LOT 36, BLOCK 1 s n r2 ryo Li SCAL IN FM i SEE DETAIL r SHEET 2 LOT 37, i OLOCK 1 � I �L__ _ - - - LOT 38, I I BLOCK 1 ti T N40'03'15"E 16.00'` -- -- — � '--N0O-03'15"E 40,00' E. LAKE HAZEL ROAD 32 33 s c - - — — — — — T3N LEGEND N89'56'45"VV 275.07' T2N g 5 4 — SECTION CORNER G�-NS c^ g 0 • — MONUMENTS 0 — DIMENSION POINT I_ 176 5 �u POC — POINT OF COMMENCEMENT POB - POINT OF BEGINNING OF - - - - SECTION LINE a ----------- - --- - TIE LINE - - -- - - -- EXISTING PROPERTY LINES - PORTION OF UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED 3 EXHIBIT "B" 9K)F MESA HIGHLALIM59 SURD. NO. I Q CAB x LOT 37 BLOCK 1 - PARTIAL, EASEMENT VACATION SHl ET aue�ewl4.+xc, .SITUATE IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 32. T3N, Rl E, 1 OF 2 80ISE MERMAN CITY OF MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF AAA STATE OF IDAHO Page 5 10A O0- I �• I I ff I r ,• I I ti r'f LOT 36, NN BLOCK I I ----- ------ -_� •N F- `.� ---L2- w S89'4 '23"E 103.80' L6 L3 co z-r��r1 T1 z-tom z r z L4 Lu L5 N69'45'23-V 103.23' --- POB U) a LOT 38, LOT 37, i BLOCK 1 BLOCK i i 1 t ' - F I I I I r SCALE FN FEET I d UNE TABLE r N0. BEARING QIST. r L+4l L2 N89'46'23"W 25.170' 0 SOO'13'37'W 5.Go, + C [ L4 NOW46'23'W 10.00, 17665 �u L5 N4$'27"41*M1+ 0.76' y 1a SEE SHEET 1 L6 sa0'13'37'W a. o' FOR LEGEND f EXH[BIT "On SKY MESA HIGHLANDS SLIBo. IVo. 1 C. B► LOT 37 BLOCK 7 - PARTIAL EASEMENT VACATION SHEET SITUATE IN THE SOUTHEnAS7 QUARTER OF SECTION 32,T3N, Rf E, a Jy�E �� BOiSE MERIDIAN CITY OF MERIDIAN COUNTY OF ADD STATE OF IOAHO �QF� a Page 6