Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-11-02 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, November 02, 2023 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Maria Lorcher Commissioner Enrique Rivera Commissioner Mandi Stoddard Commissioner Jared Smith ABSENT Commissioner Nate Wheeler Commissioner Patrick Grace Commissioner Andrew Seal ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved Motion to approve made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Stoddard. Voting Yea: Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith 1. Approve Minutes of the October 19, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering, located at 820 S. Black Cat Rd. Continued to December 7, 2023 Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0045 A. Request: Annexation of 33.893 acres of land from RUT to the M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 buildable lots on 27.59 acres of land in the proposed M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. Motion to continue to December 7, 2023 made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Stoddard. Voting Yea: Commissioner Lorcher, Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith 3. Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for I-84 and Meridian Road (H- 2021-0099) by Hawkins Companies, generally located at the northwest corner of S. Meridian Rd. and I-84 Recommended approval to City Council. Scheduled November 21, 2023. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2021-0099 A. Request: Annexation of 18.30 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. B. Request: Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment to change the future land use designation on 70.4+/- acres of land from Mixed Use- Community (MU-C) to Commercial (34.3) acres and Medium High Density Residential (36.1+/-). Motion to recommend approval to City Council made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Stoddard. Voting Yea: Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith 4. Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2022-0048) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., generally located 1/4 mile west of S. Meridian Rd. on the south side of W. Waltman Ln. Recommended approval to City Council. Scheduled November 21, 2023. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0048 A. Request: Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #108131100) to change the development plan from commercial to a mix of residential uses. B. Request: Rezone of 41.89 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (12.16 acres), R-15 (12.27 acres) and R-40 (17.46 acres) zoning districts. C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 130 building lots (83 single-family, 45 townhome & 2 multi-family) and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 280 dwelling units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. Motion to recommend approval to City Council made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Rivera. Voting Yea: Commissioner Rivera, Commissioner Stoddard, Commissioner Smith DEPARTMENT REPORTS FUTURE MEETING TOPICS / DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT 8:29 P.M. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting November 2, 2023. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of November 2, 2023, was called to order at 6:10 p.m. by Vice-Chair Maria Lorcher. Members Present: Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Mandi Stoddard, Commissioner Jared Smith and Commissioner Enrique Rivera. Members Absent: Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Nathan Wheeler and Commissioner Patrick Grace. Others Present: Chris Johnson, Tina Lomeli, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher _X Mandi Stoddard Patrick Grace X Enrique Rivera X Jared Smith Andrew Seal - Chairman Lorcher: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning meeting for November 2nd, 2023. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The Commissioners who are here are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff from the city's attorney and city clerk's office, as well as the city planning department. If you're joining us on Zoom this evening, we can see that you are here. You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony meeting -- portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion of the meeting. If you have a process question during the meeting, please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. If you simply want to watch the meeting we encourage you to -- to watch the streaming on the city's YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org\live. With that let's begin with roll call. Madam Clerk. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Lorcher: Next up is the adoption of the agenda. There are no changes to the agenda tonight. Could I get a motion? Smith: So moved. Stoddard: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 2 of 36 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the October 19, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Lorcher: Next is the Consent Agenda. We have one item on the Consent Agenda, which is to approve the meeting of the October 19th, 2023, Planning and Zoning meeting. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Smith: So moved. Stoddard: Second. Lorcher: It has been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. And any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Lorcher: At this time I would briefly like to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff report will -- staff will report their findings and how the items adhere to our Comprehensive Plan and our Unified Development Code. After staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward and present their case and restaff -- and respond to staff's comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open the floor to the public testimony. Each person will be called only once during the public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who have signed up on our website and -- and in advance to testify. You will be, then, unmuted on Zoom or you can come to the microphone in Chambers. Please -- please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and our clerk will run the presentation. If you have -- if you have established that you are speaking on the behalf of an HO -- HOA or another group where others from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any others who wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may come forward in Chambers or if on Zoom press the raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you are listening by phone please press star nine and wait for your name to be called. As a reminder, if you are listening on multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please be sure to mute those extra devices so we do not experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished the Commission does -- and does not have questions for you you will return to your seat in Chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak. And, please, remember we will not call on you Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 3 of 36 a second time. After all the testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and to respond. When the applicant is finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have an opportunity to discuss and hopefully make a final decision or recommendation to City Council -- City Council as needed. ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering, located at 820 S. Black Cat Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 33.893 acres of land from RUT to the M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 buildable lots on 27.59 acres of land in the proposed M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. Lorcher: With that I would like to open the first application for the public hearing, which is Item H-2023-0045, annexation and preliminary plat for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision for the sole purpose of continuing the public hearing for December 7th. Can I have a motion to continue the public hearing, please? Smith: So moved. Stoddard: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and second to move the Farmstone Crossing Subdivision, File No. H-2023-0045 for the hearing date of December 7th. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for 1-84 and Meridian Road (H-2021-0099) by Hawkins Companies, generally located at the northwest corner of S. Meridian Rd. and 1-84 A. Request: Annexation of 18.30 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. B. Request: Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment to change the future land use designation on 70.4+/- acres of land from Mixed Use Community (MU-C) to Commercial (34.3) acres and Medium High Density Residential (36.1+/-). Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 4 of 36 4. Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2022-0048) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., generally located 1/4 mile west of S. Meridian Rd. on the south side of W. Waltman Ln. A. Request: Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #108131100) to change the development plan from commercial to a mix of residential uses. B. Request: Rezone of 41.89 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (12.16 acres), R-15 (12.27 acres) and R-40 (17.46 acres) zoning districts. C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 130 building lots (83 single- family, 45 townhome & 2 multi-family) and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 280 dwelling units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. Lorcher: I have some disclosure for the next two applications from -- for the Tanner Creek Subdivision and Hawkins. I have family members who live in the impact area of both of these projects. After consulting with the city attorney I will recuse myself from the conversation for this evening's application. That's -- that area impacts my overall family. So, with that I am going to turn it over to Jared and he will lead these two applications for these discussions. Smith: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Lorcher. Kurt, would you like to say any words about kind of how this -- Starman: Thank you, Chairman. So, a couple of items before we open the public hearings this evening. First, just for the public's benefit and for the record, we have -- we started our meeting with four Commissioners, which establishes a quorum for tonight. As we just heard, Vice-Chair Lorcher is recusing herself for a conflict of interest reason -- is remaining in the building. She's just in the City Council conference room and so a quorum is maintained. So, we will proceed with three members casting votes -- or are eligible to deliberate on these items. But we still maintain quorum is the first observation for the record. The second item is that we have -- as I understand it, a request from the applicants for your next two public hearings, Items 3 and 4 on your agenda this evening, to open those public hearings concurrently and to hear those items concurrently and the rationale for that is that they are very much integrally related to one another and as you noted I'm sure when you read the staff reports, the two projects really go sort of hand in glove in many ways. In addition that City Council in earlier discussions had expressed an interest and desire for these projects to be dealt with at the same time. That is a bit unorthodox. We don't typically do multiple public Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 5 of 36 hearings at the same time. It's certainly not prohibited by -- in a legal manner. It's just a bit unorthodox. And so what I would like to ask is a representative for each applicant to come to the podium before we head down this path, I would just like to have it on the record that the applicants are making this request and that they would prefer to proceed in this manner. So, I will invite our applicants up to confirm that on the record. And, then, we will -- if that is the case I would ask the chairman to open both public hearings and we will proceed accordingly. I have one more announcement after that. McKay: Becky McKay from Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. Business address. I'm representing Challenger Development for the Tanner Creek project. We do consent to the consolidation of our presentations and being heard kind of as one integrated project Mansfield: I'm Ethan Mansfield with Hawkins Companies representing that the corner development there to the east of Tanner Creek and we also consent to being heard together. Thank you. Starman: Thank you. One last announcement and, then, we will turn to the hearings at hand, but that is in order to be as fair as possible and provide due process to all involved, the applicant, the public and others that have an interest in these topics, because we are doing essentially two public hearings concurrently, we will essentially double the allotted time for applicants to present and, then, double the amount of time that we would typically provide to -- for citizen testimony. So, by way of example, we would typically allow applicants 15 minutes initially to make their presentation. In this instance we will allow 30 minutes in total. They may or may not want to use that entire time, but we would make that available and, likewise, for those that want to provide testimony this evening, the public and other interested parties, we would typically provide -- provide three minutes for that purpose, but tonight we will provide six, because we are hearing both items concurrently and so we have more material to cover. So, with that, as -- as preface, I would turn it back to you, Mr. Chairman, to open both of the public hearings and we can proceed with double staff reports initially. Sonya will discuss both projects back to back and, then, we will turn it over to the applicants. Smith: Thank you, Kurt. So, per applicants' request, we are going to open for public hearing Item No. H-2023-0099, annexation and future land use map amendment from Hawkins Company concurrently with Item H-2023-0048, a modification to the existing DA agreement, rezone request, preliminary plat and a conditional use permit for multi- family housing for Tanner Creek Subdivision. We will begin with the staff reports. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a clarification for the record. This file number is H- 2021-0099. It is an older file number that's been in the -- been in the process for a little while. So, just like to -- Smith: Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 6 of 36 Allen: -- mention that. Thank you. The subject applications before you tonight are a request for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and annexation. This project was heard by the Commission on April 28th, 2022, and the recommendation of denial was sent forth to the City Council. City Council heard the application and remanded it back to the Commission for the following reasons: Reference for this property and the abutting property to the west Tanner Creek to come in together or concurrently with a master plan for the overall area that demonstrates consistency with the existing or proposed future land use map designation and that -- that is mixed use community and mixed use regional. Desire for the transportation issues to be addressed before a development plan is approved and desire for changes to be made to the concept plan to be more consistent with the general mixed use guidelines and specifically the requested mixed use regional designation. Some changes were made to the plan, but they were not substantive -- substantive enough to be deemed consistent with the general mixed use development guidelines existing MUC or the proposed MUR guidelines. Therefore, staff recommended the applicant change their map amendment request from MUR to commercial and include the Tanner Creek project to the west in the amendment with a change from MUC to medium high density residential. Revisions to the conceptual development plan and associated exhibits have also been amended to address previous comments in the staff report and discussion from the hearing. The property associated with the amendment to the future land use map consists of approximately 70 acres of land and the portion associated with the annexation consists of 18 acres of land. The general location of the property is at the northwest corner of South Meridian Road and 1-84 on the south side of Waltman Lane. The map on the left there shows the existing -- on the top there the existing future land use map designations for this property and the general area around the property. The map on the bottom shows the requested change to the future land use map. The applicant is requesting, as I mentioned, an amendment to the future land use map to change the land use designation on 70.4 acres of land from mixed use community to commercial. I'm echoing here. Excuse me just a second. The commercial designation is requested to be 34.3 acres and the medium high density residential is proposed to be 36.1 acres approximately. Based on the analysis in the staff report staff finds the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the requested future land use designation of commercial for the subject property and medium high density residential for the adjacent property to the west, which is Tanner Creek. Further, the proposed future land use designations provide for a better transition and uses from existing and future residential uses to the west and northwest and are compatible with adjacent future land use designations and land uses in this area. The applicant also proposes to annex 18.3 acres of land as shown there on the exhibit on the right with the C-G general retail and service commercial zoning district consistent with the proposed future land use amendment to commercial. The subject property is part of an enclave area surrounded by city annexed property. The plan on the left is the original development plan that you reviewed on this project when it was before you the last time. The one on the right is the proposed revised plan. This is a little -- a little easier to see here. So I will flip to this plan. The revised conceptual development plan submitted as shown depicts how the property proposed to be annexed, as well as the area currently zoned C-G to the north is planned to develop with two big box retail stores. Retail one, which is Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 7 of 36 approximately 153,300 square feet and retail two, which is approximately 80,500 square feet, four pads and five shops. The area shown on the concept plan on the bottom portion -- and that's just -- let's see. I don't have this one. Everything south of this red line is proposed to be annexed. Everything north is already annexed in the city and zoned C-G. The portion of the site currently in the city is entitled to develop in accord with UDC standards regardless of whether or not the proposed annexation is approved, as there is not a development agreement and effect for that property. I will note, though, as part of the new development agreement for the property proposed to be annexed, the applicant has agreed to enter into a development agreement on the entire property. Sole access for the development is proposed via three accesses from Waltman Lane, a collector street, in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A2, which supports limiting access points to collector streets and requires a cross-access ingress-egress easement to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street is not available. Staff recommends a driveway is provided along side the proposed pathway across the Ten Mile Creek to the west, unless otherwise waived by City Council, which will provide interconnectivity between these two developments. The applicant has submitted an emergency access easement agreement with the property owner to the west for secondary emergency access via Ruddy Drive and Waltman Lane. At no time should construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to access the site using Ruddy Drive through The Landing and Tanner Creek Subdivisions. Other than, like I said, emergency access. Improvements are required to Waltman Lane, including reconstruction of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek west of this site with the Tanner Creek project. Improvements to the section of Waltman that abuts this site will be determined by ACHD with a future development application, since this is only an annexation request. The extension of Corporate Drive to the northwest of this site designated as a collector street on the master street map, including construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek from the north to Waltman Lane is proposed to be completed with the first phase of development with the Tanner Creek project prior to issuance of building permits. If the Tanner Creek project does not go forward and complete the improvements to Waltman and Corporate as planned, staff is recommending that these improvements are completed by this developer through a cooperative development agreement with Ada County Highway District as noted in the staff report. Based on the findings of the traffic impact study for the proposed project, which includes the Tanner Creek project, the Meridian Road-Waltman Lane intersection would exceed ACHD's acceptable level of service thresholds. With previous development applications for the Tanner Creek property ACHD did not recommend any mitigation at the intersection due to right of way constraints impacting -- impacts to existing businesses and substantial intersection redesign and construction making the recommended mitigation infeasible. A letter prepared by Six Mile Engineering dated January 23rd of this year, in response to comments and feedback during the City Council hearing for this project, was submitted to ACHD proposing phased alternative improvements at the Meridian Road and Waltman Lane intersection to address traffic impacts from these developments. A three phase concept design was proposed in which the first few designs did not require any additional right of way dedication and the final phase did. ACHD reviewed their proposal and does not recommend any modifications to the intersection as under all concept designs these modifications would Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 8 of 36 negatively impact existing operations at both the interchange and ramps. ACHD concern also extended to the impacts the proposed modifications would have to the Central Drive and Corporate Drive intersections at Main Street and Progress Avenue. While the proposed improvements may benefit both of the proposed developments in the short term, they will likely negatively impact the already congested area roadways and intersections. These improvements without significant widening increased corridor travel times and interchange queue lengths, further compounding existing congestion in this area. ACHD believes that there are alternatives that may be considered, such as converting Central Drive and Waltman Lane and Corporate Drive to a one way couplet, which is anticipated to reduce both queue lanes and the impacts to the Meridian Road and 1-84 interchange system. Construction of the Linder Road overpass, which is three quarters of mile to the west, is scheduled in ACHD's five year work plan for construction in 2026 and '27, which should improve traffic conditions on Meridian Road by providing another north-south connection over 1-84. The Commission and City Council should consider if higher levels of traffic and congestion in this area are acceptable when acting on this application. If not consideration should be given to the inclusion of a provision in the development agreement which limits development to the large retail -- retail one store at this time and delays the retail two building and pads three and four and the shops until such time as the Linder Road overpass is completed or other improvements occur that allow for an acceptable level of service to be provided as determined by ACHD. There has been no written testimony from the public received on this application. Staff is recommending approval with the requirement of a development agreement and just with a caveat. If Council does not approve the requested amendment to the future land use map, staff is recommending denial of the annexation request based on incompatibility of the proposed development with the existing mixed use community future land use map designation. The applicant is here tonight to present. I guess we are going to hold the applicant testimony -- okay. Excuse me. I will roll right into the Tanner Creek project then. The applications before you on the Tanner Creek project are a development agreement modification, a rezone, a preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. This site consists of 38 acres of land. It's zoned C-G and it's located west of South Meridian Road on the south side of Waltman Lane and the north side of 1-84. Two previous development applications similar to this were denied for this property in 2018 and 2020. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation, as I mentioned before, is mixed use community. We have a request for an amendment to medium high density residential with the 1-84 and Meridian Road project. The applicant requests a modification to the existing development agreement, which allows commercial and office and hotel uses to develop on the site as shown here on these concept plans -- two -- two different concept plans were included in the existing development agreement for this site and the applicant is proposing to replace it with a new development agreement allowing a mix of residential uses, including single family residential, detached and attached dwellings, townhouse dwellings and multi-family residential apartments. There we go. Problems with my clicker here. As shown on the concept plan here before you. A rezone of 41.89 acres of land is proposed from the C-G to the R-8 zoning district, which consists of 12.16 acres, to the R-15 district, which consists of 12.27 acres and to the R-40 zoning district, which consists of 17.46 acres. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown consisting of Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 9 of 36 130 building lots. And I will go through the breakdown of those. Eighty-three single family, 45 townhome and two multi-family and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. The plat is proposed to develop in four phases as shown on the plan there on the right. I don't know if you can see that very good. The bold lines are the phase lines. This is phase one right here where my pointer is at. Phase two is directly east of that. Phase three is to the south and west. And the last phase by phase four, is on southeast. The applicant is requesting flexibility in the phasing to adjust the number of lots, combination of lots and number of phases to reflect changing market conditions. Staff is amenable to this request, unless otherwise restricted in the cooperative development agreement with ACHD or as otherwise approved by City Council. Because noise from 1-84 will greatly affect future residents in this area, staff is recommending noise abatement in the form of a berm and wall is constructed per UDC standards in its entirety with the first phase of development as a provision of the development agreement. Currently it is proposed to be constructed with the associated phases three and four. Access is proposed via the extension of Ruddy Drive at the west boundary the site and via two accesses to and from Waltman Lane at the northern boundary of the site. The applicant is proposing to construct the extension of Corporate Drive, a collector street, off site from its current terminus north of the Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Lane with an existing right of way with the first phase of development. The construction of Corporate will include the construction of a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek. This will provide additional access to the site and provide for additional access when the Ten Mile Creek Bridge on Waltman is being reconstructed. The road north of the bridge should be constructed as required by ACHD. The staff report recommends the roadway south of the bridge to Waltman Lane is constructed as a complete street section with detached ten foot wide multi-use pathways along both sides of the street and that is DA provision 1-B. Because there is not sufficient right of way at this time staff recommends a change to the staff report to only require a five foot wide detached sidewalk as required by ACHD. That should be in your recommendation tonight if you consider that change, please. These improvements shall be complete prior to issuance of any building permits on this site. The applicant is proposing improvements to Waltman Lane in accord with ACHD requirements, with a ten foot wide detached sidewalk within the street buffer. The improvements to Waltman will require reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek and should be completed as required by ACHD in the cooperative development agreement. The proposed qualified open space and site amenities meet and exceed UDC standards. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single family residential homes and townhomes as shown. I'm just going through these quickly, as I know the applicant has -- like a -- or a presentation on these. A conditional use permit is proposed for a multi-family development consisting of 280 residential apartment units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. Private streets are required for addressing purposes within the development. The proposed qualified open space and site amenities in the multi-family portion also meet and exceed UDC standards. Conceptual elevations were also submitted for the apartment and the clubhouse buildings as shown. As mentioned with the previous application, the construction of Linder Road overpass half a mile to the west is scheduled in that five year work plan for construction in 2026 and '27 should improve traffic conditions on Meridian Road by Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 10 of 36 providing another north-south connection over 1-84. The Commission and City Council should consider if higher levels of traffic and congestion in this area are acceptable when acting on this application. If not, consideration should be given to the inclusion of a provision in the development agreement which limits development to the single family and townhome portions of the development at this time and delays the multi-family portion of the development until -- until such time as the Linder Road overpass is completed or other area improvements occur that allow for an acceptable level of service to be provided as determined by ACHD. Written testimony has been received on this application from the following. Heath McMahon that the requested project is denied due to the density proposed and the negative impact on traffic in this area and that letter is in the public comments. You should have already seen that. And, then, written testimony from Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, the applicant's representative, in response to the staff report and I will let Becky go over that in her presentation. Staff is recommending approval per the staff report, just with a caveat as mentioned in the previous application, if the proposed map amendment is not approved staff recommends denial of the proposed development agreement modification and, consequently, the rezone, preliminary plat and conditional use permit applications due to inconsistency of the proposed development plan with the existing MUC designation. Staff will stand for any questions. Smith: Commissioners, do you have any questions for staff? Rivera: No. Stoddard: No. Smith: All right. Then would the applicants like to come forward and, please, state your name and address for the record and, then, one additional thing before you do, given the small number of Commissioners that are available tonight, I want to make sure, especially so that we get this right, so I will ask you to speak -- error on the side of speaking too much too closely into the mic and my fellow Commissioners online, if you are having trouble hearing, please, let us know, so that we can solve that. I want to make sure there is nothing missed. Thank you. Name and address for the record. McKay: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I'm Becky McKay with Engineering Solutions. Business address 1029 North Rosario in Meridian. I'm here this evening representing Challenger Development for the Tanner Creek application. We have before you this evening a rezone, preliminary plat, a conditional use permit and a development agreement modification. The property -- the subject property that you are looking at is 38.05 acres. It's not me? Thank you. The property -- just to kind of give you an idea of the location, the property is located just on the west side of Meridian Road. It is south of Waltman Lane. To the east is The Landing Subdivision. That's a single family development, which is currently zoned R-4. On our southern boundary is Interstate 84. North of Waltman Lane there are some estate residential. There is some agricultural. Kitty-corner to us is a mini storage facility and, then, obviously, to the east of us is the proposed Hawkins development. This property Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 11 of 36 is currently zoned C-G, general retail and service commercial. The rezone before you this evening we are asking to down zone the property to R-8, medium density residential, R-15, medium high density residential, and R-40, high density residential. Oh, there were go. Okay. It's just slow. So, this particular 31 -- 38.05 acres is a combination of nine parcels. So, historically there were multiple single family dwellings on these properties and, then, an agricultural parcel to the south. So, by consolidating these nine parcels here along Waltman Lane, that's -- that makes up the Tanner Creek property. To kind of give you a little bit of history on this property, it was annexed and zoned in 2008, 15 years ago, as C-G. In the original development agreement it was anticipated -- concept plan was submitted and tied to their DA for a mixture of big box, commercial retail office and hotel use. Obviously, after 15 years the proposed 400,000 square feet of commercial and office development and hotel never transpired. This area has been talked about -- I have been doing work in the City of Meridian for 30 year -- over 30 years and the Waltman Lane area has always been discussed as an area that we -- the city wanted to develop, but there was always a difficulty in trying to get adequate access into this area. In 2018 Matt Schultz submitted an application to the city for the Tanner Creek property that you see there highlighted in blue, asking for comprehensive plan map amendment, development agreement modification and rezone. The application was denied by the City Council. They had some concerns about traffic congestion at Waltman Lane, impact on schools and the lack of a commercial component, because they wanted to see that there was kind of a mixed use within this area. Then in 2020 Mr. Schultz submitted -- Mr. Schultz submitted an application before the city. It was very similar. And the City Council denied it a second time and they indicated we feel it's premature for this application to come through until we know what's going to happen on the adjoining property to the east. Until such time as we know we have the full picture along Waltman Lane, we are reluctant to approve anything and they said we know we want a commercial component in addition to a residential component and if we approve you for residential what happens if the property to the east comes through asking for residential also and we may not get that mixed commercial component employment center that -- that we have kind of envisioned in this area. So, strike two. Then, the Hawkins property came through independently and as Sonya indicated, the City Council reviewed it and said we would like to see you work with staff to make some changes to your site plan and remand it back to the Commission and have the two projects come through concurrently, so that we can see the big picture and see, obviously, the -- the integration of these two properties and the mitigation that can be done with two different developers working to improve the transportation system in this area. One of the problems with this Waltman Lane area is -- as you can see by this larger aerial map, this section is bounded by Linder Road on the west, Franklin Road on the north, Meridian Road on the east and I- 84. And, then, you have Ten Mile Creek that traverses the section creating another boundary or barrier to interconnectivity. Since Linder Road did not have an overpass over 1-84, this section was kind of segregated from itself. When The Landing went in they have no vehicular bridges over Ten Mile Creek, so they are basically -- that entire subdivision is coming off of Linder Road without any true secondary access. With the Tanner Creek property developing it provided other transportation opportunities that not -- not only will benefit the projects that are proposed and you are reviewing this evening, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 12 of 36 but will also enhance the interconnectivity of The Landing Subdivision by the connection of Ruddy Drive, which is a stub street that The Landing has on their eastern boundary, we will be bringing that in as a collector road up to Waltman Lane and, then, with the extension of Corporate Drive down south and building a bridge across Ten Mile Creek, will be providing another interconnectivity that will also allow for traffic not only to go to Meridian Road, but to go north up to Franklin or to go west out to Linder. With the Linder overpass everyone is -- is pretty much in agreement that it is going to really change traffic patterns in this section, because you will have this alternative route south and with the State Highway 16 extension to the interstate creating another interchange and another crossing, that's also going to make a significant difference in the interconnection between north and south Meridian and the City of Meridian and the city of Kuna, because 1-84 is a barrier. Here you can see the Tanner Creek rendering, along with the Hawkins commercial development rendering. One of the things that we did is we work closely together to try to integrate the two projects to make them pedestrian friendly, make them inviting for people on bikes, skateboards, scooters, walking back and forth, trying to alleviate the number of trips that would be on the -- the Ada County Highway District network. So, there is the -- you can see the Tanner Creek project there. So, we have, as I indicated, the R-8, the R-15 and the R-40 zones. The overall density that you are looking at here is 10.72 dwelling units per acre. Then we did break the density down within each zone, so that the Commission could see -- like within the R-8 zone where we have our single family dwellings, the density is 4.14 dwelling units per acre and we have those single family dwelling units adjacent to The Landing, so you are seeing a transition from R-4 to R-8. Then in the interior -- in the interior we have R-15 and our density within the R-15 area is 7.09 dwelling units per acre. Then as we go to our eastern side, which is the transition that we have next to Ten Mile Creek and the commercial development proposed by Hawkins, we are at 17.63 dwelling units per acre in the R-40. So, as you can see we are not pushing the density of any particular zone, but, obviously, transitioning from low density to medium density to high density. We feel that this is an ideal location for a mixed residential project, considering that the project is located one quarter mile west of a major arterial roadway, Meridian Road, and south of Waltman on -- which is designated a collector and, then, with the extension of Corporate Drive, which is also a collector. This area will have access to the Meridian Road interchange and 1-84. So, we feel that -- that this is an appropriate location for what's being proposed. As far as that original development agreement, the Council had indicated what they wanted to see with that 2008 development agreement we have accomplished with our project by having east-west and north-south pedestrian connections. Your master pathway plan shows a regional multi-use pathway along the west side of Ten Mile Creek, which is on our eastern boundary. So, we will be constructing that and it will be not just ten feet, but 14 feet in width and, then, we have a ten foot east-west pathway that will connect over to the multi-use pathway and over to the Hawkins development. In looking at the overall project, we feel that the incorporation of the mixed use residential and, then, the mixed use commercial will, obviously, be the best fit for this area by balancing out the traffic generated by the two projects. We have 83 single family lots that will be ranging from 30,850 square feet up to 10,500 square feet. We have 16 alley loaded lots and 67 front loaded homes and we have varying widths for different economic targets. We have 40 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 13 of 36 foot wide lots, 50 foot wide lots and 60 foot wide lots. We have 45 townhomes that are all alley loaded. They range from 2,400 to 3,884 square feet and with an average of 2,739 square feet. As I indicated our overall density, including the multi-family, 280 units, is 10.72. It's anticipated that we will build this in four phases. I always ask for flexibility in phasing, because we never know what the market conditions are going to do. If market conditions continue to decline, obviously, our phases get smaller. If market conditions improve, then, sometimes the phasing gets larger. So, therefore, what's before you is 128 attached and detached single family dwellings and, then, the 280 units. So, we have a total of 408 dwelling units on the property. We tried to balance out, so we didn't end up with a lot of garage orientation. We have about 47 percent alley loaded where we have front porches and emphasize, you know, the kind of cottage type look with different materials and, then, we have front loaded about 53 percent. Along 1-84 where we have the single family dwellings those will all be single level dwellings. We have a 50 foot proposed buffer along 1-84 and we will also be building a nine foot high berm and, then, we have a rhino rock type concrete wall as a sound barrier and landscaping along that entire south boundary. Along Waltman Lane your code requires 20 feet for a collector buffer. We have 37 feet. Within the multi- family area and under the conditional use permit we have a total of 12 multi-family buildings of those 12 11 are three story. The building that is adjacent with the side view to Waltman Lane is a two story building. We have balanced our -- our number of bedrooms. We will have about 33 percent one bedrooms or 94 units. Fifty-four percent will be two bedrooms with 152 units and we have 34 three bedroom units. The total parking provided meets your code update, which requires I believe 579 spaces. We have 581 spaces. So, we basically have 1.5 spaces for the one bedroom, two spaces for the two bedroom and three spaces for the three bedroom and, then, we also have guest parking, which is a new requirement under the code. In the -- the single family amenities we wanted to make sure that we hit the mark on our amenities. Our qualified open space within the single family area is 6.49 acres or 17 percent. We have a central common area that's 1.70 acres in the single family and townhome area. We have a large play structure, half basketball court, pickleball court. We have benches. And, then, ten foot pathways that lead over to the multi-use pathway. You will have pedestrian friendly crossings. They will be all striped and signed pedestrian crossings, so we can get people safely across the street if they go east and west through the project. In the multi-family area we have 3.76 acres of open space or 21.35 percent qualified open space. We will have a 5,000 -- about a 5,500 square foot -- a clubhouse. It will have a fitness facility, kitchen facilities, conference room, community gathering area. We will have covered patio with a barbecue -- outdoor barbecue area. We will have the greenbelt plaza area where we have sitting areas and plantings and that will be mirrored in the Hawkins development. We will also have a swimming pool with a hot tub. Cabana at the pool deck. Play structure. Picnic gazebo. Pickleball sports court. And within the clubhouse we will have a bicycle repair station and, then, we also have a separate room, indoor, for a dog wash area. We are going to provide charging stations for EV vehicles and we have provided for linear parks, micro paths and pathways, multiple picnic shelters and, then, obviously, the multi-use pathway. This kind of gives you an idea of the townhome elevations, so we are going to have some diversity. You can see there is a lot of different modulation. When we rear load those townhomes, Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 14 of 36 obviously, the curb appeal along the public streets is very attractive. This -- they have little porches. Very different roof changes. Very cute, very cottage looking. On the single family lots we will have some two story, two car garage. We will have some single story, two car garage. There is another one. And, then, this is the -- an elevation of the two story multi-family building that will have just 16 units that adjoins Waltman. The other building is turned so only the end of the building -- we want to minimize any wall effect next to Waltman Lane. Starman: Ms. McKay? McKay: Yes. Starman: Can I interject? Can we stop the clock just for a second, Madam Clerk. I just want to make sure we all have a common understanding of the time limit. So, I just want you to be aware that we -- so, I meant 30 minutes in total for both applicants and we are about 20 minutes in, so I just -- McKay: Okay. I will wrap it up, sir. Thank you. Starman: That's between you and your fellow applicant. I just want to make sure we had a common understanding. McKay: Want to make sure -- thank you. I appreciate that. Starman: You are welcome. McKay: Because I never know where I'm at. I will wrap it up here. So, this is the elevation of the two story building. These are elevations of the three story buildings. These renderings. As you can see they are very attractive. They got different roof lines. A lot of modulation. We have covered parking. We have uncovered parking. That's a picture of the clubhouse, swimming pool, cabana, fireplace area. So, we want to make sure that we provide an excellent gathering areas and this kind of gives you the pedestrian connection perspective of the two projects that you see there. So, that's Tanner Creek and, then, if you see to the distance that's the Hawkins property. So, we have been working with the landscape architects, so that each project mirrors the same type of amenity on each side of the creek and, then, we have a pedestrian bridge that takes everyone over and I will stop there and I will turn the time over to -- Mansfield: I will try and -- my name is Ethan Mansfield. Hawkins Companies. We are the commercial portion of this development and, Sonya, if you could bring up the presentation for me. Thank you very much. So, yeah, I will kind of pick up where Becky left off. This is the commercial. This is the eastern side of the project on the southwest corner of Waltman and Meridian. So, this -- our application includes the comp plan amendment to go to commercial on our section, a comp plan amendment for medium high density residential on Becky's portion of the project and, then, an annexation and a rezone on that small piece to the south. Let just show you here -- not quite yet. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 15 of 36 Anyway, small piece on the -- to the south of where -- where we are not actually in the city limits. So, I will give you a brief overview. Becky went through most of it. So, we were heard by City Council in June of 2022 and our application was remanded back to Planning and Zoning Commission to be heard concurrently with Tanner Creek and they wanted to ensure that the TIS was accepted by the Ada County Highway District. Later that month ACHD accepted the TIS and drafted some recommendations. So, over the course of the next -- course of the year we spent time, both with Tanner Creek and significant time with Meridian Planning and Zoning staff, to make changes to our site plan. We also worked with our tenants to -- to get our site plan dialed in. That was really important to us to, obviously, meet the requirements of staff and the suggestions of staff in the staff report. So, in July 2023 city staff expresses that they are generally supportive of the new site plan and accepts the site plans together and, then, in October last month, a couple of weeks ago, staff asked us to -- rather than go with a mixed use regional designation, that we change to the commercial land use designation for the Hawkins development, the medium density residential designation for Tanner Creek. The site plans didn't change. So, we still have a -- clearly a mix of uses. We have residential on the Tanner Creek side and we have commercial on our side of the creek and so that looks like this map before you. As you can see it's pretty darn similar to the other corners of the intersection. You know, you have got commercial on the busy corners and, then, you transition into residential as you move inward from those major arterials, especially right around the interchange. So, overall we think that this configuration makes a lot more sense than the previous. The previously approved development agreements, which -- which had commercial on Becky's side and nothing on -- on our corner here. Again -- so, this is kind of what we are looking at. Here is the annexation rezone request down at the bottom -- kind of bottom right southeast corner and showing where Tanner Creek would be and, then, this is -- you have seen this, you know, 15 or 20 times already tonight, so I won't bore you. I would like to talk a little bit about our site plan evolution however. So, on the left side of your screen you will see the old site plan. Right side of the screen you will see what's before you this evening. I would like to thank staff for working with us to dial this in and getting it to a place that we can, you know, approve -- that we can have an approval. We think it's a much better site plan. The drive aisles are oriented in a -- we think a more logical way. Obviously, the transition between Tanner Creek and our development makes a lot more sense. Overall we are really really proud of this site plan. We have got community serving shops uses right up against Waltman. You know, we have got a couple of drive- throughs kind of on the Meridian Road side and we think it kind of meets the needs of, you know, the fact that it is a regional corner, serving the needs of the region, but also having these community serving uses to meet the needs of the immediate surrounding community and providing pedestrian connectivity, so that this immediate surrounding community can -- can walk or bike to the project. That's -- I think this -- I'm really proud of this lifeline. So, anyway, I will stop there. Here is the pedestrian circulation plan. You can see that, you know, if you are a pedestrian you can get pretty much anywhere on the site, you know, and we provide pretty robust open space amenities and I think, you know, we will go through those in a second, but I think that's very important. Here you can see we have kind of modeled three different concepts of kind of Plaza amenity areas and so I will start with -- with area B. These are kind of designed -- or sorry. Area Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 16 of 36 A. A type plazas. These are kind of designed to be kind of patio seating areas and, you know, these are just kind of illustrative concepts to kind of show what the design intent is. Areas A. These are the B types. These are kind of our main entry plaza when you are turning in off of Waltman. You know, it's kind of designed to be an open space where people can kind of hang out, as well as kind of some patio seating that isn't really -- you know, it kind of merges together seamlessly to provide a really comfortable pedestrian experience. Here is another couple of views of that and, then, I think most importantly -- and Becky hit on this -- is we have our connecting plaza area. The design language is pretty similar across both the multi-family and the commercial side. It's -- it's a really cool feature I think of this project. So, here is looking at just the residential side, kind of modeling it, showing what it's going to look like. I think it's pretty cool. Pretty neat. And, then, the commercial side kind of mirroring that concept to kind of provide that pedestrian and bike comfort as you move between the two developments. Again, it's tough, because there is a creek running through it, so you can't seamlessly merge them, but this site plan I think does a really good job of tying the two together despite the geographic barrier of the creek. One thing I would just like to ask for a condition to be changed is that the city is currently recommending a street with two multi-use pathways be punched through this area. So, the area shown here is about the same amount of area. I think it's actually 74 feet -- we modelled it -- with the Corporate Drive extension, to provide two multi-use pathways, a drive area, 25 foot driveway and the associated buffer widths. So, that's about what you are looking for for your street width. Now, if you look back on this you can see that that's pretty much where our pedestrian amenity -- it's our really nice kind of plaza area connecting the two together. That's where they are located. So, what we would end up having to do to provide this connectivity with the street is remove some of these really nice amenities and we think that since the goal of -- you know, the Comprehensive Plan goals clearly state, right, that -- that the desire for the pedestrian comfort -- the experience of the pedestrian comfort -- we think that it makes a lot more sense to create amenities like this than it does to have a street that -- with just the pathways. One other quick condition we are asking for a modification of and not a removal of, but a modification of, is the construction of a stub driveway to the adjacent out parcel. We worked really hard to try to get this parcel under contract. This is up on the northwest corner of our site. So, this is up adjacent to the creek along Waltman. We were unable to acquire this parcel. They were adamantly opposed to being -- to selling their property. So, the condition from staff was to provide a cross-access agreement to allow any future development to access through our development and to construct a stub driveway to the edge of that development. We are not -- we are amenable to providing a cross- access to the future development. However, when we took a look at where and how we would actually connect that stub in, we -- Smith: You can finish up that thought. Mansfield: So, we -- we looked at it and there will be some significant grading and drainage issues if we try and construct a stub drive. Mainly we will create kind of a waterfall that goes into this adjacent property in their backyard. So, we don't really want Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 17 of 36 to actually construct the stub street. We would really like to simply provide the cross- access agreement, which protects that. Smith: Thank you. Do any Commissioners have any questions for the applicants? Rivera: No. Stoddard: I don't. Smith: All right. I have a couple of questions. Thanks for -- and this might also touch on what you were speaking to regarding the staff report and discuss for Becky, too. Just curious about any other issues with the staff report, any other disagreements with staff recommendations. Particularly one that I'm really interested in is the possible recommendation to require phasing based on the Linder overpass completion as part of a development agreement. Just curious about any thoughts on this. Mansfield: I will -- I will address that. Thanks, Commissioner Smith. We don't have any other issues with the staff report. Those were my only two concerns. Regarding phasing, that puts us in a really -- really challenging position, because we would like this center to develop in a cohesive manner and it takes years sometimes from when we have surety that we can actually develop in a certain way to actually getting a door open, a restaurant open, a shop open. The development process takes a long time and so when we don't have surety that we can do the development it really -- it -- let's say we get surety -- let's say we had surety tonight or even at Council, you know, it might be three to five years before we even finish this center's development in its entirety, simply because of -- of working through deals with tenants -- potential tenants, signing LOI's signing leases -- leases, doing due diligence. All of that development work. So, we really need that surety now to begin to even start figuring out those details. Since the Linder overpass is going to start construction in 2026, we feel that, you know, that's an appropriate timeline given what we are looking to do. Smith: And, Becky, I will ask you the same -- one I guess thought on that and whether this changes anything -- is whether that might be -- I believe we have in the past made certificate of occupancy contingent upon completion or access or something like that and so I wonder if that could help ameliorate things that you could at least get the ball rolling on some of those things, but that final occupancy wouldn't be granted. But that kind of applies to that question for you, too. McKay: Yeah. Commissioner Smith, I did discuss that with my client and -- and as Ethan stated, these projects don't pop up overnight. We -- with our first phase of Tanner Creek we have to design the bridge and the Corporate Drive extension and get that online in conjunction with our first phase and, then, after that's done, then, we have to work on Waltman Lane, replacing the bridge, building it out to a collector standard, so there is a lot of things that -- obviously, improvements that we have to install before we can even bring on phase one. The engineering plan approvals take place, as Ethan said, instead of months now it takes over years. So, my estimation is that -- that you Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 18 of 36 are not going to see a lot of traffic generation before that overpass is installed in fiscal year '26, '27, because we have got a lot of work ahead of us. We will have to be doing LOMARs, 404 permits, no rises, but to -- to impose a condition that you can only build one phase or you can only build the target, that's going to hamper their marketing and my client was concerned about that. We are convinced that our timing is going to -- to, obviously, be within that time frame, but like with our first phase I calc'd it, I'm only generating 850 trips with phase one and you have got 55 homes that have to be built and they are not going to be occupied or built overnight. So, I don't think it's necessary that -- that that condition be imposed on the project, because, like I said, I fear it will hamper their marketing and their ability to create a cohesive retail office and employment center, which, obviously, we are going to be part of as far as the residential component and our residents, hopefully, will work there and support it and I have been told that -- that Linder -- I mean that's the number one priority, that Linder overpass. I mean they are going full bore. They have already -- I did the Kendall Ford Center that's under construction on the west side of where it comes across the freeway, they have already acquired the right of way. I mean they are rocking and they are rolling. So, I don't see that there is going to be any type of delay. Mansfield: I think one other thing that's helpful to consider is that these other improvements, namely Corporate Drive and the Ruddy extension and the expansion of Waltman Lane, these other improvements will be completed prior to occupancy and I think that -- I mean that will, obviously, add an extreme amount of connectivity to the surrounding area. You know, I put this together -- we all -- you know, this is where we all live. You know, previously you just had this -- this little purple connection here. By opening up that connection to Franklin it really changes the game for not just our development, but for people who live in north Meridian to access the interchange, to access, you know, goods and services and, then, the connection to the adjacent neighborhood, too. So, those blue -- those, you know, blue connections there really have this outsized impact -- they are small connections, but they have a really outsized impact on the ability of the community -- surrounding communities to travel through the area and we think that in and of itself is something that is -- is pretty special with this development. McKay: And you are going to be capturing -- Mansfield: Right. And we will be capturing trips, you know. You are not really generating -- I mean, you know, a commercial development doesn't necessarily in and of itself create new trips, it mainly captures trips from other households in the valley; right? Because, really, the only way you can get a new trip is by having a new person driving a new car through -- through the area and, really, we are not adding any new people to the network, we are just adding a central location by -- for which to shop and -- and play. Smith: Thank you. So, you can correct me -- correct me if I'm wrong, if-- I don't want to put any words in anyone's mouth. It seems like it's a question of -- more of whether it's necessary, rather -- rather -- especially for, Becky, for your development, rather than if Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 19 of 36 it's outright harmful or whether it would prevent the -- it might make things a little bit more of a task, but it wouldn't inherently prevent the project from being completable, but just some -- Mansfield: I would say, Commissioner Smith, that it could be extremely detrimental to our project. We don't know the extent to which it could harm our project, because there is so much uncertainty with tying the ability for us to construct part of our project to a public agency's ability to complete a -- to create and complete an infrastructure project that it -- it really throws the uncertainty -- I should just say it's the amount of uncertainty that it throws into the project. It is so immense that it -- it very well could extremely negatively impact the ability for this project to be constructed. Smith: Does that -- does that change at all if it -- say -- I know the staff recommendation is -- or staff's potential recommendation is constructing retail one before the Linder overpass and waiting until after the Linder overpass to construct the rest. Does the calculus change at all whether it's -- say the other units and, then, retail one and two after or anything like that in terms of construction times, lease signings, et cetera? Does that make any of that doable at all? Mansfield: Commissioner Smith, I will say, you know, it is imperative that retail one is there, because that is the driver of other tenants. However, it -- it is, again, really totally uncertain whether or not -- you know, we might -- we might be able to construct retail one, for example, and, then, suddenly the tenants that are interested in the spaces along Waltman, the shops tenants, the -- the shops tenants that are difficult to find already sometimes and the tenants along Meridian Road might just say, no, not interested. We are going somewhere else. Something could happen in the economy. We could find ourselves with a bunch of empty pads. We could find ourselves with an empty retail two. It is -- those are all very -- very realistic scenarios, which is why we are seeking approval for the entire commercial project. McKay: Yeah. Mr. -- Mr. Chairman, you know, with commercial developments -- I have done quite a few commercial, industrial developments. There has to be certainty. You know, some of these -- these people that -- they may want to lease a building or build a building, if there is some condition where maybe there is uncertainty in which they can bring -- bring their business online that could really hurt the Hawkins Company. Whereas, obviously, with our residential development, you know, that's kind of not the case. It's more that we would prefer, you know, to build this out in a timely fashion. We think the timelines will work and we are adding capacity to the network to compensate for what we are generating. Right now what's approved on the Tanner Creek property is -- would generate 10,300 vehicle trips a day. So, when you combine the Hawkins commercial with their 10,891 at build out, then, you combine the Tanner Creek, which is 3,014 trips, you are talking, basically, a difference of 3,600 vehicle trips per day. Right now Waltman is horribly underutilized at 190 vehicle trips per day. Once we bring Corporate in and you got access to Franklin, you have got other -- you have got secondary access to Meridian Road and we rebuild Waltman -- we have got a lot of work ahead of us, but our clients, obviously, need to, like I said, have some certainty Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 20 of 36 that -- that they are not going to spend millions of dollars on this infrastructure and, then, find that their hands are tied, because they can only bring on so many uses within a specific time frame. Smith: Thank you. Understandable. I do have a question for -- and any other Commissioners, do you have any questions respect to this? I just wanted to get staff's response, I guess, to the Tanner Creek -- that the two asks around not requiring that street connectivity in favor of pedestrian and amenities and not requiring the stubbed driveway to that abutting property. Are there any major staff concerns around that? Allen: Yes, Mr. Chair. You said the timing of the -- did you say the timing of the buffer along 1-84 on the Tanner Creek property? Smith: I believe the two asks specifically were regarding the street connectivity requirement -- Allen: Between the two development -- Smith: The two developments. Allen: Yeah. Our UDC requires cross-access to be provided when access is not available from a local street. Waltman is going to be reclassified as a collector street. So, that would require a driveway connection interconnectivity. Not necessarily a public street, but a driveway connection. Our code does allow for a waiver by City Council if they deem that appropriate. Smith: Okay. And, then, as for the stub driveway, are there concerns there? Allen: On the 1-84 and Meridian Road property? Yeah. The only concern I have is how that driveway gets constructed in the future. They will have an access easement, but who would pay for that and, you know, that kind of thing. So, if the applicant has a solution to that I think we would be amenable to it. Smith: Okay. Mansfield: Yeah. Sonya, Commissioner Smith, I -- I can say that I think one way to -- to ensure cross-access would be to, right, have us sign a cross-access agreement basically allowing cross-access from them to us and, then, also limiting access from that parcel when it redevelops onto -- onto Waltman. So, if you were to say no access from that parcel onto Waltman, when that parcel comes in to redevelop and they have access to our driveway, that would ensure that access was not taken onto Waltman, but, instead, through our project, that -- that would be my -- you know, if I put on my planner hat that's kind of how I probably would -- would solve it. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 21 of 36 Allen: Yeah. But we couldn't -- Chairman, excuse me. We -- we couldn't condition that -- for that property to not take access on Waltman at this time, because it's not part of this application. It's certainly something we would look at in the future. Smith: So, that will be present in a future staff report for whatever eventually develops here? Allen: It's always easier to catch it if there is a constructed driveway and access and going on to that property to construct the driveway and -- and I'm assuming the applicant -- I don't think you touched on that, Ethan, on who would pay for that construction of that driveway. I assume that you are -- you are thinking that developer of that property would pay for it. Mansfield: Ms. Allen and Commissioner Smith, I would assume that they would -- just like as if they were connecting to a public street, they would be responsible for the cost of the driveway. You know, all of the things that I envision are basically just -- when that -- when that parcel redevelops, instead of paying for a connection to the public roadway, they would just pay for the connection to our driveway instead and so, really, we are kind of hung up on just building that stub. We really don't want to have a situation, A, where they have a site plan that just in no way really matches where we happen to have constructed the driveway, because we don't really know what that site plan is going to look like, so we -- we want flexibility to ensure that that connectivity can happen realistically and most efficiently and also that if we did connect something into there, there is a pretty significant grade change between where this driveway is going to end -- sorry -- where this drive that we are constructing is going to go north-south and, then, where the parcel is -- where the existing grade is on the parcel to the west and so if we were to construct a stub it would, essentially, almost like just drain water into the back of their property and we don't really want -- want to do that and it would -- we would end up spending a lot of money and time and engineering head scratching to like figure out how to not drain water into their property and at that point it would probably need to be reconfigured anyway upon the time that the parcel did develop, just to even out grades and to straighten out, you know, drainage and all the stuff that we kind of messed up just to put a stub street in there. Smith: So, staff and -- and also I guess if this is amenable and if this is possible, I can't seem to remember the discussions we have had in the past round this. Would it be possible to put as a condition in the development agreement that they have money set aside to pay for that stub street when -- if that property gets redeveloped in the future, so they don't have to construct it now, but we have surety that it will be constructed as part of that application? Allen: Mr. Chairman, you could certainly do that. I'm not sure about the -- I will defer to our city attorney on that. Starman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you could craft a condition or a provision within the development agreement that would deal with that general topic. We typically Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 22 of 36 don't like road sureties, just because of -- number one, there is some questions about the viability of that and, secondly, just the -- I guess the accounting and the administration that goes with something like that to collect and hold a small amount of money in a -- in the scheme of things. So, we typically don't do that. So, I guess a way I answer the question more succinctly is it's -- I think we could do -- have to condition around that topic that would require construction of a date certain or whether -- with a or trigger event. I would probably recommend that we not try to require a financial -- like a deposit or some kind of road surety today. Just administratively it's difficult for us to monitor and maintain. Allen: Mr. Chair, I believe you suggested that the applicant set aside money for that. Smith: Yeah. I -- my -- my concern is rather than -- not a surety or anything like that, but could we -- we can -- could we require them -- it sounds like the answer is yes -- to commit to building that road when -- if this property is redeveloped, regardless of where that money is held, etcetera. Starman: And, Mr. Chairman, I guess there is two topics there. So, one is a development agreement -- to distill it down is really a contract between two parties, the city and the developer in this instance, and so, contractually, I think you can craft a provision that would require some of that nature. So, that's sort of topic one. Topic two is how do you enforce it and so that's really I think -- by the other part of your question is it's nice to know that you have some type of money on deposit, some kind of surety that would ensure that a provision is carried out. That's the part that's a little more difficult just from an administrative perspective. I think the answer to both questions is, yes, that that would be a possibility, but I know -- just know from previous discussions amongst city staff that there is some hesitation about the idea of the surety idea or taking a deposit and monitoring and tracking the deposit over some period of time, yes. Maybe for several years. Allen: Definitely all those things are a concern of staff. Another alternative I might throw out is that in that cross-access easement agreement that Hawkins provides to that property owner that they provide language in it that authorizes them, the developer of that property, in the future to go onto their property to make improvements and construct that driveway. Smith: So, sorry, I'm not -- I didn't fully track that. Could you -- Allen: Yeah. As part of that cross-access easement agreement that Hawkins grants to that property, include language in it that would allow that property owner or developer to enter their property to construct those improvements on their property. Smith: Okay. Allen: Typically -- like Ethan said, you know, typically we require connection to public streets, but -- but, typically, those are stubbed to the property boundary. That's the Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 23 of 36 difference in this case and this -- this is not a public street, it's just a -- it's an access driveway. But that's the problem we run into is going -- having that property owner go onto their property to, you know, construct those improvements. So, yeah, there is some issues with all this. Absolutely understand the applicant's concern with drainage on that property. We don't want to create an issue with that either. Smith: All right. And the applicant -- he seems like -- that seems amenable to some extent? Mansfield: Commissioner Smith, Ms. Allen, I think that's probably the best solution that we could come to. We aren't a big fan of the surety idea. Having both been on the public sector side of administering those and the private sector side of administering those -- on both sides it's an absolutely miserable experience for both parties. So, I think that this solution is ideal and we can craft easement language that allows the tie in and allows construction to occur on our property for that specific, you know, connection for the driveway. Smith: All right. That's all the questions I have. Do any other Commissioners, before we open up to public comment, have any additional questions? Stoddard: I don't have any. Rivera: I don't have any either. Smith: All right. Well, thank you. I will now invite the public to comment. Do we have anyone -- Lomeli: We have a Terry Harper signed in. Smith: Okay. Oh. Sorry. Starman: I was going to say just for the record, so we can capture that, the -- the -- the citizen indicated that they chose not to -- to testify, they just wanted to hear what was happening. Smith: Thank you. Is there anyone else on -- that signed in? Lomeli: Kelsee Lorcher on -- via Zoom. Smith: All right. Kelsey, are you -- K.Lorcher: Hi. Can you hear me? Smith: Yes, we can. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 24 of 36 K.Lorcher: Hi. My name is Kelsee Lorcher. I live at 2099 West Meta Drive. First and foremost, I'm very not for this application. Very against it. One of the biggest issues that wasn't really talked about was the traffic impact study and how there is going to be almost 14,000 vehicle trips -- daily vehicle -- vehicle trips on Waltman Lane and also there is going to be over 950 vehicles per hour during peak hours and that's just with the Hawkins development. I wanted to go over one of the things I found that the ACHD submitted on to the application with their review. They talk about Waltman Lane. I'm just going to go ahead and quote them. It says: The traffic impact study did not evaluate Waltman Lane abutting the site, but the Tanner Creek traffic impact study indicated that Waltman Lane abutting the Meridian site is projected to exceed ACHD thresholds for a three lane collector road under the total build out conditions in the p.m. peak hours and would need to be widened to five lanes to meet ACHD's acceptable LLS planning thresholds. However, there is not enough existing right of way off site to construct this. This would not be consistent with the existing intersection configuration at Meridian Road/Waltman Lane and tapering from a five lane road to a two lane road would create confusion for drivers. Staff recommends that the City of Meridian take this into consideration when evaluating this application, as ACHD cannot require additional improvement with this development application for Waltman Lane beyond widening the segment to the three lanes abutting the site. So, basically, what that's saying is it's going to be LOS F. It's going be a grade F even with three lanes and they recommend -- they can't enforce, but ACHD recommends that needs to be widened to five lanes and if that neighborhood to the west that will be coming through Ruddy Drive once that's open, that's not even part of the traffic impact study. There is no numbers on how many people are going to be coming through those neighborhoods to get to the Hawkins' side or to get to 1-84 from Meridian onto the ramps if they are going to Boise or whatever. So, you are talking about 14,000 just from -- from Waltman Lane and Corporate and, then, not -- we don't even know the number of the neighborhood going through Ruddy Drive onto Waltman. And another thing is that Ruddy Drive -- with all the people coming in they are going -- into Tanner Creek neighborhood out onto Waltman and that creates a safety issue for the local street inside the neighborhood and the park is right there. It's near and there is -- that's a whole other situation. So, I just wanted to talk about just how wild and crazy our intersection at Meridian and -- and Waltman Lane is already. It's way over -- over jam packed with traffic and this is just going to create so much chaos and just the grid -- everything -- if you look at the traffic impact studies, once Tanner Creek and once Hawkins is built almost every intersection from Franklin and Meridian to Overland is F. F down the board. F. F. F. F everywhere. So, this is not the smartest development to be -- it's not -- that's not the smartest location for this development. This development would be great somewhere else. But since our intersection is landlocked and there is not much we can do to improve it for new construction to modify it, we are pretty much landlocked with all the neighborhood commercial, the roads, the bridge, the ramps. 1-84. There is like no improvement. So, this wouldn't -- to my opinion would not be very smart to approve due to future traffic. It's already out of failing rates. This is going to make it even worse and I think it said about like 2040 we are going to have a million people in the Treasure Valley and, honestly, I don't think the Linder overpass is going to really do much once we have a million people. I think it's Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 25 of 36 going to be just as bad, if not worse within the next 20 years and that's all I have to say on that. So, I would ask you to, please, deny this application. Smith: Thank you. Do we have anyone else signed up? Lomeli: Yes. Clair Manning. Smith: Is that also via Zoom? Johnson: Mr. Manning, you should be able to share your screen when you are ready. Manning: I am getting ready here to share my screen. Oh. So, it's not going to let me share my screen until someone else stops sharing. Johnson: We are fixing it right now. Manning: But my name is Clair Manning. I live at 650 Waltman Lane. You should be seeing a screen right now. Is that -- Smith: We can see it. Manning: Can you, please, confirm? Okay. So, while -- while it is tempting to take a look at this area and think that it belongs is, you know, commercial or a regional use, you know, the simple fact of the matter is -- is you do not have the infrastructure to support it and there really is no path from the developers to support that infrastructure. So, I wanted to take a few moments to share some of the nuances of the area with you guys, since, you know, I live here and I am pretty familiar with -- with that area. So, right to the north you already have some monstrous high density apartments here. This is the area next to the freeway where you would like to put more commercial and 17 acres of, you know, high density apartments here and this development. It makes for a lot going down Waltman Lane. So, let's take a look at how someone actually has to get into Waltman Lane. So, you have -- over here you have that high density developments that are existing that will spill out here into Meridian Road going towards the freeway; right? And more importantly what you have going into the development for a left turn is this small little sliver of a buffer and once that fills up that will choke off an entire lane into the city and it does not take much to -- to fill that up. So, I mean if we looked at it a little closer, I have kind of parked here towards the end, so I think you will notice it's not very big and I also want to point out that to the right here you can even clearly see that there is no path to where you can open that to the left and there is no path -- path for them to widen the street on the other side and, you know, here you can see four -- you know, four cars here in the -- in the area. It fills up quite a bit of that. So, there really isn't much buffer to get in -- to get into the area. So, it's -- it's extremely -- extremely problematic to get into the -- into the subdivision to -- what's proposed as the subdivision and the commercial. So, I mean I think Kelsee has mentioned that it's already a little overrun, but maybe you are wondering like what it really looks like today. So, this is -- this is what I see every day on my morning commute to Micron. So, this is Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 26 of 36 pretty common. You probably all experienced it as well and let's say I'm so lucky as to like actually get home off work during rush hour and have a bad picture, but you can see it's -- it's even challenging to get like in today into this area with a green light with like, you know, traffic still coming over here where I -- where I still have a green light and I'm completely blocked going in. So, you know, it's pretty clear from -- from this that it shouldn't be a surprise to you that it really is going to be a level of service F when they put this in and, you know, this -- this kind of -- this small little sliver -- Linder overpass will do nothing to help this. Linder overpass is never going to fix this. There is no path to fix this. The developer has no plan and there never can be a plan, because they are blocked by the -- blocked by ACHD and they are blocked by, you know, the state of Idaho. So, you know, I think it's pretty clear that a -- you know, a zoning mess to -- to allow this would be -- you know, as a commission would be completely irresponsible. So, I would ask you to deny this. Can I answer any questions? Smith: Any Commissioners have any questions for Mr. Manning? Stoddard: No. Rivera: No. Smith: Thank you. We -- we have no one else signed up, so anyone on Zoom if you would like to testify, please, raise your hand or anyone else from the audience if you would like to come up and speak on this. Lomeli: We have one more Joe Lorcher. Smith: Okay. Joe, are you there? J.Lorcher: Can you hear me? Can you hear me now? Smith: Yes, we can hear you now. J.Lorcher: Okay. My name is Joe Lorcher. I live at 740 Waltman Lane. I'm the agricultural triangle at the north of the Tanner project. My main concern for this project is just the safety of the residents. They are all talking about connectivity and walking paths, but I have got some questions on the ten foot walking path along Waltman Lane. What happens there where Mrs. Lee didn't sell her parcel, does the ten foot path stop and you have to walk out into Waltman Lane and, then, come back once you get past Tanner and, then, go out into Waltman Lane and, then, come back into where Hawkins is developing? Also the -- just the -- right now Waltman Lane is used as a walking path for a lot of residents in The Landing Subdivision and they walk up to Winco and so a lot of concerns on just safety of the residents. When Ruddy drive is opened up all those cars are going to be coming down Waltman Lane and that park is right there. There is no parking for the park. So, people are going to park along the street next to that park, because there is no assigned parking spots for the park. The Linder overpass, like Clair just said, it's not going to impact this at all. If you live in The Landing Subdivision and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 27 of 36 you want to go to Boise you are going to go through Ruddy Drive, Waltman Lane and get stuck at that intersection. They talked about how many cars -- 190 cars a day. That's 15 cars per minute. Right now there is six families that live on Waltman Lane and we get stuck in that subdivision. Six families. I can't remember what the count was. I think it was -- current count was -- Becky said it. I can't remember what it was. But we get stuck and Clair showed that picture. This is every day we get stuck in that -- that intersection to turn left onto Waltman Lane. We have to watch that light turn at least twice before the traffic coming from Winco turning in front of us and stops in front of us, so that we can get across. Ada County Highway District has done nothing to help this. They -- all plans that have been sent to them they have denied. They -- they are not going to fix it, so why would we want more cars onto an intersection that's already graded F. The Corporate Drive through my place connecting up, it still comes back to the same intersection. They can go up Corporate Drive, turn right onto Meridian and, guess what, it's the same intersection. Until the highway district decides -- figures out somehow to fix the overpass, to fix the Waltman Lane, there is just no way that this project can handle the density that's being offered because of the intersection. So, I strongly suggest public concern, public safety. There was no officer -- last time we had this meeting there was a police officer and -- and it would be nice if we could get their opinions on this. But, please, deny this just for the public safety. Thank you. Smith: Thank you. Is there anyone else with the hand raised? Lomeli: One more. Joey Lorcher. Joey Lorcher: Can you hear me? Smith: Yes, we can. Joey Lorcher: Okay. My name is Joey Lorcher and I live at 5110 Dandridge Way. But at one point in time I lived off of Pelican Way, which is in The Landing -- the neighboring -- next door neighborhood and when I lived there if -- if the road would have been punched through to Waltman Lane I would have took it every day to get to the freeway. So, it's -- it -- it will be a big problem for Waltman Lane and also this wasn't touched at all, but the Tanner project is going to overrun Peregrine Elementary with kids, especially with the new high density apartments off of Ten Mile and Franklin, which is in Peregrine's area. So, that's a whole other issue at hand. But I would -- I strongly am against this, both developments, because like everybody said before, Waltman Lane can't handle it. The City of Meridian really can't handle it. So, please, vote against it. And that's all. Smith: All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else with a hand raised? Lomeli: No one else. Smith: Is there anyone in the audience that would like to come up and testify? All right. Would the applicant like to come back up? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 28 of 36 McKay: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. Waltman in its current condition is isolated. It's limited. What we have the ability to do with these two projects is changed that with spending a significant amount of money, six to eight hundred thousand for a bridge over Ten Mile Creek and extending Corporate Drive down to Waltman. That's going to allow -- traffic can go north up to Franklin or it has alternative access points onto Meridian Road. By opening up Ruddy Drive we will get some inner connection with the prop -- the subdivision to the west, but even Ada County Highway District in the memo written by Mindy Wallace on October 18, she talks about the Linder ACHD and the Linder Road overpass project and she states: It is likely that the intersection at Waltman and Meridian Road will operate better than reported in the traffic impact studies once the stub streets to the adjacent neighborhoods are connected and Corporate Drive is extended to intersect with Waltman. So, we are going to see a change in traffic patterns. With that Linder overpass we are going to see alternative routes and not just one point of access to Meridian Road from Waltman. These -- these roadway improvements that we are proposing are not cheap. They are very expensive and time consuming. We are willing to take on that task and we believe that it's going to help add alternative routes to this Waltman area and this is recommended by ACHD. The level of service during the p.m. peak hour, it does go to a level of service F with us or without us and that's due to the fact that you have a single point urban interchange that was built by ITD when they did the Meridian interchange update and that complicates the signal timing of the upstream and downstream intersections. Leah Kelsey is here from Six Mile Engineering and if you guys have questions for her -- they designed the Meridian one way couplet. They also did an analysis and provided three options for ACHD to allow us to extend some of those turn lanes and improve the capacity of the intersection at Meridian and Waltman. You also can't ignore the fact that the Tanner Creek project is already annexed. It's already zoned C-G. Somebody could come in and buy it and put a Fred Meyer there tomorrow if they wanted to with just a building permit, because in the DA that's what it's approved for is some big box, a hotel, retail, restaurants. Part of Hawkins Properties already zoned C-G. They said they could pull a permit basically for a big box user also. We are not going that route. We are downsizing. We are working together to solve the issues and as far as the infrastructure there is sewer out there, there is water out there. All of the police, the fire department, all their response times are significantly lower than what they average. So, all of your facilities are available out there now and I guess my thought is if not now, then, when and if not these projects where we are willing to make all of these system improvements, then what? We have good projects. I will turn it over to -- Mansfield: Thanks, Becky. I -- Commissioner Smith, I don't have a lot to add, but I would just say, you know, Becky's correct, there is a 400,000 square foot shopping center entitled for the Tanner Creek site right now. We are proposing to build about 325,000 square feet. So, it's significantly less than what is currently entitled. About 75,000 square feet less. I think that we are -- you know, we hired Leah to come up with some concept designs for the intersection. We are trying -- we are making as many improvements to the transportation network in this area as ACHD will let us and I think, you know, if we could do more we absolutely would and so that's all I really have to say. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 29 of 36 1 think, you know, it's a -- it's a tricky situation, but this is an in-fill site. We are not extending services out into the hinterlands. We are filling in. That's going to capture trips. It's going to reduce travel times for many people and overall I think that's a very good thing for the community. Thank you. Smith: I do have a quick question for one of you, but I will ask real quick first. Do any of you other Commissioners have any questions for applicants or any other individuals who were in the public testimony? Stoddard: I do not. Smith: All right. Mr. -- Commissioner Rivera, do you have any? I see he just come off mute. Rivera: I just have a quick question. In terms of maximizing the, you know, solutions as best as to what ACHD allows you -- so, you have had these discussions -- discussions with ACHD and they also feel that this is the best implementation for -- you know, for that street and -- and the solution, just to make it more accessible and free up as much as you can to -- at the best capacity available? Mansfield: Commissioner Rivera, that is correct. We have had extensive discussions with ACHD to try and increase capacity at the Waltman intersection and they have staunchly rejected that option. Rivera: And these -- these improvements -- sorry. Follow up. And these improvements are -- are there any different from the past -- you know, I think, what was it, 2018 or the past submissions -- submitted applications, has anything changed or -- Mansfield: Commissioner Rivera, we are actually bringing up the -- kind of the proposal that we brought to ACHD that Leah helped us design. Again, Leah is with Six Mile Engineering and she completed the original traffic engineering for this entire area and so, you know, I think that -- her firm -- she and her firm know more about this area than any -- anybody else. So, you know, here is the proposed improvements. Two northbound left turns from Meridian into Waltman. Two eastbound right turns from Waltman to Meridian. We are actually increasing bike-pedestrian facilities by pulling the bike lane off of Meridian Road, putting it in a multi-use pathway separated with an eight foot buffer and we are also allocating space for an additional southbound lane on Meridian Road. The idea would be ACHD could come and, then, construct in the future the remaining improvements to the intersection to -- to allow it to, then, operate at an efficient level. So, that's a -- you know, this is what we proposed to ACHD and they were not interested at this time. So, we are moving forward with what we have got and appreciate them taking a look at it. Smith: Could you -- Commissioner Rivera, any follow-up question? Rivera: No. That -- that answered my question, Commissioner. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 30 of 36 Smith: Thank you. I do have a follow-up question. Could you speak a little bit to why ACHD -- or the reason they gave you why they weren't interested in that? And, yeah, if you would like to come up from Six Mile or to anyone. Mansfield: Yeah. Commissioner Smith, if you don't mind I'm going to have Leah come up and talk a little bit about her understanding of that, because it is a very technical response from ACHD. Smith: And to be clear, my question is -- I guess this might help inform kind of your response. My question is based -- trying to get to the root of is this something that there is some inherent, you know, law of nature type of thing that ACHD is citing as a reason for not or is it just not at this time? Is there -- you know, what was kind of their reasoning around that? Kelsey: Yeah. I would be happy to answer your question. I'm Leah Kelsey with Six Mile Engineering, 704 East United Heritage Court in Meridian. And so we received the letter from ACHD in response to our January technical memo where we came up with three phased ideas -- or concepts to improve the intersection and level of service and in their reply, which Sonya also touched on and I believe Becky as well, they thought it would be detrimental -- these improvements would be detrimental to the operation of the SPUI interchange and they didn't provide any technical analysis, so I can't speak to the -- the actual -- or I can't quantify their -- their qualms with the improvements. It was just kind of a broad statement. Their feeling that it -- it would have some impacts to the SPUI and, then, again, they touched on Linder and how that would relieve some of the pressure on Meridian and improve the intersection operations, which I do agree with that. And if I can add something, I think that what Hawkins is proposing with their site plan doesn't preclude making these improvements in the future. They are setting their pathways back and allowing for additional right of way in Waltman. So, at some time if ACHD allows for these phased improvements they -- it will be possible. Smith: Thank you. Parsons: Mr. Chair, I can add a little bit to the conversations, too, because I had a conversation with ACHD staff this morning on the same topic. Because Sonya and I didn't want to be too nearsighted on this topic either, because we know -- I go home this way every night, so I know exactly what all of these residents are dealing with. I -- I'm stuck in traffic for -- I mean it takes me 40 minutes to go two miles home. So, I understand that and that's what ACHD's report says is you just -- city, if you are going to approve something here just be prepared to wait longer and I think we all recognize that. Where ACHD is concerned is if these improvements -- or that extra stacking lane happens we are queuing up more cars closer to the intersection. So, my conversations with ACHD is they would prefer to have the ability, if that -- if they keep that a single lane at the Waltman intersection, it would force cars potentially to go far deeper into Meridian and, then, turn left onto Corporate Drive or Central and, then, circle back from behind those apartments on Corporate and drop down in. That's why it's so critical that we get Waltman widened and that Corporate Drive extension done with this project and Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 31 of 36 that's why ACHD said, yes, this -- and the city said, yes, we need this now, because that's the most critical piece right now is to get that built and get the -- all those roads extended and improved. So, that was the -- the intent -- the discussion that I had with -- with Mindy today is like even if we put it in the DA to say do it at a later date can you get behind this and she said, no, we don't want to lose that functionality of the interchange that the applicant testified to. So, that's really their rationale is they really feel like it will degrade how that -- that SPUI -- or at least that interchange functions and they don't want to make it any worse. So, it's -- it really -- and that's why we even brought up to you in the staff report tonight. Are you willing to wait for other things to happen before too much development occurs on the site. Example Linder Road overpass. And we know that's -- that's a fair -- that's a stretch with this particular application, because they do have some sort of entitlement on it, but we thought if the applicant was willing to work with us and hold off on some of those -- some of that intensification that we could possibly continue to work on solutions as this project continues -- continues to progress through the city's process. Smith: Thank you. That actually answered some -- my other question for you. The only question that I have remaining, I guess, is for Becky on -- and it's going to kind of bring up the issue we already talked about that you mentioned around phasing, et cetera. I think for me the -- the main concern right now -- I tend to actually -- this probably is one of the better plans that we could have for this kind of area, but I really am concerned about the timing and especially relative to that Linder overpass. I understand the concerns about whether it's necessary or not, whether it might hinder -- I know for -- for the Hawkins side of things it's a little bit more of an issue. Question for you, then, regarding occupancy of maybe the multi-family housing. Would that be possible to include in a DA, you know, requirement of waiting for that Linder overpass. I guess what I'm trying to get at is anything we can do to just kind of soften things a little bit, maybe just notch down the impact until that Linder overpass is done -- is completed. Are there any thought -- I mean during testimony haven't had time to think over it. Are there any kind of thoughts around how we can make that work? McKay; Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Becky McKay. I did go through that condition. The -- the way staff -- because they highlighted it in the staff report and I said if -- if -- if asked directly by the Commission, you know, would -- would you agree to, you know, not -- holding off on the multi-family component and, you know, their comment was that, you know, they -- they need to be able to make the project progress. Obviously it's very heavy front loaded and they said they would be reluctant to -- to be saddled with that type of condition. Now, if it's occupancies and not like final, you know -- then, that pushes that -- you know, when, that -- those units come online further out, you know, because, realistically, if this is approved by the end of the year, we will be in design for a year, then, the first phase comes online, then, the next year you start infrastructure on the second phase and -- I mean, you know, pretty soon before you know it we are into 2026 and 2027. That's -- logistically that's kind of how it works. Smith: Yeah. But my main concern, to be clear is, again, regarding the necessity versus detriment is, you know, we talked about, you know, what if market conditions Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 32 of 36 shift, et cetera. What if for some reason Linder gets delayed or what if, you know, things go great and you are ahead of build schedule, you know, considering all these other kind of these -- these marginal cases, what my main concern is -- and it seems like this might not be feasible with the retail side, if you are just kind of not amenable to that, but maybe we can reach something on the residential side to, you know, kind of just ensure that there is a little bit more peace of mind around, you know, us not -- you know, there is going to be some strain in the interim while -- while Linder overpass is being constructed and there is going to be some strain regardless until ACHD can kind of figure this out, whether that development is there or not, but how can we reduce the impacts where possible is kind of my concern. If we can have some peace of mind around, you know, if things get delayed or ahead -- behind schedule, et cetera, how can we make sure that, you know, that worst case scenario doesn't happen. McKay: Yeah. I get it and I guess I would be reluctant -- I don't -- I'm not authorized, based on the question I asked them and the answer I received, I'm not authorized to make a commitment that, you know, we are only going to build phase one until the Linder overpass is -- is completed. I'm not authorized to say that. Obviously, you know, the Commission has to understand that when we are putting out millions of dollars in improvements off site and on-site improvements and, then, we are -- we have to stop, then, you lose momentum in a project for marketing and so forth. Logistically, do I think that everything's going to fall into place in the way that will match up with that overpass construction? I think logistically it will. But I can't make that commitment on part of my client, because I was not authorized to do that, sir. But, obviously, it's the purview of the Commission and the Council in what they want to stipulate. Thank you. Smith: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Any other Commissioners have any additional questions? No? All right. Hearing none, I would -- can I get a motion to close the public hearing on items H-2021-0099. I think I got that. And H-2023-0048. If we can get a motion on that. Rivera: So moved. Stoddard: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. Can I -- all those in favor, please, say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. Smith: So, discussion? I will kind of start off. Starman: Mr. Chairman, two -- two quick housekeeping items -- Smith: Yes. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 33 of 36 Starman: -- with your permission. One is I wanted to -- for the Commission as a whole, the recommendation both from the city attorney's office and from the planning staff would be as you get to the point of making a decision and recommendation to the City Council, we would recommend that the Commission first take up the Hawkins Company project, because that includes an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that also incorporates Tanner Creek. So, it would be logical for the Commission to deal with that topic first as you take action and, then, do Tanner Creek second. So, that -- that would be the recommendation in terms of order and I just wanted for -- for the Commission, but mostly for the public and the record, as we have stated earlier, Commissioner Lorcher has recused herself, so we have three Commissioners acting on this item and just for a base general -- still on the same page, this requires a majority of those voting on the items. A two-one vote would carry a motion. Obviously, a three-oh vote would carry a motion as well. But stated differently, two affirmative votes is required to pass a motion. Smith: Thank you. Yeah. So, like I said, I will -- I will kind of lead off on just my thoughts is -- I mean I think it's kind of been made clear throughout some of the discussion and questioning. I do tend to think that this is -- you know, given what these developers or future developers have the right to do, it seems like this is -- this is probably near as good as -- as a developer is going to get in this area and, you know, save for this -- this sitting kind of dormant forever, I don't really know what this looks like in a way that looks better than this. My main concern, like I said, is -- really around timing is -- I think we kind of worked through this and to work -- we are going to start with Hawkins first, but I will speak to Tanner Creek as well for this kind of portion -- that it seems like we kind of reached somewhat of an agreement on the stub driveway issue. The -- the pedestrian amenities versus street connectivity issue, it seems like Council can -- can grant a waiver and so that can be part of a recommendation if anyone wants to include that in the motion. My main thought at the moment regarding timing and regarding requests, especially for the Tanner Creek Subdivision is I believe -- just want to make sure. Yes. Regarding Tanner Creek is the requirement at Linder -- my thought is I wouldn't mind seeing in a -- any motion something that errors on the side of including that request that that phrasing be there and that could be a discussion point for Council. The applicants can -- can speak to the owners that they are representing to maybe kind of formulate whether they can find something to make that workable or if they have a compelling agreement -- compelling argument for Council. But I would like to maybe see that personally, knowing that I can't make that motion, I would like to maybe see that in there personally as a preference. But that's kind of where my head is at the moment. It seems like this in-fill being what it is, especially right off of, you know, a freeway entrance -- it's tough and it does seem though that this is a really good faith attempt to meet all those requirements that Council made -- those recommendations Council made on remand and I think that this is a good faith effort by developers in -- and, yeah, regardless of -- not regardless, but even considering some of the issues that this maybe creates or exacerbates in some cases, I think net -- especially in the long- term future for Meridian this seems to be a solid project that I would support. Any other Commissioners have any thoughts, concerns, motions, et cetera? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 34 of 36 Stoddard: I actually agree with -- Smith: Commissioner Rivera, do you have any thoughts on this or any -- would you like to express anything? Rivera: Yeah. It's -- it's a -- it's a tough project at a -- at a tough location. I appreciate the developers putting in the effort to -- to make the best accommodations possible for the -- for the road and under the constraints of that -- of that location. Overall I understand -- I mean I -- I use that intersection on my commute in the morning and in the evening. It's definitely congested. But I also appreciate the -- the project going to your -- your statements, Commissioner Smith, on -- before that -- that it's for the City of Meridian, too, for that -- that project to go there, since it's a well thought out project. I wish I -- it's a lot of information in two hours to digest. That's -- that's -- that's tough. I wish I had more from the ACHD side to have been able to review. But overall I look -- I support the project. But, yeah, that's what I have to say right now. Starman: One last clarifying comment. I just want to go back. You made a comment -- you made a remark maybe three or four minutes ago and I have heard this from others as well. I just wanted to clarify. It is certainly sort of custom and protocol that the chairperson allows other Commissioners to make motions and second and so forth. I just wanted to just say from a legal perspective there is no prohibition against the chairperson making a motion or certainly no prohibition on voting on items for sure. But I do think there is a little bit of misunderstanding that the chairperson is like legally prohibited from making a motion. That is not the case. It's more for custom and protocol. But when you have a small commission like we do tonight, that's something you could consider. Smith: Thank you very much, sir. I appreciate that. Given that -- and, again, with the knowledge that we are going to be moving on the Hawkins application first, does anyone have any additional comments or a motion that they would like to throw out? I might hand -- let's see. So, with Hawkins -- sorry. Let me make sure I'm -- have all my T's crossed and I's dotted. I'm sorry. So -- yeah. Okay. Yes. Allen: Excuse me. If I may. I am not sure that on this application I mentioned staffs request to modify DA provision A-1-1 to require the extension of Corporate Drive to be constructed as required by ACHD. I know I did with Tanner Creek and I'm not sure if I did with this application. So, if you could also consider staff's request on that, please. Thank you. Smith: Could you say -- you say DA -- DA provision A-1-1? Allen: Yes. To require the extension of Corporate to be constructed as required by ACHD. That was where staff had recommended a complete street section and there is not -- there is not enough right of way for that. Thank you. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 35 of 36 Smith: All right. I will try my hand and you all can let me know if I missed anything. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File No. H-2021-0099 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 2nd, 2023, with the following modifications: To modify the DA Section A-1-1 to require an extension of Corporate to be completed up to ACHD requirements and -- sorry. I have this mixed up. To grant a waiver for the street connectivity requirements under UDC and, then, to -- instead of requiring a stub driveway to the abutting property, allow a CDA with a requirement to allow the property owner to -- or the future property owner to enter the Hawkins property in order to construct improvements. Stoddard: Second. Smith: I have a motion. Any second? Any -- or I have -- all those in favor say aye. None opposed. The motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE RECUSE. THREE ABSENT. Smith: All right. As for Item No. H-2023-0048, is there any additional discussion? Are there any motions, etcetera? Stoddard: No discussion from me. Smith: All right. I will try my hand at motion number two here. After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend to the City Council File No. H -- want a clarification. Is this 2023 or 2022? There are different numbers here. Two? Okay. I move to recommend approval to City Council of File No. H-2022-0048 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 2nd, 2023, with the following modifications: To also modify the development agreement, Section A-1-1 to require the extension of Corporate to be completed per ACHD requirements and to include a provision requiring that Linder -- the Linder overpass be completed prior to occupancy of the multi-family housing development. Rivera: So moved -- I second. Smith: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, please, say aye. Any opposed? None opposed. I guess that motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE RECUSE. THREE ABSENT. Smith: It is at this time that I think we can grab Commissioner Lorcher to come back in I believe. Starman: Madam Clerk, would you mind asking Commissioner Lorcher to join us? Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission November 2,2023 Page 36 of 36 Smith: And as part of that I would like to -- I don't know what the official word is, but the chairmanship is now yours again. Yeah. Lorcher: Back in the room. So, are we going for one more motion? Smith: I do believe we are. Lorcher: All right. One more motion for the evening. Smith: Madam Chair, I move to adjourn. Lorcher: Do I have a second? Is that a second? Stoddard: Second. Lorcher: Okay. All those in favor to adjourn say aye. Any opposed? Meeting adjourned. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:28 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 11-16-2023 Andy Seal Chair ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the October 19, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission October 19,2023 Page 4 of 4 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 11 12 I 2023 ANDREW SEAL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Changes to Agenda: Item #2: Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) Application(s):  Annexation  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 27.59 acres of land, zoned RUT, located at 820 S. Black Cat Road. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Employment (ME) Summary of Request: Annexation is requested of 33.89-acres from RUT to the M-E zoning district as shown on the Annexation description. A conceptual development plan and elevations are included that show how the site is anticipated to develop. The development abuts Mixed Employment designated land to the east and borders I-84 to the south. This development is proposed to have access to a collector street as desired. Medium-high-density residential uses are proposed to the north and light industrial to the west. Allowed uses in the M-E district consist of offices, medical centers, research and development facilities, and light industrial uses with ancillary support services. This area is intended to develop with flex uses of approximately 356,000 s.f., encompassing various potential uses like office, light industrial operations, and research and development components such as distribution and light manufacturing. Additionally, 2.047 acres of the site are earmarked for future commercial development. The inclusion of loading docks on the elevations for the proposed flex buildings implies that all of the intended uses are primarily related to distribution/warehousing, which requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the M-E zoning district. Furthermore, Staff recommends that several of the buildings along the collector street incorporate more storefronts and reduce the number of roll-up doors to minimize the prevalence for this particular type of use. The proposed preliminary plat consists of 6 building lots on 27.59-acres of land in the M-E zoning districts for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. The subdivision is proposed to develop in three (3) phases as shown on the phasing plan. Staff recommends that the collector street (Vanguard Way) be constructed prior to development commencing on the property. Additionally, the first phase of development should encompass the construction of both the 10’ detached sidewalks along S. Black Cat Road and Vanguard Way including the entire street buffers. The second phase of development should encompass the completion of the remaining 10-foot pathway along the I-84 Interstate. Furthermore, the proposed plat is currently missing lot the number for the commercial lot. Staff recommends that the Applicant revise the plat to include the lot number of the future commercial lot and depict the required landscape buffers within an easement or common lot on the plat. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: According to GIS imagery, there is an existing home and other historic outbuildings adjacent to Black Cat Road that will be removed upon development of the Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. During the pre-application meeting, Staff encouraged them to incorporate and preserve the historic structure as a part of the development. Staff recommends that the Applicant preserve some elements of the existing use/historic buildings; and coordinate with the Historic Preservation Commission. As part of the proposed first phase of development, all existing structures that do not conform to the district’s setbacks must be removed, except for those agreed upon for historic preservation. Dimensional Standards: Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the M-E zoning district in UDC Table 11-2B-3, as applicable. The proposed preliminary plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district. 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. The proposed subdivision appears to comply with these standards. Access (UDC 11-3A-3) Access is proposed to be provided from the northern boundary of the site from the extension of Vanguard Way to Black Cat Road to the west. Vanguard Way is designed as a collector street in accordance with the Master Street Map and the Transportation System Map in the TMISAP. A driveway is proposed to the adjacent property to the east for future extension. Additionally, the Applicant has proposed temporary fire access directly off of Black Cat Road located on the future commercial pad site intended to be built with Phase 3. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall record a cross-access/ingress-egress easement to adjoining property to the east \[S1215427850\] and submit copy of said easement to the Planning Division in accordance with the provisions of UDC 11-3A-3A2. Direct access via S. Black Cat Road is prohibited. Streets: Vanguard Way should be constructed in accord with Street Section C (major collector street) in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan (TMISAP), which requires (2) 11-foot travel lanes, 6-foot bike lanes, 8-foot parkways with streetlights at a pedestrian scale and minimum 6-foot wide detached sidewalks. The Applicant proposes a modification of the street section to include 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/pathways in lieu of on-street bike lanes, which is required by ACHD and as set forth in the Meridian Master Pathways Plan. All streets should be constructed as complete streets as defined in the TMISAP (see pg. 3-19 & 3-20). Prior to submitting the final plat for approval, the Applicant shall collaborate with the property owner to the north and east to construct Vanguard Way and deed the right-of-way to ACHD. The Applicant should ensure that the intersection of Vanguard Way and S. Black Road aligns with the entrance of the Black Cat Industrial projects on the west side of S. Black Cat Road. The Applicant is proposing three curb cuts off of Vanguard Way, a planned collector street in the TMISAP. In accordance with UDC 11-3A-3 (Access to streets), multiple accesses off an arterial and/or collector roadway shall be restricted. In light of this, Staff recommends that the Applicant remove the curb cut on the east side of the property and instead utilize the proposed access stubbed to the property to the east for future shared access. The Applicant should also collaborate with the property owner to the east to ensure the most suitable alignment between the two sites. Additionally, the Applicant should coordinate with the property owner to the north to ensure that the entrances of both the northern subdivision and the second entrance to this site are directly aligned. Pathways (UDC 11-3A-8): Ten (10) foot-wide multi-use pathways are proposed on the site in accordance with the Pathways Master Plan. One segment follows Vanguard Way across the northern portion of this site; one segment runs along the southern boundary within the street buffer along I- 84; and another segment runs along the west side of the site adjacent to S. Black Cat Road. The Applicant has included the pathways on the plans; however, the pathway widths are not indicated on the plans to determine if they are consistent with the UDC. In accordance with the Park’s Department and Pathways Master Plan, the Applicant shall incorporate radius curves between pathway segments to avoid right angles (except at Vanguard); a detached multi-use pathway should be integrated along Vanguard Way. Furthermore, it is recommended that the southern pathway stretch be relocated outside of the ITD/I-84 easement. A 14-foot wide public use easement for all multi-use pathways shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to submittal for City Engineer’s signature on the final plat(s). If the pathway will be located entirely within the right-of-way, a public pedestrian easement is not needed. Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. A 5’ wide landscape strip is required on both sides of the pathway planted with a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover. Staff recommends the Applicant revise the plat and landscape plans to include the dimensions of the pathway, incorporate radius curves, relocate the pathway outside of the ITD/I-84 easement, and landscape both sides of the pathway in accordance with the UDC. Sidewalks & Pedestrian Walkways (UDC 11-3A-17 & UDC 11-3A-19.B.4): The UDC requires minimum 5-foot wide sidewalks to be provided adjacent to all streets with detached sidewalks along collector streets and attached or detached sidewalks along local streets. However, the guidelines in the TMISAP for the collector street sections (i.e. C) depict 6-foot wide sidewalks, which should be provided within the development at a minimum. Staff recommends that the Applicant incorporate a 6-foot pedestrian walkway (as required by the TMISP guidelines) from the main pathway along Vanguard Way, connecting to one of the buildings in Phase 1, and extending the sidewalk to reach each building for enhanced pedestrian connectivity within the commercial development in accordance with UDC 11-3A-19. Sidewalks, walkways, and pathways should include a dedicated crosswalk at the intersection of S. Black Cat Road with changes in color, markings, materials, texture and/or surface to distinguish them from the surrounding pavement as set forth in the TMISAP. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): Street buffers are required to be provided as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7. A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer is required along all arterial streets (i.e. S. Black Cat Road) in commercial districts. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along all collector streets (i.e. Vanguard Way) – the buffer may be placed in an easement rather than a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. A minimum 50-foot wide street buffer is required along I-84, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3, which requires a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover. A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Black Cat Road, an arterial street. However, part of the buffer adjacent to the 2.04 acre “future commercial” pad does not look to be 25-feet wide. Additionally, the 50-foot required buffer adjacent to I-84 does not depict 50-feet of landscaping as required by UDC Table 11-2B-3. The Applicant has included the landscape buffers on the plans; however, the buffer width along S. Black Cat Road is not indicated on the plans to determine if it is consistent with the UDC. Staff recommends the Applicant revise the plat and landscape plans to accurately depict the dimensions of the landscape buffers along S. Black Car Road and I-84 on the plans. The Applicant should revise the landscape plan to reflect Landscaping within the required buffers in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7; which requires a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover. During the pre-application meeting, Staff conveyed to the Applicant that, in line with the TMISAP guidelines, the Applicant should incorporate a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients (may include an area for food trucks, bike storage, outdoor meeting space, etc.) in their design. Staff recommends removing one building and re-orientating the central building to face horizontally along Vanguard Way, creating space for the development of a central plaza. Parking lot: Interior parking lot landscaping is required in the parking lot per the standards in UDC 11-3B-8C.2. No linear grouping of parking spaces shall exceed twelve (12) in a row, without an internal planter island. The planter island shall run the length of the parking space and may be reduced by two (2) feet to allow for improved vehicular maneuvering. Each interior planter that serves a single row of parking spaces shall be landscaped with at least one (1) tree and shall be covered with low shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover. Each interior planter that serves a double row of parking spaces shall have at least two (2) trees and shall be covered with low shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover. Trees shall be centered within the planters and provide urban canopy. There are multiple planters that do not contain trees as indicated above due to lighting and easements. Moreover, the Applicant should add landscaping planters adjacent to the buildings between the sidewalks to provide an enhanced pedestrian scale element, as the current design seems to feature excessive asphalt. Furthermore, as mentioned above, the Applicant has the option to include a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients as a means to address this requirement. To improve the integration of this property with the neighboring M-E zoned property to the east, Staff recommends that the Applicant consider removing the entire landscape buffer along the eastern side and align parking accordingly with the adjacent property owner. This would facilitate shared access to the east and improve integration with the eastern property. Staff recommends that Applicant submit revised plans incorporating the aforementioned changes 15 days prior to the City Council Hearing. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. The Applicant is proposing a 6-foot solid vinyl fence along the west property line adjacent to the pathway and the ACHD drainage swale. The proposed vinyl fencing abutting the pathway obstructs the view of the pathway and landscape buffer from S. Black Cat Road. Therefore, Staff recommends removing the fencing or providing an open vision wrought iron fence. Parking: Off-street vehicle parking is required for the proposed commercial subdivision as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6.B. Based on approximately 362,000 square feet of proposed floor space, a minimum of 724 off-street spaces are required; a total of 727 off-street parking spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. Based on 727 parking spaces proposed, a minimum of 29 bicycle spaces are required to be provided; none are proposed. Bicycle parking facilities should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bike racks should be provided as close as possible to each building entrance totaling 29 spaces. The parking stall count and bicycle parking facilities will be analyzed with the future CZC application submittals. Building Elevations (UDC 11-3A-19 | Architectural Standards Manual (ASM) | TMISAP): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed flex buildings and light industrial building as shown in Section VII.F. Building materials consist of horizontal metal or Hardie plank siding in white, wood colors; stucco in dark and light gray colors; metal awnings; and gray wrapped cornice moulding. Conceptual elevations were not submitted for the 2.04-acre pad site designated for future commercial use. Future elevations for this pad site should incorporate similar design elements consistent with those of the other proposed buildings in this development. The proposed conceptual elevations are not approved. The conceptual elevations should include more design enhancement on the north-facing side along Vanguard Way compared to the current proposal. As previously mentioned, Staff recommends removal of one building and reorientation of the central building to have its design elements facing horizontally along Vanguard Way, thereby highlighting the building’s most appealing features to the roadway. Final design must comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM) and the design guidelines in the TMISAP for the Commercial designation (see the matrix for Application of the Design Elements on pg. 3-49). A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the site and building design prior to submittal of building permit applications. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval - Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and preliminary plat per the conditions and findings in the Staff Report. Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2023-0045, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 2, 2023, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2023- 0045, as presented during the hearing on November 2, 2023, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2023-0045 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Item #3: \[Project name\] (\[file #\]) Application(s):  Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of \[#\] acres of land, zoned \[district\], located at \[address/general location\]. History: \[if applicable\] Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: \[details\] Summary of Request: \[details\] Written Testimony: \[name(s)\] - \[issue(s)\] Staff Recommendation: \[Approval/Denial\] Why? \[i.e. what is unique/premier (Comp. Plan policies/goals), meets minimum requirements or not, process comments/story\] Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number \[#\], as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of \[date\], with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number \[#\], as presented during the hearing on \[date\], for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number \[#\] to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Item #4: \[Project name\] (\[file #\]) Application(s):  Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of \[#\] acres of land, zoned \[district\], located at \[address/general location\]. History: \[if applicable\] Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: \[details\] Summary of Request: \[details\] Written Testimony: \[name(s)\] - \[issue(s)\] Staff Recommendation: \[Approval/Denial\] Why? \[i.e. what is unique/premier (Comp. Plan policies/goals), meets minimum requirements or not, process comments/story\] Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number \[#\], as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of \[date\], with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number \[#\], as presented during the hearing on \[date\], for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number \[#\] to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 2, 2023 Item #2: AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP & Preliminary Plat-Crossing Subdivision Farmstone Annexation & Preliminary Plat Legal Descriptions & Maps Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan Temporary Fire Access Conceptual Elevations Item #3: I AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment & Annexation 84 & Meridian Road - Comprehensive Plan Annexation ExhibitFuture Land Use Map Amendment Item #4: Tanner Creek AERIAL MAPZONING MAPFUTURE LAND USE MAP Development Agreement Modification, Rezone, Preliminary Plat & Conditional Use Permit Existing Conceptual Development Plans Rezone ExhibitPreliminary Plat/Landscape Plan Landscape Plan & Berm Details w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering, located at 820 S. Black Cat Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0045 A. Request: Annexation of 33.893 acres of land from RUT to the M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 buildable lots on 27.59 acres of land in the proposed M-E (Mixed Employment) zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : November 2s 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 2 PROJECT NAME : Farmstone Crossing Subdivision ( W2023 - 0045 ) 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 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 i STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING November 2,2023 Legend DATE: aProject Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner -- --- 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Farmstone Crossing Subdivision AZ, PP H-2023-0045 LOCATION: 820 S. Black Cat Road in the Northwest a P 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, - - T.3N. R.1 W. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted an application for the following: • Annexation of 33.893 acres of land from RUT to the M-E(Mixed Employment)zoning district. • Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots on 27.466-acres of land in the M-E zoning districts for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 33.893 acres overall Existing/Proposed Zoning RUT in Ada County;M-E(Mixed Employment) Future Land Use Designation Mixed Employment(ME) Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/agricultural land Proposed Land Use(s) light industrial,commercial/office,research and development,and other uses. Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 6 buildable lots Phasing Plan(#of phases) 1 3 phases(plat) Number of Residential Units(type NA of units) Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 7/06/2023 attendees: Page 1 Description Details Page History(previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description Details P . Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action No. A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was submitted. es/no Access Access is proposed from the new collector road(Vanguard Way) (Arterial/Collectors/State that connects to Black Cat Road(arterial road).Vanguard Way Hwy/Local)(Existing and will be constructed prior to development commencing on the Proposed) property. Traffic Level of Service Condition Area Roadways Traffic Countt is based on Vehicles per hour(vph) Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service Franklin Road None Principal Arterial 565 Better than"E" Black Cat Road 396-feet Minor Arterial 544 Better than"E" 'Acceptable level of service for a five-lane principal arterial is"E"(1,780 vph). 'Acceptable level of service for atwo-lane minor arterial is"E"(575 vph). Stub Cross access with BVA's development to the east Street/Interconnectivity/Cron s Access Existing Road Network Black Cat Road&Franklin Road Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None Buffers Proposed Road Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): Improvements • Franklin Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from McDermott Road to Black Cat Road with the design year in 2026 and the construction date has not been determined. • The intersection of Franklin Road and McDermott Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be reconstructed as a single-lane expandable roundabout. There is no design year or construction year,and this project requires coordination with the Nampa Highway District. • Black Cat Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 54anes from Franklin Road to Overland Road between 2036 and 2040. Funding for ITD's portion is not included with this project. Fire Service • Distance to Fire 2 miles Station • Fire Response Time This project currently falls on an area where we don't have a total response times that meet NFPA 1710 standards or current City of Meridian adopted standards. The first due station is Fire Station 2. This fire station is approximately 3.5 miles from the project. • Resource Reliability 82%-does meet the target goal of 80%or greater • Risk Identification 3—current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project. Risk factors include fire fighting in large commercial warehouses. This entails a great risk for the occupants as well ad firs responders. • Accessibility Project meets all required access,road widths and turnaround. • Special/resource In the event of a hazmat event,there will need to be mutual aid needs required for the development. In the event of a structure fire an additional truck company will be required,This will require additional time delays as a second truck company may not be available in the City. Page 2 Description Details P . • Water Supply Water supply for this proposed development required 4750 gallons per minute for two hours. • Other Resources Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent with WW Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/concerns • Flow is committed • See Public Works Site Specific Conditions in Section VILB Water • Distance to Water Water available on-site Services • Pressure Zone 2 • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's _ • Water Quality None Concerns • Project Consistent Yes with Water Master I Plan • Impacts/Concerns • If a well is located on the site it must be abandoned per regulatory requirements and proof of abandonment must be provided to the City. • Each phase of the development will need to be modeled to verify minimum fire flow pressure is maintained. • 12"water main in Vanguard needs to be on the north side of the road,currently shown in the center of the road. • See Public Works Site Specific Conditions in Section VIII.B Page 3 - • - FRAN•KLIN�r - ' -' "' ' FRANKL-IN F- U • D - � v v �j�•n � ®s��� Qp �'ra ONfRL-AND E' 111, 1111� �. G�96aG3 = _ ; __ _ - 4R9Q �_ ►/ . - . . FRANKIL- ."- - lu 84,$ % 84 I, _���1Q,I,,.�im I��IIf, �� \■�f� \�/��� , ���`1�I���,.A�,I'�II�, ���j�\■��� \�►��I �C���*f'��� I��11��, �i��� �C���T�'��ir'ni �i■i ii�i �I � O�/ERL-AND, =■�, ��� O�/�AN,D� Do • . . C. Representative: III.SHAWN BROWNLEE,TRILOGY DEVELOPMENT NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 10/17/2023 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 500 feet 10/14/2023 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 10/20/2023 Nextdoor posting 10/16/2023 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan and Ten Mile Interchange Specif1 Area Plan) Land Use: The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan designates the 20.5+/-acres as Mixed Employment(ME). ME: The purpose of ME designated areas is to encourage a diversity of compatible land uses that may include a mixture of office,research and specialized employment areas,light industrial including manufacturing and assembly,and other miscellaneous uses. These areas generally do not include retail and consumer service uses serving the wider community. However, a small amount of retail and service establishments,primarily serving employees and users of the ME areas or nearby industrial areas,are allowed.ME areas should provide a variety of flexible sites for small,local or start-up businesses, as well as sites for large national or regional enterprises.ME areas should be designed to encourage multimodal travel and convenient circulation to supporting uses located within the area. It's anticipated that buildings will range in height from 1-2 stories,have total floor areas of 42,560- 185,760 square feet, and that FAR will not exceed 0.75. The ME designated area is intended to develop with a mix of flex uses of approximately 362,000 s.£, which may include office, light industrial, along with research and development components and/or distribution and light manufacturing. Building heights will range from 1 to 2 stories.Furthermore, the Applicant has not presented a proposed use or conceptual building elevations for the pad site labeled `future commercial': In light of this,Staff recommends that any use intended for this pad site complies with the uses listed in Allowed Use Table 11-2B-2 for the ME zoning district. This area is adjacent to Mixed Employment designated land on the east, light industrial to the west,l-84 to the south, and RUT to the north proposed to be annexed as medium-high density residential. This site will have access to a collector street as desired. The proposed M-E zoning encompasses the entire 27.466 acres that is currently designated ME on the FLUM -See Pg. 3-11 in the TMISAP for more information on the ME designation (see cut sheet below). Page 5 Page I ME1 MIXED EMPLOYMENT (ME) _ TEH MILE SSE nac PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS Map Cater 17 28mind C4--J C-G ITN-C J M-E sample use(s) D Office,research&development,information&light ndustriA daycare,and ancillary comwnierrce retail ,5,,,eral D Recommended FAR 075 or more Scandards :1 Ileight2lSWHesmaxinum 7 Design Review required;see Architectural Standards Manual 7 Comply with Pathways Master Plan Design :1 'fate Proposed development,including land uses and actinides,to adjacent and surounding uses and pubic C tiara CSerisLits spaces as appropriate tm maintain compatibility and establish the cmntnuity of the planned urban form and cha ratter. 7 Coordinate routes,placement of facities,and infrastructure improvements with the appropriate transportation authorides and any adopted or accepted long-range prans. 7 Locate buildings in establish an appropriate development character that enhances the compatibility and atlracWeness Gf the site,buildings,and surrounding uses. 7 Design surface parking as an integrated and attrac iv element of the built eminn ent that promotes Pedestrian comfort and safety and adds tm the aesthetic character of developments,in addition to accommodating vehicular uses. 7 Use parking srra y that includes one ora combination of the following souctured parking,onstreet Parking,inegreted small parking areas,anal or shared parking as an ahematiue to general surface pariutg. 7 Building design should enhance public and urban spaces,articulate an urban form,and provide human and pedestrian scale. Site lPwMrn - IIII. A Id- liia-Thu nfmmaiin is a w-1 mf At Tea l0e licinlamle Sped Jim Ili aid City mf Ileridim fnopmL-sin%an Hwr me drmi di—in iv rnmplem iniumadni. T s queWn?Cart-t the PUnning 6ukrn at 33 E Eodtl 7 PA'4 Sum SQ Hlkll•M R%42 u MAAUSU Page 6 MIXED EMPLOYMENT (ME) PAyel M1.2 TEN MILE SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS PWrnnecrt Heights Yertiwl Farm L.,body,8 T,, 20.�.%Fdvm.Siiqla plane wall—ir—m diestanm=building height AdditeDnall Cut Shea References Page 9 Facades 8 Heights WC.2 Bass Ddy.&Tp BFC.3 '4 R-9,-R -Pitched UCA P Signis&Public Art SGN.1 Mud Employment urtis should be designed u IDwr dmir suburba-style d1m5oprnmis.Design ind aevelop-mene standards art recommended rhm wuI6 help so make rl wbpnnenu Mort 11U31M,engagging and MR151113e places(Ten Mile In terhanb_Specrlic Area Plan. 0 0 Quctraem CttYO.t tle Punni rig Dvtvn at 33 E�d�V k5—5uft 10Z Hendq m83bii a 1C19.8B1.M3 Transportation: The Transportation System Map in the TMISA-P depicts a collector street through this site that connects to S.Black Cat Rd. an adjacent arterial street. The collector street network depicted on the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the Transportation System Map(see pg. 3-18 in the TMISAP). The Street Section Map depicts Vanguard(major collector) as being appropriate to provide access from adjacent arterial streets (i.e. Black Cat,Franklin&Ten Mile Roads) into the employment area. Streetlights should be located in the tree lawn area and should be of a pedestrian scale. Page 7 ti e lace Street Section C Cedrlo-whdhranu The collector street(i.e.Vanguard Way)in the commercial mixed-use area of the development should be constructed in accord with this street section with the following exceptions as required by ACHD: (3)travel lanes instead of(2); and 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/pathways instead of 6-foot wide detached sidewalks in lieu of on-street bike lanes. Design: The TMISAP emphasizes the quality of the built environment and includes recommendations on the location, scale, form,height and design quality of public and private buildings in the form of building placement, orientation, and massing;types and design treatments for building frontages; as well as recommendations for the incorporation of art in public and private projects. The design elements in the Plan are intended to serve as the basic framework for any given project within the Ten Mile Area. The primary components that the design elements address include: architecture and cultural heritage;building placement whereby build-to lines are identified; heights and step backs;the definition of a base,body and top; and frontage types. The proposed development should be designed in the accord with the TMISAP(see pgs.3-31 thru 3-51). See the Application of the Design Elements table on pg.3-49 to determine specific design element requirements according to the associated FLUM designation.Future development applications should include the applicable design elements. Comprehensive Plan Policies: The following Comprehensive Plan Policies are applicable to this development: • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services." (3.03.03F) City water and sewer service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • Focus on developing industries that exceed the living wage, such as technology,healthcare and other similar industries. (2.06.01E) The TMISAP designates the subject property for mixed employment. These areas are intended to capture full economic advantage of the Ten Mile interchange to enhance the long-term fiscal health of the City of Meridian and the Treasure Valley. The proposed annexation and zoning this area to M-E will result in the creation ofprimary jobs as anticipated by the Plan. • "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) Several multi-use pathway segments are proposed within this development for interconnectivity between the residential and commercial and employment portions of the Page 8 development and open space and site amenity areas. • "Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas." (3.06.02C) The proposed commercial,flex space, light industrial with manufacturing, and office should provide supportive uses for the proposed employment area. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development." (3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems; services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • Evaluate development proposals based on consistency with the vision as well as physical, social,economic, environmental, and aesthetic criteria. (3.01.011)) The TMISAP vision for this area is an employment-generating center that buffers the community from I-84 and the future extension of Highway 16, and serves the employment areas with easy access to markets, high-speed transportation facilities, and employees across the Treasure Valley. The TMISAP incorporates specific design standards for this area to create a sense ofplace and a unique identity. In line with this vision, the proposed annexation and zoning to M-E are intended to accommodate four(4)Flex space building lots, one (1) light industrial building lot, and one (1) commercial lot, all of which are consistent with the overall vision and the design principles for this area. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available to this site and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. The emergency response times for Police Dept. and Fire Dept. meets the established goals. • "Require appropriate landscaping,buffers,and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors(setback,vegetation, low walls,berms, etc.)."(3.07.01C) A 50 foot wide landscaped street buffer is required to be provided along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to I-84. • "Encourage the integration of public art as an integrated component with new development." (5.03.01B) • The Applicant has not proposed integration of any public art. Nevertheless, Staff recommends that the Applicant consider displaying a plaque for one of the historic structures currently residing on the site • 'Coordinate with the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission to recommend use, restoration, and preservation of historical structures and sites throughout Meridian. "(02.02A) • "Stimulate private and public investment in the restoration and preservation of historic buildings,outdoor spaces, and natural historical features."(5.02.02D) • "Support the efforts of the Historic Preservation Commission to foster preservation and conservation."(5.02.02E) Page 9 • "Develop policies to preserve and protect or document and memorialize historic and culturally significant structures and sites."(5.02.02J) Encompassing the aforementioned policies, there are currently multiple historic buildings situated on this site. Staff recommends that the Applicant preserve certain elements of the existing use/historic buildings and coordinate with the Historic Preservation Commission. • "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 proposed as required with this development. In summary, Staff believes the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan for this area per the analysis above. V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS (UDC A. Annexation and Zoning(AZ): Annexation is requested of 33.89-acres from RUT to the M-E zoning district as shown on the Annexation description and Exhibit in Section VII.B. A conceptual development plan and elevations are included in Section VII.D that shows how the site is anticipated to develop. The development abuts Mixed Employment designated land to the east and borders 1-84 to the south. This development is proposed to have access to a collector street as desired. Medium- high-density residential uses are proposed to the north and light industrial to the west. Allowed uses in the M-E district consist of offices,medical centers,research and development facilities, and light industrial uses with ancillary support services. This area is intended to develop with flex uses of approximately 356,000 s.f., encompassing various potential uses like office,light industrial operations, and research and development components such as distribution and light manufacturing.Additionally,2.047 acres of the site are earmarked for future commercial development. 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 VIII.A. Proposed Use Analysis: A variety of uses are proposed including office, commercial, flex space,light industrial,research and development,and other uses; see UDC Table 11-2B-2 for allowed uses in the applicable zoning districts. Compliance with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 is required, as applicable. The inclusion of loading docks on the elevations for the proposed flex buildings implies that all of the intended uses are primarily related to distribution/warehousing,which requires a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)in the M-E zoning district. Furthermore, Staff recommends that several of the buildings along the collector street incorporate more storefronts and reduce the number of roll-up doors to minimize the prevalence for this particular type of use. The proposed zoning and uses are generally consistent with the associated FLUM designations as discussed above in Section IV. Page 10 B. Preliminary Plat(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 6 building lots on 27.59-acres of land in the M-E zoning districts for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. The subdivision is proposed to develop in three (3)phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VII.C. Staff recommends that the collector street(Vanguard Way)be constructed with the first phase of development. Additionally,the first phase of development should encompass the construction of both the 10' detached sidewalks along S.Black Cat Road and Vanguard Way including the entire street buffers.The second phase of development should encompass the completion of the remaining 10-foot pathway along the I-84 Interstate. Furthermore,the proposed plat is currently missing lot the number for the commercial lot. Staff recommends that the Applicant revise the plat to include the lot number of the future commercial lot and depict the required landscape buffers within an easement or common lot on the plat. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: According to GIS imagery,there is an existing home and other historic outbuildings adjacent to Black Cat Road that will be removed upon development of the Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. During the pre-application meeting, Staff encouraged them to incorporate and preserve the historic structure as a part of the development. Staff recommends that the Applicant preserve some elements of the existing use/historic buildings; coordinate with Cassandra Schiffler(cschifflw&meridiancity.or ) and Blaine Johnston(bjohnston_aia@hotmail.com), Historic Preservation Commission.As part of the proposed first phase of development, all existing structures that do not conform to the district's setbacks must be removed,except for those agreed upon for historic preservation.No other site improvements are known. Dimensional Standards: Development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards of the M-E zoning district in UDC Table 11-2B-3, as applicable. The proposed preliminary plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district. 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. The proposed subdivision appears to comply with these standards. Access(UDC 11-3A-3) Access is proposed to be provided from the northern boundary of the site from the extension of Vanguard Way to Black Cat Road to the west.Vanguard Way is designed as a collector street in accordance with the Master Street Map and the Transportation System Map in the TMISAP. A driveway is proposed to the adjacent property to the east for future extension. Additionally,the Applicant has proposed temporary fire access directly off of Black Cat Road located on the future commercial pad site intended to be built with Phase 3. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy,the applicant shall record a cross-access/ingress-egress easement to adjoining property to the east [51215427850] and submit copy of said easement to the Planning Division in accordance with the provisions of UDC 11-3A-3A2. Direct access via S.Black Cat Road is prohibited. Streets: Vanguard Way should be constructed in accord with Street Section C(major collector street) in the TMISAP,which requires(2) 11-foot travel lanes, 6-foot bike lanes, 8-foot parkways with streetlights at a pedestrian scale and minimum 6-foot wide detached sidewalks(see pg. 3-20, 3- Page 11 22, 3-23). The Applicant proposes a modification of the street section to include 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/pathways in lieu of on-street bike lanes,which is required by ACHD and as set forth in the Meridian Master Pathways Plan. All streets should be constructed as complete streets as defined in the TMISAP(see pg.3-19 &3-20). Prior to submitting the final plat for approval,the Applicant shall collaborate with the property owner to the north and east to construct Vanguard Way and deed the right-of- way to ACHD. The Applicant should ensure that the intersection of Vanguard Way and S. Black Road aligns with the entrance of the Black Cat Industrial projects on the west side of S.Black Cat Road. The Applicant is proposing three curb cuts off of Vanguard Way, a planned collector street in the TMISAP. In accordance with UDC 11-3A-3 (Access to streets),multiple accesses off an arterial and/or collector roadway shall be restricted. In light of this,Staff recommends that the Applicant remove the curb cut on the east side of the property and instead utilize the proposed access stubbed to the property to the east for future shared access. The Applicant should also collaborate with the property owner to the east to ensure the most suitable alignment between the two sites. Additionally,the Applicant should coordinate with the property owner to the north to ensure that the entrances of both the northern subdivision and the second entrance to this site are directly aligned. Direct access off of Black Cat Road is prohibited. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): Ten(10) foot-wide multi-use pathways are proposed on the site in accordance with the Pathways Master Plan. One segment follows Vanguard Way across the northern portion of this site; one segment runs along the southern boundary within the street buffer along I-84; and another segment runs along the west side of the site adjacent to S. Black Cat Road. The Applicant has included the pathways on the plans; however,the pathway widths are not indicated on the plans to determine if they are consistent with the UDC. In accordance with the Park's Department and Pathways Master Plan,the Applicant shall incorporate radius curves between pathway segments to avoid right angles (except at Vanguard); a detached multi-use pathway should be integrated along Vanguard Way. Furthermore,it is recommended that the southern pathway stretch be relocated outside of the ITD/I-84 easement. A 14-foot wide public use easement for all multi-use pathways shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to submittal for City Engineer's signature on the final plat(s). If the pathway will be located entirely within the right-of-way, a public pedestrian easement is not needed. Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C.A 5' wide landscape strip is required on both sides of the pathway planted with a mix of trees,shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover. Staff recommends the Applicant revise the plat and landscape plans to include the dimensions of the pathway, incorporate radius curves, relocate the pathway outside of the ITDII--84 easement, and landscape both sides of the pathway in accordance with the UDC. Sidewalks&Pedestrian Walkways(UDC 11-3A-17& UDC 11-3A-19.B.4): The UDC requires minimum 5-foot wide sidewalks to be provided adjacent to all streets with detached sidewalks along collector streets and attached or detached sidewalks along local streets. However,the guidelines in the TMISAP for the collector street sections(i.e. C) depict 6-foot wide sidewalks,which should be provided within the development at a minimum. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of five (5) feet in width shall be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s) for nonresidential uses. The walkway width shall be maintained clear of any obstructions, such as vehicles, outdoor Page 12 sale displays,vending machines, or temporary structures in accordance with UDC 11-3A-19. Staff recommends that the Applicant incorporate a 6-foot pedestrian walkway(as required by the TMISP guidelines) from the main pathway along Vanguard Way, connecting to one of the buildings in Phase 1, and extending the sidewalk to reach each building for enhanced pedestrian connectivity within the commercial development. Sidewalks,walkways, and pathways should include a dedicated crosswalk at the intersection of S.Black Cat Road with changes in color,markings,materials,texture and/or surface to distinguish them from the surrounding pavement as set forth in the TMISAP(see pg.3-28,Crosswalks). Landscaping(UDC 11-3B1: Street buffers are required to be provided as set forth in UDC Table 11-2A-7.A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer is required along all arterial streets(i.e. S.Black Cat Road)in commercial districts. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along all collector streets (i.e. Vanguard Way)— the buffer may be placed in an easement rather than a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3B- 7C.2a. A minimum 50-foot wide street buffer is required along I-84, landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3,which requires a variety of trees, shrubs,lawn or other vegetative groundcover(see updated code for specifics & figures below). A 25-foot wide street buffer is required along S.Black Cat Road, an arterial street.However,part of the buffer adjacent to the 2.04 acre"future commercial"pad does not look to be 25-feet wide. Additionally,the 50-foot required buffer adjacent to 1-84 does not depict 50-feet of landscaping as required by UDC Table 11-2B-3. The Applicant has included the landscape buffers on the plans; however, the buffer width along S. Black Cat Road is not indicated on the plans to determine if it is consistent with the UDC. Staff recommends the Applicant revise the plat and landscape plans to accurately depict the dimensions of the landscape buffers along S.Black Car Road and I-84 on the plans. The Applicant should revise the landscape plan to reflect Landscaping within the required buffers in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7; which requires a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover(see figures below). Page 13 FIGURE 1 Id TT T.FT '7 I IYYT - il I an.x .d.w. 'nllc9iw. Landscaping is required within parkways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3B- 7C. Class II trees shall be provided in parkways in accord with UDC 11-3A-17E. Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C.A 5' wide landscape strip is required on both sides of the pathway planted with a mix of trees,shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover. Mitigation is required for all existing trees 4"caliper or greater that are removed from the site in accord with the standards in UDC 11-3B-1OC.5. Mitigation calculations are depicted on the landscape plan in accord with UDC standards(i.e. 149 trees at 2 caliper inches each for a total of 284 caliper inches). The location of mitigation trees shall be depicted on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application. During the pre-application meeting, Staff conveyed to the Applicant that,in line with the TMISAP guidelines(see pg.3-16),the Applicant should incorporate a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients(may include an area for food trucks,bike storage,outdoor meeting space,etc.)in their design. Staff recommends removing one building and re-orientating the central building to face horizontally along Vanguard Way, creating space for the development of a central plaza. Page 14 Parking lot: Interior parking lot landscaping is required in the parking lot per the standards in UDC 11-313-8C.2. No linear grouping of parking spaces shall exceed twelve (12) in a row, without an internal planter island. The planter island shall run the length of the parking space and may be reduced by two (2) feet to allow for improved vehicular maneuvering. Each interior planter that serves a single row of parking spaces shall be landscaped with at least one (1)tree and shall be covered with low shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover. Each interior planter that serves a double row of parking spaces shall have at least two (2)trees and shall be covered with low shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative ground cover. Trees shall be centered within the planters and provide urban canopy. There are multiple planters that do not contain trees as indicated above due to lighting and easements. Moreover,the Applicant should add landscaping planters adjacent to the buildings between the sidewalks to provide an enhanced pedestrian scale element, as the current design seems to feature excessive asphalt. Furthermore, as mentioned above,the Applicant has the option to include a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients as a means to address this requirement. To improve the integration of this property with the neighboring M-E zoned property to the east, Staff recommends that the Applicant consider removing the entire landscape buffer along the eastern side and align parking accordingly with the adjacent property owner. This would facilitate shared access to the east and improve integration with the eastern property. Staff recommends that Applicant submit revised plans incorporating the aforementioned changes 15 days prior to the City Council Hearing. 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. The Applicant submitted a Geotechnical Evaluation for the subdivision. Pressure Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-1�: Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided for each and every lot in the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-15. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-211: Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-101: There are no waterways on this site. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-D• All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. The Applicant is proposing a 6-foot solid vinyl fence along the west property line adjacent to the pathway and the ACHD drainage swale. The proposed vinyl fencing abutting the pathway obstructs the view of the pathway and landscape buffer from S.Black Cat Road. Therefore, Staff recommends removing the fencing or providing an open vision wrought iron fence. Parking: Off-street vehicle parking is required for the proposed commercial subdivision as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6.B. Based on approximately 362,000 square feet of proposed floor space, a minimum of 724 off-street spaces are required; a total of 727 off-street parking spaces are proposed in excess of UDC standards. Based on 727 parking spaces proposed, a minimum of 29 bicycle spaces are required to be provided; none are proposed. Bicycle parking facilities should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bike racks should be provided as close as possible to each building entrance totaling 29 spaces. The parking stall count and bicycle parking facilities will be analyzed with the future CZC application submittals. Page 15 Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual(ASM � I TMISAP): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed flex buildings and light industrial building as shown in Section VII.F. Building materials consist of horizontal metal or Hardie plank siding in white,wood colors; stucco in dark and light gray colors;metal awnings; and gray wrapped cornice moulding. Conceptual elevations were not submitted for the 2.04-acre pad site designated for future commercial use. Future elevations for this pad site should incorporate similar design elements consistent with those of the other proposed buildings in this development. The proposed conceptual elevations are not approved.The conceptual elevations should include more design enhancement on the north-facing side along Vanguard Way compared to the current proposal. As previously mentioned,Staff recommends removal of one building and reorientation of the central building to have its design elements facing horizontally along Vanguard Way, thereby highlighting the building's most appealing features to the roadway. Final design must comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM) and the design guidelines in the TMISAP for the Commercial designation(see the matrix for Application of the Design Elements on pg.3- 49).A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the site and building design prior to submittal of building permit applications. Note:Any variations from the design guidelines in the TMISAP and/or design standards in the ASM should be requested through a design standard exception as detailed in the ASM with the Design Review application. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and preliminary plat per the provisions noted in Section V111,per the Findings in Section IX. Page 16 VII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map Description for Annexabion Farmatone Cressing Subdivision August 29,2023 A pertion of the Northwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 15,Township 3 North,flange 1 West,Boise Meridian,Ada County,Idaho more particularly described as forlows= BEGINNING at the 114 corner common to said Sections 15 and 16,7_3N., R.1W,B.M.,from which the Section corner common to Sections 15, 16,21 and 22 7.3N_,R.M.B.M._bears South 00°43'07"West,2,656.14 feet; thence South 89°1443"East,1,322.85 feet to the Center-West 1116 comer of said Section 15; thence on the east line of the Northwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of said Section 15_South 00`39'28"West,1,216.87 feet to the centerline cf U.S.interstate 84; thence on said oentedine,North 60°32'51"West,1.339.69 feet to the west section fine of said Section 15; thence on said west section line, North 00'4S07"East,1.01428 feet to the POINT of BEGINNING. Containing 33.893 acres,more Or less. End of Dewiption, N1- L A 11779 Nr 0 G7 94F4)F X4P Page 1 of 1 Page 17 Palm of 1/4 / BegFnning 5891#'43"E 1327-$5' ew 1 f 16 5.1s 5,15 m rw o � Iti f 33.893 Acres ° � m �+ 0 v to ar � 0 v m � rn r - r 3,T9.Bg' �o - �13 r� I 1 �L LAND "s ` 11779 i zmlie, 5.16 5.15 #{ �1 Scalc: 1"=2C.C. S,Z1 5.22 0 50 10D 20D a:V��w..� 'ureo a=..ibis xr.cn.e, ..e.a. eJ3rf�ozs is sr.sr.w IDf FI Exhiplt Drowing for Job No. I p y xx-xxx SURVEY 1 5 f� cossw euenn� 5`r Annexa Llon Shaek Mo. V pow Formstone Crossing Subdivision Wo-afm CROUP, LLC A portion or Me NW?/4 or the W/4 Of sOeaan 15, oww Dots T.W. R.W. B.M._Ado Cinty.Idoho. 8/29/2023 Page 18 B. Farmstone Crossing Plat Boundary Legal Description and Exhibit Map Descdptiorl for Farmstone Grossing Subdivision July 18,2023 A parcel of land located in the Northwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 15.Township 3 North, Range 7 West. Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho more particularly described as follows: Commencing atthe 114 comer common to said Seotians 15 and 15, T.3N., R.1W.,B.M.,from which the Section comer common to Seclions 15, 16,21 and 22 T.3N.,R.1W.. S.M_,bears South 00'43'07"West,2.656.14 feet;thence on the east-west centerline of said Section 15,South 39'14'43"East,50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Wence conilnuing, South 89°14AS'East, 1.272.U5 feet to the Center-West 1116 comer of said Section 15 thence on the east line of the Northwest V4 of the Southwest 14 of said :F,cctipn 15,South 00°30'26"Mat, 1,095.70 feet to the north right-of-way line of V.S. Interstate 84; thence on said north right-af-way line the following two(2)courses and distances: Nurth 8 V21'56"West,682.94 feet; North 80°32'51"West,452.75 feet; thence leaving said north right-of-way line,North 00°43'07"East,559.16 feet,, thence North 89'12'58"West, 150.09 feet to the easterly right-of-way line of S. Black Gat Road; thence on said easterly right-of-way line the following four(4)courses and distances: North 00°43'07"East,273.37 fee#; North 45°50'37'East,30.09 feet; Nort# 00°50'37"East.60.04 feet; LAy� Noah 46"41'47"West, 29.14 feet to the �p4Gt. LA S G POINT OF BEGINNING. 1 '? Containing 27.466 acres,morn or foss. I 1 1 779 End of Description. ' Page t of L Page 19 I Point of 1 f4 L1 Beginning 589'14'431 127285' Cw 1 f15 5.16 S.15 1.5 J r I I W t7 rPo M � o ty O 1 � I I � o h 1 � �1 O °9 to to f 27. 6 Arr65 3 RT � � C Ln yy w N „ M O � I M I ❑ V7 I I 682.94, 41-S. 1-84 I LAB I Line Table M Rearing n h Lire � 4 � 9� 11779 I L1 Sa9'14'43"E 50.00' iZ ,x� I L2 N89'12'59"W 150.09' OF 1 ► L3 N45'50'37"E 30.09' MCi41 L4 NOO'SQ'37"E 60.D4' S.16 S-15 L5 N48'41'47'W 79-14' 5eole: 1`� OO' &21 S.22 0 50 100 20H 10 IDAHO Exhibit Drawing for dab Nb. SURVEY s+sw srenuoeT Formstone Crossing Subdivision �Edlt NO, Bose ioa"oa3rw y IM�67G I GROUP, LL r A portion M the NW1f4 of ue SM/4 of sectlon 1% OwQ. padr i.3N.. RAW.. B.11., Ado County, Iddh4. TOJ18f2023 Page 20 C. Preliminary Plat&Phasing Plan PR!]JY]HAllY PLAT FOR {{++ FARV9TfiNR CR6M MIMM MKOH15 b[� fi f. TO FMP�Ffl AVM'I SL6 f y J PHASE 3 0 o _ ° .m° rea aorrt ern annse�m�wt�s PHASE E ---- — --_ BUILDING 5 �, _ _ A °Y�R6'dAfASfl1C Q - 0 N . `� �C�'L"2'lFdbfClWS r i � :S:RI� .� 1..Sd.��' •Ca x�:e 4t�• W n o S +a Page 21 D. Landscape Plan J N J .o..�; BUILDING 5 185,7W 0 FARMSTONE CROSSING SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN,ID Page 22 E. Temporary Fire Access PFMMINARY PLAT FORLO p 41. iARIISMMR CROSffiMG RIIHLIY1810N 88 - 5 i — ds 10 i A 154R I j — - - --- -- .�.-.-. --.-� lenlporay EM PLAN gSHHEE�I INDEX BUILDING 5 s 40= IL 611�11111j�f l ay" �asSsa Yarsxmes e :Ip �_ •� vlsea—��a• W 0 �Js A'Y-• �W�I R..rlil�'.YSY Page 23 F. Conceptual Building Elevations for Buildings 1 -5 V 1 I I I 1 „ ,—f ,s a ,s I? 7 FIIONT ELEVATION Q Q T T T T T T T T � T 6xG[FIELAPON ae u r6 is FARMSTEAD CROSSING-BUILDING H5 PRESENTATION ELEVATIONS Page 24 + � a 1 �■� 1 t•■�1� VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation,a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian and the property owner(s)/developer at the time of ordinance adoption. A final plat will not be accepted until the DA is executed and the AZ ordinance is approved by City Council. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation and rezone. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: a. Development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the site plan, landscape plan,preliminary plat,phasing plan, and conceptual building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein.The Applicant shall submit revised concept plans 15 days prior to the City Council hearing that includes the changes specified in the conditions listed below. b. Elevations for the future M-E commercial pad site should incorporate similar design elements consistent with those of the other proposed buildings in this development. c. All future development, site design and building design shall comply with the guidelines in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and the standards in the Architectural Standards Manual, as applicable. d. The Applicant shall preserve some elements of the existing use/historic buildings; coordinate with Cassandra Schiffler(cschi fler@meridiancioy.org)and Blaine Johnston (bjohnston_aia@hotmail.com),Historic Preservation Commission. As part of the proposed first phase of development,all existing structures that do not conform to the district's setbacks must be removed, except for those agreed upon for historic preservation. e. Development of the pad site labeled"future commercial" shall comply with the uses listed in the Allowed Use Table 11-213-2 for the M-E zoning district. f. Incorporate a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients (may include an area for food trucks,bike storage,outdoor meeting space, etc.) in the design in line with the TMISAP guidelines(see pg. 3-16). g. The street sections for Vanguard Way shall be constructed in accord with Street Section C (major collector street)in the TMISAP with a modification that allows (3) 11-foot travel lanes, 8-foot parkways and detached 10-foot wide sidewalks/pathways in lieu of on-street bike lanes as required by ACHD. Streetlights are required at a pedestrian scale(see pg. 3- 20, 3-22, 3-23). h. The collector street(Vanguard Way) shall be constructed prior to development commencing on the property. Additionally,the first phase of development should encompass the construction of both the 10' detached sidewalks along S. Black Cat Road and Vanguard Way including the entire street buffers. The second phase of development should encompass the completion of the remaining 10-foot pathway along the 1-84 Interstate. i. Construct Vanguard Way and deed the right-of-way to ACHD and/or dedicate the right- of-way as an easement in the final plat. The Applicant shall provide written Page 26 documentation that they have relinquished their rights to Vanguard Way prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat. i. Direct lot access to Black Cat Road is prohibited. j. Sidewalks,walkways and pathways shall include dedicated crosswalks at the intersection with all streets of S. Black Cat Road with changes in color,markings,materials,texture and/or surface to distinguish them from the surrounding pavement as set forth in the TMISAP (see pg. 3-28, Crosswalks). j. Development in the M-E district shall be consistent with the development guidelines contained in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan(TMISAP) for Mixed Employment(ME)designated areas. k. Public art in a high quality of design shall be provided in shared spaces and incorporated into the design of streetscapes as set forth in the TMISAP(see pg. 3-47). 1. Design elements shall be provided within the overall development as required in the Application of the Design Elements matrix on pg. 3-49 of the TMISAP. m. Several of the buildings along the collector Street shall incorporate more storefronts and reduce the number of roll-up doors to minimize the prevalence for a distribution/warehouse type of use. n. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance application(s)and/or building permit application. o. The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application to the Planning Division for approval of all future uses on the site to ensure compliance with the Unified Development Code,Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan,Architectural Standards Manual,and provisions of the development agreement contained herein,prior to issuance of building permits for any structure(s)within this site. 2. Preliminary Plat: 2.1 Future development of the proposed lots is required to comply with the dimensional standards M-E zoning districts in UDC Table I1-2B-3, as applicable. The 25-foot wide arterial street buffer and the 20-foot wide collector street buffer may be placed in an easement rather than a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.2a. 2.2 The final plat shall be revised 15 days prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Incorporate a 6-foot pedestrian walkway(as required by the TMISP guidelines) from the main pathway along Vanguard Way, connecting to one of the buildings in Phase 1, and extending the sidewalk to reach each building for improving pedestrian connectivity within the commercial development. b. Include a note prohibiting direct access via S. Black Cat Road and Vanguard other than the access points approved by the City and ACHD with this application. c. Revise the plat to include the lot number for the future commercial lot. d. Depict street sections for Vanguard Way consistent with Street Section C in the TMISAP with a modification that allows(3) 11-foot travel lanes, 8-foot parkways and detached 10- foot wide sidewalks/pathways in lieu of on-street bike lanes as required by ACHD. Streetlights are required at a pedestrian scale (see pg. 3-20, 3-22, 3-23). Page 27 e. The intersection of Vanguard Way and S. Black Road shall align with the entrance of the Black Cat Industrial project on the west side of S.Black Cat Road. f. Depict required street landscape buffers in common lots or on permanent dedicated buffer easements,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business owners' association, as applicable, as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.2. f. Revise the plat and landscape plans to accurately depict the dimensions of the landscape buffers along S. Black Car Road(25-feet wide) and 1-84 (50-feet wide)on the plans... g. Prior to submitting the final plat for approval,the Applicant shall collaborate with the property owner to the north and east to construct Vanguard Way and dedicate the right- of-way on the final plat to ACHD. 2.3 The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall be revised 15 days prior to the City Council hearing as follows: a. Revise the plat and landscape plans to accurately depict the dimensions of the landscape buffers along S. Black Car Road(25-feet wide)and 1-84 (50-feet wide)on the plans; currently both landscape buffers do not accurately depict 25-feet wide or 50-feet wide landscaping as required by UDC Table 11-2B-3. b. Incorporate a 6-foot pedestrian walkway(as required by the TMISP guidelines) from the main pathway along Vanguard Way, connecting to one of the buildings in Phase 1, and extending the sidewalk to reach each building for improving pedestrian connectivity within the commercial development. c. Depict landscaping within required street buffers in accord with the recently amended standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C; 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. d. Applicant revise the plat and landscape plans to include the dimensions of the pathway, incorporate radius curves,relocate the pathway outside of the ITD/1-84 easement, and landscape both sides of the pathway in accordance with UDC 11-3B-12C. e. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. A 5' wide landscape strip is required on both sides of the pathway planted with a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn and/or other vegetative ground cover. f. Revise the landscape plan to include the lot numbers for each parcel. f. Remove the proposed vinyl fencing or provide a wrought iron open vision fence. g. Sidewalks,walkways and pathways shall include dedicated crosswalks at the intersection with all streets of S. Black Cat Road with changes in color,markings,materials,texture and/or surface to distinguish them from the surrounding pavement as set forth in the TMISAP (see pg. 3-28, Crosswalks). h. Depict a berm in the street buffer along I-84 in accord with the TMISAP for street buffers along transportation corridors (3.07.01 C). i. The Applicant shall submit an Alternative Compliance Application for trees that are missing(approximately 17 trees)from the parking lot planters and provide mitigation equal to or superior to what is required in accordance with UDC 11-5B-5. Page 28 j. Incorporate a central plaza/gathering area for employees/clients (may include an area for food trucks,bike storage, outdoor meeting space, etc.)as defined in the TMISAP (see pg. 3-16). 2.4 All streets shall be constructed as complete streets as defined in the TMISAP(see pg. 3-19& 3-20). 2.5 A 14-foot wide public use easement for the multi-use pathways within this site shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to submittal for City Engineer signature on the final plat(s). 2.6 Depict bike racks on the plans submitted with the future CZC and Design Review application in accordance with UDC 11-3C-5C. 2.7 Prior to Certificate of Occupancy,the applicant shall record a cross-access/ingress-egress easement to adjoining property to the east [S1215427850] and submit copy of said easement to the Planning Division in accordance with the provisions of UDC 11-3A-3A2. 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 1 I-3B-14. 2.7 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. PUBLIC WORKS https://weblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308331&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC i &cr=1 C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancily.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308338&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ity D. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) hops://weblink.meridiancity.or lWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308539&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky E. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink.meridianciV.or lWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308789&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky F. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridianciU.or,glWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=308414&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky G. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308329&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr=1 H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=309887&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC hty Page 29 IX. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment and subsequent development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment will allow for the development of a mix of commercial, ,flex space, and light industrial and employment uses which will provide for the service needs of the community consistent with the purpose statement of the commercial districts in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the annexation is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat Findings(11-613-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Staff finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan in regard to land use and transportation. (Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies in, Section IV of this report for more information) 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services will be provided to the subject property with development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers) Page 30 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because City water and sewer and any other utilities will be provided by the development at their own cost, Staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development based upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., Fire, ACHD, etc). (See Section VIII for more information.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and, Staff is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the platting of this property. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 31 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for 1-84 and Meridian Road (H-2021-0099) by Hawkins Companies, generally located at the northwest corner of S. Meridian Rd. and 1-84 Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2021-0099 A. Request: Annexation of 18.30 acres of land with a C-G zoning district. B. Request: Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment to change the future land use designation on 70.4+/- acres of land from Mixed Use-Community (MU-C) to Commercial (34.3) acres and Medium High Density Residential (36.1+/-). PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : November 2 , 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3 PROJECT NAME : I - 84 and Meridian Road ( W2021 = 009 ) 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 --� 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT f D A H 0 HEARING November 2 2023 0 Legend �� DATE: Continued from: October 19, 2023 I PFQICG1 Umu-5or I TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Pmri FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533LLJ SUBJECT: H-2021-0099 I-84+Meridian Road—CPAM,AZ LOCATION: Generally located at the northwest corner of S. Meridian Rd. and 1-84 on the south side of W. Waltman Ln., in the southeast -- %4 of Section 13,T.3N.,R.1W. Li ! b Note:Since this project was remanded back to the Commission, the Applicant has changed their CPAM request from MU-R to Commercial and included the Tanner Creek project to the west in the amendment with a change from MU-C to MHDR at the recommendation of Staff.An amended conceptual developmentplan and associated exhibits have also been submitted. The staff report has been updated accordingly. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map(FLUM)to change the future land use designation on 33.1370.4-acres of land from Mixed Use—Community(MU-C)to Mixed Use Regional /TR)Commercial(34.3-acres) and Medium High Density Residential(MHDR)Q6.1+/-acres); and annexation of 18.30-acres of land with a C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial) zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 33.1370.4 acres(CPAM); 18.30 acres(AZ) Future Land Use Designation MU-C(Mixed Use—Community)(existing); (existing/proposed) Commercial(proposed on subject 34.3-acre property)&MHDR(Medium High Density Residential)(proposed on adjacent 36.1-acre Tanner Creek property) Existing Land Use ` Single-family residential and vacant/undeveloped land Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial Current Zoning RI and RUT in Ada County; and C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial) Proposed Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial) Physical Features(waterways, The Ten Mile Creek runs along the west boundary of the site. hazards,flood plain,hillside) Page 1 1 a1 1 CC L wr • , rill 1. � r LII - �IR #t , T ' 4i•�71INI r � Q III •F.1 - v IIIII II '- -■ - i— �. lr ��A. 211�ii" m is � 4 • jgw 94 k VERL y , —I I 4'.J$7,*, 'a.a CI 4 ; rl34 RI 1 OVERLAND � TIPi. ! L. • I�ty.j ,!.III��I S 14'�FaiSl^lZ 1�IIII::11 :�,i �uluu _ 'aC�4-6_: A �NIIIIIIII'1� ::'=':'=7'�'� :11L4 LL11 � ■�■ �. IIII IIII. Is -___ ■�+r'"i��i � gi's• - - .I II �IR �IIIII 1•�e€ L m ' _ _ a IME __ Ik�la■. f1■■ III rvIT III-�1�I -_�s�i �■��j '�� �� ■ �vl}I =��IIIN�IIIIIIIOY � - --I�IIIIII .N � ■■ ill�ll�ll m►C ��R� • " S= = Y W �� YS.. u�■� III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies—855 W. Broad Street,Boise,ID 83702 B. Owner: Hawkins Companies 855 W. Broad Street, Boise,ID 83702 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 4/5/2022; 10/17/23 5/29/2022 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 4/4/2022; 10/13/23 5/26/2022 Public hearing notice sign posted on site 4/7/2022; 10/23/23 6/3/2022 Nextdoor posting 4/5/2022; 10/17/23 5/25/2022 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: This property and the adjacent property to the west totaling 70.4 acres of land is currently designated as Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan (see map in Section VIII.A). The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential,and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-N) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to,but also walk or bike to(up to 3 or 4 miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3C. (See pgs. 3-11 through 3-16 for more information.) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: The proposed FLUM designation for this property is Mimed Use Regional Commercial (34.3 acres)and Medium High Density Residential(MHDR) (36.1 acres) the adjacent property to the west(see map in Section VIILA). The V„ose ef Me r rr r A designation ;y pi-ovide a nik of eniple�,ment, i;etaik, and-residential d-wellings andj9mblie uses near fliajer di-te eenmiei-eial uses. De+,elaptnent-s shouk4 be anehored by uses that have a i-egional dFaw wiM Me appr-epriate 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 Page 3 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 MHDR designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively 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 and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscapin and nd a project identity. The Applicant submitted a conceptual developmet plan for the area included in the FLUM amendment(see Section VIII.D). The subject property,proposed to be designated Commercial, is proposed to develop with a mix of regional commercial/retail and restaurant uses with some neighborhood serving uses. The adjacent property to the west,proposed to be designated MHDR, is proposed to develop with a mix of residential uses, including single-family,townhome and multi-family dwellingproposed uses are consistent with the FLUM designations proposed for the subject property and the property to the west. Note: The initial FL UM amendment request for this property was from MU-C to Mixed-Use Regional(MU- R). The Commission recommended denial to City Council based on their belief the proposed use isn't consistent with the general mixed-use development guidelines, the existing MU C or the proposed MU-R guidelines: they also felt a Traffic Impact Study(TIS) was needed. Council heard the application and remanded it back to the Commission in order to be reviewed concurrently with the Tanner Creek application in an effort to determine consistency with the Comprehensive Plan for the overall property. After review of these applications, it's Staffs opinion the proposed development plans for both projects are lard ly inconsistent with the purpose statements and development guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan for the general mixed use and specific land uses (i.e. MU-C and MU-R) for the following reasons: 1)functional and physical integration of land uses is desired—these are two separate residential and commercial developments with only a pedestrian pathwayproposed for interconnectivity—no integration of uses is proposed; 2) a mixed use project should include at least three (3) types of land uses—only two (2) are proposed Li.e. residential and commercial(includes retail, restaurants, etc.27; 3) community serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools,parks, daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are desired—none are proposed; 4)supportive and proportional public and/or quasi public spaces and places, including but not limited to parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools are expected—none are proposed: 5) mixed-use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed and inte rrg ated public and quasi public centers of activity that are activated and incorporate permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests rangingfrom leisure to play —no such public/quasi public areas are proposed: 6)a mixed use project should serve as a public transit location for future park-and-ride lots, bus stops, shuttle bus stops and/or other innovative or alternate modes of transportation—no such stops or lots are proposed; 7) community-serving uses and dwellings should be seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric for an integration of a variety of uses to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildin (MU-C —single-use developments are proposed that are not well- integrated; 8 vertically integrated structures are encouraged—none are proposed(MU-C�9 rote rg ation of a variety of uses together, including residential as a supporting use, to avoid predominantly sin lg e use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses (MU--R)—no residential uses are included in the proposed MU-R designated area, which creates a single use development with only commercial uses: and 10) retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area (MU-R)—most if not all of the proposed MU-R designated area consists of commercial/retail uses, no residential, office, civic or other uses are proposed. For this reason, Staff recommended the Applicant change their request for a map amendment from the MU- R to the Commercial designation and include a map amendment on the adjacent property to the west Page 4 (Tanner Creek) from MU-C to MHDR, as agreed to by both Applicants. This change better aligns with the proposed development plans for both properties and in Sta�f's opinion is more compatible with adjacent existing and future residential development in the area and provides a good transition between these uses to the proposed commercial uses and is more appropriate than the existingand previously proposed MU-R designation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancitv.orzlcompplan): Goals,Obiectives, &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): • "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 be rewired to connect to City water and sewer systems. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the Ci, over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The surrounding properties have all been annexed into the City; the property to the north is developed, the property to the west is proposed to develop with residential uses (i.e. Tanner Creek Development of this infill property will result in more efficient provision of public services. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and ug tter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with development. • "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map(MSM), generally at/near the mid- mile location within the Area of City Impact." ,6.01.03B� The MSM depicts Waltman Ln. as a collector street where it abuts the site due to the increased traffic anticipated with this development and the ad'a7 cent property to the west(Tanner Creek • "Require pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments."(3.07.02A) A pedestrian circulation plan was submitted for the site, included in Section VIII.F. • "Improve and protect creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial,industrial, and residential areas."(4.05.01D) The Ten Mile Creek along the site's west boundary should be protected during construction. • "Support Valley Regional Transit's(VRT)efforts to construct multi-modal transit centers in areas of high commercial activity and employment as well as areas with transit-supportive residential densities."(6.01.01B) A bus stop is proposed within this development, which will serve residents of the residential development to the west and employees and customers of the proposed commercial development. • "Locate smaller-scale,neighborhood-serving commercial and office use clusters so they complement and provide convenient access from nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadway multimodal corridors."(3.07.02B) Smaller-scale neighborhood commercial uses are proposed along with two Leger retail building A pedestrian pathway is proposed for access between the subject property and the adiacent proposed Page 5 residential property (Tanner Creek) to the west. For better connectivity, a more direct access, and to reduce traffic on the collector street(Waltman Ln.), Staff recommends a vehicular driveway/bridge is provided across the Ten Mile Creek between the two proiects for easy access from the residential development in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits." (4.05.03B) The proposed vacant parcels are within the City limits and the lamer area is surrounded by properties already annexed into the City. The development of this property will result in better provision of City services. The fol evAng analysis is specific to the request for a Mixed Use Regional(MU R) designation, and not the fner-its E)r-benefits of I' t j ' pr-E)pE)s d uses. Analysis for-either-eamplianee with the adepted Attwe 4ad t*se designation of MU C, E)r-another-one,may r-esult in very dif-fer-epA analysis.A pr-operty designate MU R ffffist eemply with both the general mixed used poliees and the NIU R pE)Iieies be! fi9i-a eembination ef eanTatible land uses.within a elese g;eegf-qphie ai-ea that allei�wfor eas-i4,aeees-sible funetional andpkwieal integration ef land uses-, te ei-eate and enhanee neighbor-heed sense 6��ee-, and to allow.,.e.e..,t.e... ...b.e.,__e. ...gib.ee� ...,...b........,. _...e J.e.........y. The proposed pr-ojeet is eofnpr-ised entifely of eemmer-eial uses,primarily high tfaffie generating • two big box retail and junior anehor-retail spaees along with drive thfoul--r-estaufants), along with a single gh dediea4ed offiee site. Thet:e are fie residential E)r-publie uses proposed. The a!is for-a eommer-eial projeet without any mixed use elements. There are no eofiffnufli !er-viees stteh leeations far-day ll or-other-typieal eommunity > f4ex spaee, > depAists, . —uses. There is also no ipAegr-ated r-esiden�ial with E)r-eensider-ation for-the planned pr-ojeet to the west. pi,opepi�,, it has not yet been submitted as an up�ted Tf:affie Impaet S4i,4 is under r-e+ the pre applieatien meetiffg, Stwff reeemmended te theApplieant that thej,,wait and submit their applieation Staff finds the ipAegmtion of!a-ad uses in the pr-oposed eoneept is not eansistent with many of the MU R an 1 eff-oft have been made to addf:ess mixed use r-equir-ements. The following items are additional Faents of the general mixed tise designation,the major-ity of w-hieh are not met w 4te in reviewing development > ill > per-the Comprehensive Plan (pg.3 13)! (S460 i4wk in kalie-s) ..92s ant cc A mixed use pr-E)jeet should inelude 4 least difeet)Tes of land uses. Exeeptions may be granted for- smaller-sites on a ease by ease basis. This!and tise is not in4eaded for-high density residential development ales Page 6 This.is a 3344 aere site with anky eammer-eitil and affiee uses.19twpese6t. This is net a 4mall"site • cc Where appr-opr-ime,higher density and/or multi fafaily residential development is eneoiffaged fe adjacent to US 70/76 Cu cG Cu 16 or Cu tia » address the land to Me we4, i��ieh eufwent4,eantains.Me s-ame Alf,'G designation. If appr-eved Mer-e integration. • cc Mixed Use areas are t�Tieally developed under-a master or eonceptual plan; during an annexation o fezene r-equest, a development agreement will typieally be r-e"ir-ed for-developments with a Mi�Eed Use designation,-' • "In de"Iepffleftts where fFmItiple eo er-cial and/or-offiee buildings are proposed,the buildings should be affanged to er-ea e some f6fm of eE)fnmE)n,usable afea, stieh as a plaza or-green spaee." There is no shared spaeefior odes�aumntq, business gathepiffgs, eo-destination oriemW retail(ereati ;, • "The site plan should depiet a tFansitionaluse and'of landseaped buffering between commefeial and existing low or-medium density residential development." and the larg�tjqropased users andpad sites with the greatest impae�q q,-e loeaW-adjaeent to multi fiami4,residential planned tg the west, The s-WIqlan does not integrate ether eammunity,se * - tteAture to >plazas, > open spaee, > ; The l9repesed site plan inehidas seveml areaq 0��eH spaee. Heifvver-, these areas.aFe in renmaH leeations.or in the middle of a l9a4dng area with no integration and d*ffieulb4msqft jqedestF aeeess. A16 at-herpublie ar quasi publie spaees ar-elgivevided in allgnnient with Me purpose and-intent of the niked use desigwatiei*. Page 7 amenities that foster-a wide variety of intefests ranging from leisure to play. These areas should be ve ieles and pedestrians." edestria nn )) wouk4 be stibnfitfiHg plans that wei-e eoordinated in aeeoi-danee with Oty,poliey. They,have talked • "Alleys and foadways should be used to tfansition 4em dissimilaf land'ases, and between fesidential densities and housing types." The pfoposed site plan does ifielude a df:ive aisle leeated behind the large retail aneher, that in eembination with a landseape bugaf pfevides "a"tfansition to Attwe residential to the west. This however-is not the point of the mixed use transition standafds. As shown in the mixed use genefal and mixed use regional eompr-ehensive plan figuf es (3A and 3D,below), foads are generally use tfansition with 4eating uses. These foads afe intended to both iategfa4e and to tfansition, and not to the- mixed e d nt conneclivity - "- L Single Family Residential Townhouses or Candos _. Open —� Space q q Multi-family 5 TransIt Office, o Stop Live-work,or Townhouses o L - Commercial/ --Retai[Core Office or I Service Use Plaza iOpenSpace AitedalRead _ O Feature area(shared space,connectivity;etc.) A f Figure 3A from City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan.Note the focus on robdway frontage that transitions and integrates uses,and the open space amenities both integrated and shared. Page 8 Single Family Residential Office or I Hospitality 3 Retail yr — -- Service Use Local � Residential Office Park/ or Office Headquarters _ Q —0 0. Integrated 0 0, 0 Plaza Area o � Retail dT A Arterial Road O Feature area(shared space,connectivity,etc.) ----� Figure 3D from City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan.(Vote the special focus on uses with roadway frontage,the unimpeded and direct pedestrian access without traversing frequent parking aisles,the opportunities for a variety of community serving uses(not just high visibility pad sites)and the shared amenity spaces and open space for both the large anchor and smaller pad sites and uses. in reviewing development >the following items w a 11 be considered in AIU R areas, areas.• Development should generally eemply with the general guidelines for-development in all Mixed Use qHalio,ef hf-e. NOTE,-Staff reeegwLaes-that the Ten Mile Greek separates.these Ave prejeets. amenity that ties theprejeet tegethei,. [Aile it may be eestprehibitive to haw sever-al eres-sin Q( areas.. This.site alld the eHe te the west are net Mteg-rated s-inTly beeause an aeees-s 19eint i of the develapmefA area a4 gFess densities fanging ftem 6 to 4 0 units/aer-e. There is neither-a minimum nor- esed on non l , e ffi ld4fy t4 .if uses.0 0� eo aus 0 There is neither-a minifflUm nor-max* 4 on non retail een*ner-eial uses stieh as offiee—, elean � o„ et 0 , o eateftainment uses. The site is jqredominate4,retail with a siffgle effiee pad, Aze auenTts at�e made�e imehide ar integi-ate Page 9 other 0� Of the dffek)-pfflefft area. CoHneil that eommunh�,Pffle semviees-s-heHk4 oeeu,-en Waltman to the east; neither applieatien is may be eligible for-additional afea for-retail developmef+t(beyond the allowed The proposed eoneept is ahigiost entirely retail with ne eMer eommunio,sen,ing uses.Atprevie ),based on the r-aties • Far-land that is designa4ed for-a publie > > the developer-is eligible for-a- 2:1 bonus. That is to > > areas,be eligible for-two additional acres of retail development. sueh as a park,tot lot, > the develope > area, • For-plazas that are if4egr-a4ed into a f:etail pr-ejeet,the developer-wetild be eligible for-a 6.1 the site wotild be eligible for- Sueh plazas should provide a fecal pE)ipA(sueh as a fou-pAaitt, statue, and water > seating afeas, and some weeAher-pr-oteetion. That wetild mean that by providing a half aer-e plaza, the developef wetild be eligible for-dffee additional aer-es of retail development. Additional AnalysW attemp I I . I - . any of the on site uses or-with any proposed adjaeepA later-nal Cir-eulation and Pedestrian Aeeess! Some effoft has been made to elevate the site plan to suppoft pedestrian safety. iner-eased sidewalks dffoughotA the puldag areas ha-ve been provided,unlike eommer-eial strip malls a-ad power-eepAer-s of deeades past. These iWFovemeats however-really only support and benefit, users that. e t the site via „t,..Y,ob to The maze of par-king spaees and drive aisle er-A-i afe fef tiser-s not affiving on the site via ean Pa sites have all been loeated on the Outer-edges of-fl ill . -destfia-n er-es i . g fr-eEluently thf oughou4 the in4eFioF par-king af eas. The uses likely me st att:f aetive to adjae pon�--rvos iddeenitts for-Fepem trips, are the pad sites a4eng Mer-idian Read. These have no dir-eet pedestrian aeeess and r-eVife meandering through the larger-paf-k4ag ar= -1 . . y east west drive aisle has a niee pedestfian spine,until it abfuptly ends at no paftietilar-destination(the small retail-Pad 2 site). These ou4ef:pad sites with drive thfoughs afe not Adding more sidewalks to a large pafl6ag area and er-eating token open spaee that is suffetmded by par-king ZD with no dir-eet aeeess or-unattfaetive afeas(near-dtHmpster-s and leading areas) does not fiffther-mixe Besides eifettla4ioa and aeeess,the proposed uses are the pr-imafy eeneefn. This espeeially when eonsider-ing ifftegr-ation with this site.A single dr-ive aisle eonneetion between the two is not integfation, and is a baseline . . Faent for-all pr-ojeets in the City for-aeeess, eir-ettlation, a-ad safiat-y. Mixed ttse areas are intended - serve oeigMor-ing eow.-aunities. T-hef:e af:e no smallef eommtmity serving uses pFoposed in either-pfeoet-. The pr-ojeet is laid ot4 to attmet regional au4omotive users cmd generate "iek t-Fips,without also providing Page 10 leeations and uses for-fesidents to benefit. These eommunity sefvf ees afe intended and essential to fe loM trips-. Uses from the subjeet site r-equife new residents to get into their ears for—vii4ually all trips, and most of that no seeendafy areas for-fle*uses, afts, da-year-e, live/wofk, small offiee sites�qr-therapists, > dentist, these uses at an a&r-dable pr-iee point giwn the ale, loea ion, and iotefst4e visibilit-y. The smallef Retail 2 -pad site (in the middie)may suppoi4 some multi tenant uses,bilt 4-4-o-me oft-h-ke listed examples are typieally attraeted to these 4�Tes of loeation -i , eirettlation,physieal building design, and general attorneys, or other o vices. The 4 story class A offlee spaee,is not likely to suppoi4 most of Site Design; To be oonsidered a mixed use pfojeet, an entire site redesign is very likely required.No small atimber-of ehanges will fesolve the tinder-lying design issties. A lafge retail anehor-eould easily be integr-ateA into a mixed ttse projeet,but for this site in this loeation, it would likely need to be loeated along th-e inter-state or Meridian Road. This is nofinal and typieal both for sites sueh as this, and for major retailers, in othef sttbufban afeas of the Cou*tfy. The loe4ion as designed prohibits any integration with the adjaeen� uses to the west, and disallows the potential for-any lesser-eommunit-y sef�vi -1 tlSeS ffE)-M-- eee"��ng spaee along Waltman Lane. Waltman is the ideal ation for ng uses that do -needi ;—Q em-not affor-d thevisibility of the inter-state and Mer-idian Road. site needs to realize better- eittster-ing of non residential uses to ffame a-ad befiefit r-eloeated open s-paee, c-md there needs to be existing r-esid ntiall mle�as. Destination tise nd eommunity setwices for-Weal r-esidefAis should be e ffieie t and safe. needs the square footage r-ededieated for better-irAegr-ation of eenununity sei=ving uses.While offiee also desir-ed,there is a eonsider-able amount of it being eonstfueted elsewhere in the eommunity and eetild also be r-ededieated. The large Retail 1 anehof eatild be easily provided with a eentfal spifle aeeess ffom Wa4man if it was feleeated with the baek faeing the inter-state. it would hm,e gFeater-visibility,be no less aeeessible, and allow ffmeh bet4er-integfation for-a variety of other-uses. The planned residential to the wes would also then not be liter-ally walled off by the unat4metive side of a large big box, and eould make better- use of views aef:oss the Ten Mile er-eek.None of the pad sites on Mer-idian Read need to be lost,though users. Provision of A' - . "ot a eheekbox r-e"ir-emeat that ean be provided and just make a pfojec4 speeifie pokey. The spaee behind the leading deeks is unat4metive and likely to be a nuismee and CPT-ED issue. The area stfffounded by paf4dag near-offiee pads is a heat island,unsafe, and diffieult to meess,both for-nearby employees and fof:fesidents. A4iile the eefi#al open spaee eould serve as something of an otAdoo market, it does not meet the ifftent of the mixed use pfineiples and is poor4y loeated(see above). Finally, and as pr-eviously stated,the site laeks ifAegr-ated design featwes for-user-s to leisufe and The seeendafy mid box(larger-retail 2 along the inter-sta4e)may be diffietilt to integrate, and likely instead happen, or-f6r-user-s to visitef:s to simple There afe no elemea4s of destination regional,no plaoes designed for-business visits a-ad otAdoof:meetings to and ef�oy set=viees with synefgies. The site plan is standafd h i gh-w . . .1, designed to usher-in as many whieles as possible, a-ad then to get them out as qttiek4y otA after-. TRANSPORTATION' Access is proposed via three (3)driveways to/from Waltman Lane, a local street,at the project's north boundary. ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) designates Waltman Ln. abutting this site as a collector street. Improvements are required to Waltman Ln., including reconstruction of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek, Page 11 west of this site with the Tanner Creek project. Improvements to the section of Waltman that abuts this site will be determined by ACHD with a future development application since this only an annexation request. The extension of Corporate Drive to the northwest of this site, designated as a collector street on the MSM, including construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek from the north to Waltman Lane, is proposed to be completed with the first phase of development of the Tanner Creek project prior to issuance of building ep rmits. If the Tanner Creek project doesn't go forward and complete the improvement to Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr. as planned, Staff recommends these improvements are completed by this developer through a Cooperative Development Agreement(CDA)with ACHD, as follows: • Extend Corporate Dr. off-site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Ln. and construct a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,within existing ROW. The roadway north of the bridge should be constructed as a 40-foot wide commercial street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk. The crossing of Ten Mile Creek will require a 58-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. Staff recommends the roadway south of the bridge to Waltman Lane is constructed as a complete street section with detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathways along both sides of the street.These improvements should occur with the first phase of development and should be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site.. • Construct Waltman Lane as %2 of a 36-foot wide street section with curb, gutter, an 8-foot wide planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk within 29-feet of right-of-way(ROW) from centerline with 7-feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated ROW abutting the site. All improvements are proposed to be constructed south of the existing edge of pavement for Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8-feet south to the south. ACHD is requiringthe he Applicant to construct the north side of Waltman with a minimum of 12-feet of pavement from centerline,a 3- foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm run-off. Center turn lanes are required to be constructed on Waltman Ln. if determined necessary ACHD. The improvements to Waltman Ln.will require reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek as a full 36-foot street section with curb and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. These improvements should be completed as required by ACHD and shall occur with the first phase of development and be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site. The proposed commercial development is estimated to generate 10,891 vehicle trips per day(VTD) (950 vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour). Based on the findings of the Traffic Impact Study(TIS) for the proposed project,which included the Tanner Creek project,the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection would exceed ACHD's Acceptable Level of Service thresholds. With previous development applications for the Tanner Creek property,ACHD did not recommend anmitigation at the intersection due to right-of-way (ROW)constraints,impacts to existing businesses, and substantial intersection redesign and construction, making the recommended mitigation infeasible. A letter prepared by Six Mile Engineering,dated 1/23/23, in response to comments and feedback during the City Council hearing for this project,was submitted to ACHD proposing phased alternative improvements at the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection to address traffic impacts from these developments. A three- phase concept design i was proposed in which the first two designs did not require any additional ROW dedication and the final phase did. ACHD reviewed their proposal and does not recommend any modifications to the intersection as under all concept designs,these modifications would negatively impact existing operations of both the interchange and ramps. ACHD's concerns also extended to the impacts the proposed modifications would have to the Central Dr. and Corporate Dr. intersections at Main St. and Progress Ave. While the proposed improvements may benefit both of these proposed developments in the short-term,they'll likely negatively iyely impact the already congested area roadways and intersections. These Page 12 improvements without significant widening increase corridor travel times and interchange queue lengths, further compoundin existing xisting congestion in this area.ACHD believes there are other alternatives that may be considered such as converting Central Dr./Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr.to a one-way couplet,which is anticipated to reduce both queue lengths and the impacts to the Meridian Rd. and the I-84 interchange system (see ACHD's letter for more information). The construction of the Linder Road overpass (3/4 mile to the west),scheduled in ACHD's IFYWP for construction in 2026-2027,should greatly improve traffic conditions on Meridian Rd.by providing another north/south connection over I-84. The Commission and City Council should consider if higher levels of traffic and congestion in this area are acceptable when acting on this application.If not, consideration should be given to the inclusion of a provision in the Development Agreement,which limits development to the large retail(Retail 1) store at this time and delays the Retail 2 building and Pads 3 and 4 until such time as the Linder Road overpass is completed or other area improvements occur that allow for an acceptable level of service to be provided, as determined by ACHD. TRANSPORTATION FOCUS—EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK CONCERNS Staff and ACHD have concerns with the ability of the existing transportation network to support the proposed development. 14 sheeld be nated 4ia4 a A Traffic Impact StudX(TIS)was submitted for the subject project; a memo with additional information was also submitted. There are already signal timing issues at the Waltman and Meridian intersection and this development will add to the wait times and congestion. • Northbound Left Turn from Meridian Road: There is inadequate storage for northbound left turns into the project site, onto Waltman.A dual left-turn is likely needed in this location, even with community uses occurring here,let alone regional serving uses. Further, a single left-turn lane requires longer green light time to provide the needed access for major big box retailer,mid box, and several drive throughs, ironically each rivaling the stacking capacity of this turn lane. • Southbound Right Turn from Waltman Lane onto Meridian Road: There is inadequate southbound right turn lane capacity for all return trips originating from either the interstate or south side of the interstate. While not a direct correlation to signal timing and capacity, each retail pad site can accommodate more cars than this lane without blocking the proposed full turn access on Waltman,nearest to Meridian Road. There are multiple proposed high traffic generating pad sites,never mind the large retail anchor and variety of other pad sites. eoneept plan,whieh is not shown(but may suppoA some tr-a-nspoi4a4ion expansion),bu4 would also need to eon4end with impr-ovements tha4 will aff-eet k4er-seetion alignment, gr-ading, a-ad drainage. The sotAhbeund tufn lane no4h of MeDonalds for-example, air-eady has an exeeptionally wide,partially obseur-ed,and very aw4p,va-Fd tufning are. Additional aoFthbotmd left tum!a-aes on4o Waltman ffom this light will eomp existing defieieneies. islands and signals may also need to be r-eset,but this pr-ojeet should not seek to benefit and eommanity identity. This all remains tif4mov,%, and is without eommitmeffts. The very large ifi4er-seetion is sof4ened s4stantially by the existing 4ndseaping, and that should eofAinue with development of this site. Aayffiiag ea-a be engineered,but tmder-standing the impaets of the efftir-e area developed and operating a4 the worst paft of the day,where tr-affie flow is alfeady eompt:omised thfough sever-a!inter-seefien ligMs, is. essential. The Mer-idia-a8A'ahma-n inter-seetion was not designed to aeeowmoda4e the proposed impaets, in the &dsfiag eonditions and with the single pok4 ufba-a inter-ehange (SPUI). Timing will be ftifther-eompliea4e Page 13 Other T-ranspOARtiOn Coneernse No frontage r-oads are provided to integfate the par-eels in this area. All tfaffie, leeal a-ad regional, is feetised ento Waltman. A r-ebttst loeal ae�wedE shotild inte 4e with a planned fiet4h setith Cer-per-ate Dfive extension a-ad not Fequife east west travel on Waltman exeittsively. The east west drive aisle pfopesed with this pr-ejeet, efessing thfough the middle of a planned private ffmiti ftmii4y development, is not designed to safely aeeE) I , , . I olume through tr-affie. Ftti4her-, if this- eei+neefien exists,the p1mmed multi family pr-E)jt0-#-A-4-1-t-4ke iviest should not have baek out paf king, shoi have wide detached sidewalk to acconunodate bicyclists wid pedestrians, and the buildings should inelude Speenlative Entitlement! Stag believes that amending the Fut+we Land Use Map as proposed, give existing status of speculative development is unwise. 14 is not clear if one or-both of the projeets tentativAy proposed for the"Waltman area"can reasonably afford or en-' . . ements that adequately eempensate for-their-impaets. -Pr-ejeets f6r-the entire adepted Mixed Use GewAnunity area need to have eempleted tr-afge impaet studies,have been fully Feviewed, and have eensider-ed impr-ovements tha4 adequately address the aggr-egmed impacts of pr-ojeets for-the lar-gef afea. This is not possible when neithef pr-ejeet has a solid and eahesive master-plan,when both may still ehange dr-amatieally, and when they are being reviewed and eensider-ed indepeadepAly. The subjeet site is exeeptionally unique in the Tfvastffe Valley,not just for-eppeftuait-y,but also operations through this afea. It is essential that analysis by both the Idaho Transportation Department and the Ada County Highway District be fully and thoroughly reviewed, and that Commission and City Council be able to consider the full array of both land use and transportation impacts before making a decision. Considering appFovals in sitos-, inteFehange and entFyway into the City.T-heFe should be lingeFiRg OF unanswered questions, nothing left to ehanee OF ehange later-given the impor-tanee of this area-. Master Street Map (MSM):The MSM depicts W. Waltman Ln. and W. Corporate Dr.to the north,which is planned to be extended across the Ten Mile Creek to Waltman, as commercial collector streets but does not depict any collector streets across this property. Note:ACHD has submitted comments based on their preliminary review of the TIS, which may be considered with the future development application (see Section IX.I for more information). VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT(CPAM) Based on the analysis above in Section V, Staff finds the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the requested FLUM designation of Commercial for this site and the requested designation of MHDR for the adjacent property to the west(Tanner Creek) and is compatible with adjacent existing and future land uses. Further,the proposed FLUM designations provide for a better transition in uses from existing and future residential uses to the west and northwest and are compatible with adjacent FLUM designations in this area.Note:If the proposed amendment to the FLUM is not approved,Staff finds the proposed development is not consistent with the existing MU-C FLUM designation for the reasons noted above. See above analysis in Section V for more information. B. ANNEXATION(AZ) The Applicant proposes to annex 18.30-acres of land with a C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial) zoning district consistent with the proposed FLUM amendment to MU Commercial. The Page 14 subject property is part of an enclave area surrounded by City annexed property. A legal description and exhibit map for the annexation area is included in Section VIII.B. The proposed G Gi%aiag dist-Fiet is eensistent with both the existing Fb:�A4 desigaa4ien of NIU G an A revised conceptual development plan was submitted as shown in Section VIII.0 that depicts how the property proposed to be annexed,as well as the area currently zoned C-G, is planned to develop with two (2)big box retail stores a-adajuaier- eher-retail spaee [Retail 1 (130,000 150, 153,300 square feet(s.£)) &Retail 2(80,000-80,500+/-s.f.),Retail 3/Let 2 (20,000 30,000 s.f-.)j 3 eut-4 pads, n^'„.ing 2 with drive thro g 's, and a 4 stet=y 90,0005 shoes. The area shown on the concept plan on the bottom(south)portion of the development area(delineated by a red line)is the portion of the site currently in Ada County proposed to be annexed;the area on the top (north)portion of the development area is the portion of the site currently in the City. The portion of the site currently in the City is entitled to develop subject to UDC Table 11-2B-2 Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts,regardless of whether or not the proposed annexation is approved, as there is not a Development Agreement in effect for that property. As proposed by the Developer in the updated application narrative, a minimum of 10% of the total building square footage for the site will be reserved for non-retail commercial uses that may include such uses as office, clean industry, entertainment,hospitality/hotel, fitness and/or recreation,personal services,non drive-through restaurants,health care,daycare, finance and/or banking, and educational and/or training uses. The conceptual development plan depicts a future VRT bus stop at the northeast corner of the site along Meridian Rd., an arterial street. For safety reasons and for better accessibility from the proposed residential development to the west, Staff recommends it's relocated off the arterial street to the plaza area at Shop 1 or another location acceptable to VRT. A vehicular connection/stub is not depicted on the revised concept plan to the property to the west for future extension across the Ten Mile creek and interconnectivity, only a pedestrian pathway is proposed. Staff recommends a driveway is provided(alongside the proposed pathway)in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2,which supports limiting access points to collector streets and requires a cross- access/ingress-egress easement to be granted to adjoining properties where access to a local street is not available,unless otherwise waived by City Council.The Applicant has submitted an emergency access easement agreement with the property owner to the west for secondary emergency access to Ruddy Dr. and Waltman Ln. At no time should construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing and Tanner Creek Subdivisions. A 10-foot wide pedestrian pathway exists along Meridian Rd. adjacent to the site. In accord with the Pathways Master Plan,a detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway should be provided within the street buffer along Waltman Ln.; and a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided east/west through the site with connections to the pathways along Waltman Ln. and Meridian Rd. and internal pedestrian walkways. The Applicant should coordinate the location of the pathway through the site with the Park's Department.A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement is required for the multi-use pathways; a recorded copy of such should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development.Internal pedestrian walkways should be a minimum of 5-feet wide and should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application,staff Page 15 recommends the provisions discussed above are included in a DA for the subject property. The entire property depicted on the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.0 shall be governed by the DA as agreed upon by the Applicant.A legal description for the boundary of the property subject to the DA is included in Section VIII.G. Future development of the property should be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan in Section VIII.C. The Applicant requests flexibility in the ,general configuration and size of the building footprints and orientation,plaza areas and parking on the site with an allowance for up to 20% changequare footages of building uses. The proposed eoneeptual development plan for-the annexation area(and larger-area) only ineludes two (2) land ttse types eommer-cial retail and offiee.Although residential land uses are planned to develop on the adjaeei#pfoper-�y to the west,the pr-opei4j,is eeffently entitled to develop solely with eommer-cial uses;the previous residential developmet#proposed for that property was As noted abo"lle in Seetion V,fnixed use designated areas should inelude at least dffee(3)t"es of!a-nd Therefore,Tanner Creek). Reasons for denial ineluded Couneil's determination that the sole residential use of the pt:opeft-y was not eonsistent with the MU G designation beeatise a mix of uses wasn't proposed and the di&4 wan4 to btffden this pr-opet4y with pr-ovidifig only the non residential eomponeat of the mix of uses desir-ed for-this afea. Henee, Staffs r-eeen*nendatien for this property and the adjaeent pr-eper-ty to the west to come in for review eoneufFe*tly in order-to ensufe the over-all development is eensisteFA with the development guidelines in the Gempr-ehensive Plan f6r-the mixed use designati In aeeE)r-d with Staffs analysis above,the pfopesed development is not eansistent with the general Stag is not ift s"poA of the r-e"ested annexation with the eoneeptidal development plan proposed Elue to its ifteeasisteney with the Compr-ehensive Plan. As r-eeenimended in the pre appheation meetings for-this pr-aperty and the adjaeeflt pr-epei4y to the west, Stag r-eeewmmeads development appliea4ioas are s4mitted eonetffeady for-these pr-opet4ies with a master-plan for-the over-all area tha4 demoastfa4es eonsisteney with the guidelines in the Compr-ehensive Plan for-mixed use developments and speeifleally the MU C designatiOR OF afi alteffla4e desigfia4iOR i pr-eposed.Altema4ively, if s4mitted separately,the develepfnen4 plan for-eaeh pr-epefty should demonstrate eonsisteney with the-Plan on its own mer-its. The TIS should also be updated to take into eonsidef:a4ion the developmefft impaets of both pr-apefties and the neeessar-y road and inter-see impr-evements needed in this af:ea in oFder-for-the stfeet fietwoFk to funetion suffieiefAly with the intensity of developmeni pf:oposed. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends derma gpproval of the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map FLUM and the proposed annexation per the updated analysis above in Sections V and VI and the Findings in Section X. If City Council does not approve the requested amendment to the FLUM, Staff recommends denial of the annexation request based on incompatibility of the proposed development with the existing MU-C FLUM designation. tion. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on April 28,2022. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend denial of the subject CPAM and AZ requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies;Matt Schultz,Representative for Tanner Creek(to the west) b. In opposition: Kelsi Lorcher,Joe Lorcher C. Commenting: Clair Manning,Nona Haddock d. Written testimony: None c. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen Page 16 f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parsons 2. Key issue(s) testimony a. Public testimony in agreement with Staff s recommendation of denial due to not having a Master Plan with the Tanner Creek development to the west; b. Concern pertainingto o impacts on traffic in the area from the proposed development; c. Testimony from the Tanner Creek developer's representative that they're in favor of the proposed development and intend to re-submit a residential development plan for the property to the west once ACHD has accepted their Traffic Impact Study(TIS). 3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Concern pertaining to the impact on traffic in this area if the proposed development plan is approved; b. Desire to have the TIS reviewed&accepted by ACHD for the overall development area in order to know the impacts and transportation improvement requirements for the development; C. Consistency of the proposed development plan with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None(Commission recommended denial based on their belief the requested use is not consistent with the general mixed use development guidelines,the existing MU-C guidelines or the proposed MU-R guidelines; also need a Traffic Impact Study.) 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. None C. The Meridian City Council heard these items on June 14,2022. At the public hearing.the Council moved to remand the subject CPAM and AZ requests back to the Commission. 1. Summary of the City Council public hearing: a. In favor: Ethan Mansfield,Hawkins Companies:Matt Schultz.Representative for the Tanner Creek development to the west. b. In opposition: Joe Lorcher,Kelsi Lorcher, Clair Manning; William Kissinger; Joev_ Lorcher C. Commenting: Mike Swenson;Kristy Inselman.ACHD d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony, a. Concern pertaining to traffic impact on the Meridian/Waltman intersection from the proposed development: b. Against the intensity of uses proposed with the NU-R FLUM designation and resulting traffic in this area and at the Meridian/Waltman intersection; c. Desire for a true mixed use project to be developed on this site as opposed to an entirely_ commercial development. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council: a. Preference for this property and the abutting property to the west to come in together or concurrently with a master plan for the overall area that demonstrates consistency with the existing or proposed FLUM designation; b. Desire for the transportation issues to be addressed before a development plan is approved- C. Desire for changes to be made to the concept plan to be more consistent with the general mixed use guidelines and specifically the requested MU-R designation. 4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation: Page 17 a. Council voted to remand this application back to the Commission for review of anticipated changes to the concept plan to be more consistent with the general mixed use guidelines and specifically the requested MU-R guidelines: and so that a master plan can be reviewed for this property and the Tanner Creek property concurrently. Page 18 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Future Land Use Map—Adopted&Proposed Land Uses Amended Date: 10/12/2023 Adopted Land Uses WOO a 500 1,000 ����� ��%Z/f� �/.�%- or Legend : zjr+����� j r ® Area of City Impact ■ ¢1 1f 11 Future Land Uses 00 w1 •fy Citywide ■ jy,�►�� Low Density Residential ■ Medium Density Residential i T Med-High Density Residential iio *y1• ■ ■ - High Density Residential - Commercial - Office - Industrial CIVIC Old Town Proposed Land Uses ® Mixed Use Neighborhood © Mixed Use Community I - Mixed Use Regional ,/�,(•/ii /��i'/f%—" ' I'/if rJ►-------------------- I����•� i '. - Mixed Use Non-Residential + �� III I IEVER Mixed Use-Interchange - +++ 0F� 0 �_� Ten Mile Specific `��/-- 1141 � j//'I - Low Density Employment ■ ,14�I/�fI/�Ji�r�Jy11/ �,`+./� Lifestyle Center ■ ��/ I�ij � i'i+�; High Density Employment ■ 20, /���% Mixed Employment Ir---- I f`q1 Mixed Use Residential ` ' ■ I / �%INP, ,1ti► ® Mixed Use Commercial ■ ■ - Fir r ' 01 ✓! ITD **■ �- FA Pori F , FAIN ------------- 1// 1/ / �. I Page 19 B. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map km E r4GrNEERtryG Februaiy4,2022 Project No„20-176 I-W!Aeridian Road 6thlbtt A Legal Dearriptlan for Anmxatkm Knd Rezone toC-G A parse I of I and being a port Ion of the Northeast 114 of the Southeast 1{4 of Section 13,Townshl p 3 North,Range!west,8_M.,Ada[aunty,Idaho being mare particularly descrlbed as follows= Commencing at a bra ss Ca p marking the East 114 oo rrLer of said section 13,wh Irb bears 589'2t}'1Q"E a dicta nce of 2,642.64 feet fro m a 5{g-inch re bar rna r1 irig the-Center 1/4 Corner of so id ype Lion 13,thence followi rtg the a ante riy I ine of the 5outh4m st V4 of said Secti on 13,501'02'43"W a di5ta nce of 420.62 feet to the POINT OF BEGIN MING. Thence following said easterly Ilne.SU1'01'4YW a distance-of 614.71 feet to the boundary of the City of Meridian par ofdrnance number 343r also known as South Gate Annexatlon,dated May T,1979; 1_ Th&ncie leasing sald easterly I i ne and forlawing said bound aryr the to Iiowing flue J 5�cou rses.. NEW58'17''W a d istarice of 96.37 feet; 2- 571*02'14"W a distanre of 373-86 feet; 3. 574'40'17"W a distance of 471.15 feet; 4. 583'2913"4V a distance of 332.94 feet; 5. N89°34'12'W a distance of 85.20 feet to the westerly Ii ne of sa id Northeast 1{4 of the Southeast 1/4r rf a ntA Ieawing sa id boundary a nd fol.lowing se id westerly Ilne,N00'43'22"E a dicta nce of 664.99 feet to a 5{ -inrii reber; Thence leaving said westerly line,589832'05'E a digtanCe of 968.55 feet to a 5{9-inch mbar; Thence H01r41136"E a distance of 244,37 feet Thence S99'08'09"E a distance of 349.98 feet to the PCHNT OF GE61KNING. Sa id pa reel conta i ns a total of 18.304 acres,more or less. Attached herea Is Exhlbit B and by this refer-ence Is made a part hereof. pL L:11Iq o � m c 1 66 L, Y I(E' �`- 4 5725 North Discovery Way+Balser idahD 63713• 208.639.6919-kmengllp.com Page 20 CENTER 1/4, CORNER POINT ❑F DI?MLgF-NCWEHT 51:GTICN 13 W. Waltman Ln, Elf 114 CORNER SECTION 13 FbUNb 519-INCH -2EB R (3ASJS OF BEARING FOUND BRASS cop S&5_215'10"E 2642.64' LI FEE:TARL.E � LINE 13FARIN6 DISTANCE I v � Li N66513'17W 96.37 of _ ew L2 S71'02'14-W 373.85 POINT bF BEGINNiWG i# L3 332.94 L4 N159'34'12-W 55.20 S99'08'O$"E ;U . 49.9W Unplatted Current Jw .t Zoning:R a , r� S59'32'O5"E 9681.55' � Annexation.Area- 18.304±AwL a C Prop-osed Zoning:C-G a Uri tatted m 51213417707,SIZ13417690&51213417699 � V3 '8 C>urr�rgt a V3 Zouing:RUT i L1 - Eerw I aJw Al I Y1 WSW.-8� I l'I !.� LA p LEGEND ERA$5 CAP -- Cr 0 ALUMINUM CAP 6662 - 5/8-INCH REAR 44 CALCULATED POINT OF — — — ANpW_KAn0W & REZONE BOUNDARY —SECTION LINE " Exp3nNn RIGHT--or-wAY LJH� 0 250 500 750 Plan Sca IG;1'-250' IEHGINEEAING 57'tS ndTn-I di�JGwCrA'W4t EIf715F,�4H[Y 83713 P+a«�owl aowms Exhibit B Annexation and Rezone owe r.b��mx SHEET; 1-841 Meridian Road 1 OF 1 NE114 Ski/4 Sec, 13,TAN, RIW, BM. Ada County, Idah-D Page 21 C. Conceptual Development Plan(REVISED) &Renderings I 0, DT-0 0 0 u�ttrrnmtru �th 0 � _ n III Iri IY� CIP km ate- — IA4 MERIOWi ROAM-L9NL4PlIlAL SfiE PIAN 0PN0N 6-0 "_� ��`_�'�•tiw�'��-n - - c i - i UIIIIIUIIIIIIU F II qa� e I nIIII f lJllli iiiiI l U i ---------------- (T I-84/MERIDIAN RDAD-CONCEMALSITE PLAN Page 22 1- 4 MERIDIAN IDiEILPNIENT CONCEPTUAL,SUBJECT TO CHANGE IA - F pi • .1 r— I F # •��fA cw rlp rte Page 23 - - -- T' y Y �IW6a 5 Sti �. YF11yA'kC-11 V I-�4 Z- is - - PIA/A TvYI Pi - _ -_ - �': ,i•, .I �:•i ri YTRSYFC I I}'h 1 �. - t \ �I I P_u�rn�e Page 24 - � �� __ _ -1-L1]LS I'RIAN CO IV7;('1'[C1N .. 'IP"'� )L •! �.! I �: ^ i e i , ■ i Yi.t 1Tti!1. ww*mc wor NLRl VEC fIV E 2 �p A F ■ D. Tanner Creek and I-84 &Meridian Road Conceptual Development Plan TANNER CREEK & 1-84 MERIDIAN DEVEL®PMENT CONCEPTUAL,SUBJECTTO CHANGE "S `' t air' IS ( 1 p r , - ,,1 I r J_ r / r Ill +, low 04 TANNER CRElEK & 1-84 MERIDIAN DEVEILOPM'iFN'lf-' A PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION C 1-84&MERIDIAN PLAZA TYPE C 6 C III; Y i B TANNER CREEK PLAZA /2 4 -� _ fi Page 27 E. Vehicular Connectivity TANNER CREED & - _ .:r�, �.+.••j FRANKLIIRD. 1-84 MERIDIAN CONNECTIVITY • I'1./�IV s CONNECTIVITY LEGEND B • ? <•••• VEHICLE CONNECTIVITY <••.n. CORPORATE PR.EXTENTION -.c O WALTMAN LN.1 MERIDIAN RD. ••+} w-ncrvawooD sr ' INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS eat* LINDER OVERPASS • {BY ACHDIFFDS � �� ki v • e'� Mav • •' "1 �` dzLe .. . say*.•,'•. - Z. +' - - - -1dtErsr�r�aa •i Page 28 F. Pedestrian Circulation Plan ff TAN NER CREEK & i I 1I r I a T ! I J T--84 MLRIDIAN I I DEVLLOPMLNT „'V, PATHWAY PLAN _ PATHWAY LEGEND `.... SITE CONNECTIVITY j /11 f� �y�I� �} ` I��f��� TEM OTHERS CONNECTIVITY 9V OTHERS !3!•s•.•..�i....._ 1 y__�. - f i r .7 _ .i �'1 ' nn <+• Ia'PA7HWAV[MPROVEMEN75 —_ � fF`iiia•a•a�..a � ...' a. i :mac IZ' li 'r a a {I�� ._ �� ! T '� .. �i "� �- .,� • F iii:. a {f J OPEN SPACEAMENIrIES __.. � a ���'' ,h e.u•as•i••.�faL�%sasaaap i 16 -�: _ r�M1 :� i � ZarVi:.-•■tii .Ira I �..� I � { i� Z • Cai rI a IY ._.•,90�a.�..•....aaaa.a..........• ICJ• J • '�� ! I� ! i Y ter,.:, �n„ I � I�, er .=►�. r.:to rilq__ii4 rl. Page 29 G. Legal Description&Exhibit Map for Property Subject to the Development Agreement-forthcoming Page 30 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS A. PLANNING DIVISION The Plaflaing Divisiefl has fie eefiditions on this applieation because the reeommendation is for denial. 1-f be eof4ifmed ' . Fit hearing in order-for-Stag to pr-epafe eonditions and Findings for-approval. 1. A Development Agreement(DA) shall be required as a provision of annexation of the subject property. The DA shall be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the City within six(6) months of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision&Order for the Annexation request. The new DA shall include the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan,renderings,pedestrian circulation plan and vehicular connectivity plan, included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. Flexibility in the general configuration and size of the building footprints and orientation,plaza areas and parking on the site shall be allowed with an allowance for up to 20% change in square footages of buildings. b. As proposed by the Developer, a minimum of 10%of the total building square footage for the site shall be reserved for non-retail commercial uses that may include such uses as office,clean industry, entertainment,hospitality/hotel, fitness and/or recreation,personal services,non drive- through restaurants,health care,daycare, finance and/or banking, and educational and/or training uses. c. A vehicular connection/driveway shall be provided to the west boundary_(alongside the pedestrian pathway,)of the site for interconnectivity in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.2,unless otherwise waived by City Council. A cross-access/in rg ess-egress easement shall be granted to the adjacent property to the west and a recorded copy of the easement submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the site. d. A vehicular driveway and cross-access/ingress-egress easement shall be provided to the out- parcel(Parcel#S 1213417320)at the northwest corner of the site and a recorded copy of the easement submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the site. e. A detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided within the street buffer along Waltman Ln.; and a 10-foot wide multi-use pathway shall be provided east/west through the site in accord with the Pathways Master Plan with connections to the pathwa sg Waltman Ln. and Meridian Rd. and internal pedestrian walkways. Coordinate the location of the pathway through the site with the Park's Department.A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be required for the multi-use pathways if located outside the public right-of-way; a recorded copy of such shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. £ Internal pedestrian walkways shall be a minimum of 5-feet wide and shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving;surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19. g. A bus stop should be provided in the plaza area near Shop 1 or an alternate location acceptable to Valley Regional Transit(VRT). h. At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing and Tanner Creek Subdivisions. Page 31 i. If the improvements to Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr. aren't completed by the developer of the project Tanner Creek)to the west as planned,these improvements shall be completed by this developer through a Cooperative Development Agreement(CDA)with ACHD, as follows: • Extend Corporate Dr. off-site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Ln. and construct a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,within existing ROW. The roadway north of the bridge should be constructed as a 40-foot wide commercial street section with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk. The crossin of f Ten Mile Creek will require a 58-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. The roadway south of the bridge to Waltman Lane shall be constructed as a complete street section with detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathwa sag both sides of the street. These improvements shall occur with the first phase of development and shall be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site. • Construct Waltman Lane as '/2 of a 36-foot wide street section with curb, gutter, an 8-foot wide planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk within 29-feet of ri hg t-of- wa(ROW) from centerline with 7-feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated ROW abutting the site. All improvements shall be constructed south of the existing edge of pavement for Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8-feet south to the south. The north side of Waltman shall be constructed with a minimum of 12-feet of pavement from centerline, a 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm run-off. Center turn lanes shall be constructed on Waltman Ln. if determined necessary by ACHD. The improvements to Waltman Ln. shall include reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek as a full 36-foot street section with curb and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. These improvements shall be completed as required by ACHD and shall occur with the first phase of development and be complete prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the site. B. PUBLIC WORKS Site Specific Comments 1. No Public Works infrastructure was provided as part of this submittal, any changes must be approved by Public Works. 2. Water main must connect to the existing main in Waltman Lane at two locations. 3. Provide a water main connection to the west. 4. Ensure no permanent structures are built within a utility easement including but not limited to tree, shrubs,buildings, carports,trash enclosures,infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.). 5. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. General Comments 6. 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. 7. 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. Page 32 8. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. 9. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(MCC 9-1-28.C). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 10. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 15. 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. 16. 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. 17. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 18. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. Page 33 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. 22. 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. 23. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridianciU.o�ublic_works.aspx?id=272. 24. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=257681&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU D. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=258727&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT hygs://weblink.meridianciU.orgJ ebLink/DocView.aspx?id=257725&dbid=0&repo=MeridianQV F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=258617&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City G. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https:llweblink.meridiancitE.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=257906&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City H. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https:llweblink.meridianciLy.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=259278&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=267371&dbid=0&repo=MeridianQty https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=259453&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=309476&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiiy X. FINDINGS A. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 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 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,the Council shall make the following findings: Page 34 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Stafffinds the proposed amendment from MU-C to AA*ed� '(AIU "' Commercial and MHDR and conceptual development plan is ire# eg nerallX onsistent with Me intent efime AA"4? designatien other elements in the Comprehensive Plan development O;etaip and does net inelude anj,,residential uses as desiFe including the provision of a transition in uses and compatible uses, as noted in Section V. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. Staff finds that the proposal to change the FL UM designation from Mixed Use—Community(MU-Q to Commercial and MHDR dee&-norprovides an improved guide to future growth and development of the City as the proposed development plan deal net iHehide the nik m:geq g a,..,;,,,a in the AIU n designatien is consistent with the proposed development plan and existing and future uses in the area, as discussed in Section V above. 3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the Goals,Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is n-e€consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the proposed AAI R Commercial and MHDR designations as noted above in Section V. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code. 5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Stafffinds the proposed amendment and conceptual development plan will fft4 be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land usesfer the rease as noted in Section V above. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Stafffinds that the proposed amendment and development will likely burden transportation capabilities in this portion of the city even without sigwffi- eavtt improvements to Waltman,and the extension of Corporate, and the r,r.,,4diam'W- t n inter-see ; ,� Sewer and water services are available to be extended to this site. 7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. Stafffinds the proposed map amendment provides a logical juxtaposition of uses but doesn't N many fthe N .a , id ,4 f r a..vele,,, n as discussed in Section V above; there should be sufficient area to mitigate any development impacts to adjacentproperties. 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. For the reasons stated in Section V and the subject findings above, Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is net in the best interest of the City. Page 35 B. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to the C-G zoning district and plan to develop " commercial retail and eff-tee neighborhood serving uses on the property per the proposed conceptual development plan Bees not demonstrates consistency with the gHidelineig in the Plan Commercial FL UM as noted above in Section V. (See section V above for more information) 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to C-G and conceptual development plan generally complies with the purpose statement of the C-G district in that it will provide for the retail and service needs of the community. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health,safety, and welfare; Staff finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed commercial uses should be conducted entirely within a structure. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds City services are available to be provided to this development. No residential development is proposed; therefore, enrollment at area schools shouldn't be affected. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation with the conceptual development plan proposed is ntat in the best interest of the City per the analysis in Sections V and VI above. Page 36 V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing continued from October 19, 2023 for Tanner Creek Subdivision (H-2022-0048) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., generally located 1/4 mile west of S. Meridian Rd. on the south side of W. Waltman Ln. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0048 A. Request: Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #108131100) to change the development plan from commercial to a mix of residential uses. B. Request: Rezone of 41.89 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (12.16 acres), R-15 (12.27 acres) and R-40 (17.46 acres) zoning districts. C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 130 building lots (83 single-family, 45 townhome & 2 multi-family) and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. D. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 280 dwelling units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : November 2v 2023 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : Tanner Creek Subdivision ( H - 20 M048 ) 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 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A N O HEARING November 2,2023 Legend DATE: Continued from: October 19, 2023 I(�Ppc� i TO: Planning&Zoning Commission FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner a 1 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0048 F Tanner Creek - LOCATION: 675 W.Waltman Ln.,in the SE 1/4 of Section 13,Township 3N.,Range 1 W. (Parcels: S 1213428050; S1213428301; S1213428010; - S1213427890; S1213427880; S 1213427872; S 1213427860; S1213428020; S1213427840) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant has submitted applications for the following: • Modification to the existing Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #108131100),which allows commercial/office/hotel uses to develop on the site,to replace it with a new DA allowing a mix of residential uses to develop on the site,including single-family detached and attached dwellings,townhouse dwellings, and multi-family residential apartments; • Rezone of a total of 41.89 acres of land from the C-G to the R-8 (12.16 acres),R-15 (12.27 acres)and R-40 (17.46 acres)zoning districts; • Preliminary plat consisting of 130 buildable lots [83 single-family,45 townhome and two(2)multi-family] and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the R-8,R-15 and R-40 zoning districts; and, • Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 280 residential apartment units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 38.05 Future Land Use Designation Medium-Density Residential(MDR)(3+/-acre strip along west boundary)&Mixed- Use Community(MU-C)on the remaining 35+/-acres of the property[Note:An application is in process(H-2021-00991-84&Meridian Road)to amend the FL UM for this property from MU-C to MHDR.] Page 1 Existing Land Use I Vacant/undeveloped land(pasture) Proposed Land Uses Residential(single-family detached/attached,townhome and multi-family apartments) Current Zoning C-G Proposed Zoning R-8 (12.16 acres),R-15 (12.27 acres)and R-40(17.46 acres) Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 130 buildable/20 common Phasing plan(#of phases) 4 Number of Residential Units 408 units [83 single-family(attached/detached),45 townhome&280 multi- (type of units) family/apartment] Density(gross&net) 10.72 gross(overall); 16.44 net(overall) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ SFR-3.66 acres(16.6%)—street buffers,parkways,internal common open space areas buffer/qualified) MFR—4.06 acres—street buffer,linear open space,open space areas greater than 5,000 s.f. in area,areas greater than the dimensions of 20' x 20' Amenities Children's playground, 'h basketball court,pickleball court,pathways(SFR);clubhouse, swimming pool,playground with covered sitting area,internal pathways and a 10'wide multi-use pathway,plaza, shade structure&benches,pickleball court(MFR) Physical Features(waterways, The Ten Mile Creek runs along east boundary,a small portion of the site is within the hazards,flood plain,hillside) floodplain Neighborhood meeting date 6/30/22&9/27/23 History(previous approvals) AZ-06-063 (DA#108131100);PP-08-001;TE-10-028;TEC-12-008;TEC-14-005;H- 2016-0008 (PP exp.4/7/18);H-2018-0023 (CPAM,CUP,MDA,PP,RZ—denied);H- 2020-0024(CPAM,CUP,MDA,PP,RZ—denied) B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • TIS(yes/no) Yes • Level of Service(LOS) The TIS in 2018 noted that all studied roadways and intersections were anticipated to operate at an acceptable level of service at build-out of the development. • Existing Conditions Waltman Ln. is improved with 2-travel lanes,25' of pavement&no curb,gutter or sidewalk abutting the site. • CIP/IFYWP Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)!Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): • Linder Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from Overland Road to Franklin Road with an undetermined date.This does not include funding for ITD's portion of the I-84 overpass. • The intersection of Franklin Road and Linder Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 6- lanes on the north leg,6-lanes on the south,7-lanes east, and 7-lanes on the west leg,and signalized between 2021 and 2025. Access One(1)access is proposed via Ruddy Dr.,a local street stubbed at the site's west (Arterial/Collectors/State boundary;two(2)accesses(1 public street, 1 driveway)are proposed via Waltman Ln,a Hwy/Local)(Existing and local street along the site's north boundary. Proposed) Proposed Road Improvements Corporate Dr. is proposed to be extended from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek south to Waltman Ln.within existing right-of-way;this will include construction of a new bridge over the creek. Waltman Ln. is proposed to be widened and reconstruction Page 2 of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek is required. See the ACHD report in Section IX.J or more info. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.3 miles from Fire Station#1 • Fire Response Time • Resource Reliability 82%(meets target goal of 80%or greater) • Risk Identification 4(current resources would not be adequate to supply service) • Accessibility Meets all required access,road widths and turnarounds as proposed • Special/resource needs Aerial device(can meet this need if required);hazmat event will require mutual aid; structure fire will require an additional truck company;water rescue teams would require mutual aid • Water Supply 1,000 gallons/minute for 1-hour(maybe less for sprinklered buildings) • Other Resources Police Service • Distance to Police Station 1.6 miles • Police Response Time 2:46 minutes(expected);3:58 minutes(average) • Calls for Service 5,176 within 1-mile(6/l/21-5/31/23) • %of calls for service split See comments by priority • Accessibility See comments • Specialty/resource needs None • Crimes 665 (6/l/21-5/31/23) • Crashes 88 (6/l/21-5/31/23) • Other Reports West Ada School District No comments received Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Directly adjacent • Sewer Shed Ten Mile • Estimated Project Sewer ERU's See application • WRRF Declining Balance 13.91 • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns Flow is committed—see Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water • Distance to Services Directly adjacent • Pressure Zone 3 • Estimated Project Water ERU's See application • Water Quality Concerns None • Project Consistent with Water Yes Master Plan • Impacts/concerns See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Page 3 1 1 1 11111 � NNIY :zMINE �• - — �� IN Ip NEI lilt: III.1111 _ - IIIIN +IIII • III■III �•�.: Cc _- S 1 - ■11■ I 9i IIIIII Ilr �•� ' OVERLAN 1�---- . -9-jLA YIII . _ 'R x p p it •n- ■ 1111}n= - uuv � f -u111n1 EL ' -��■ � -�11115111a • uuu11� p+uw �N IIIIII • +■` :=IIIN: - :ii 1..wF.T. •� ■ ■ ■uumul � �Baal• �:I � � � : ED NI III �I ■ .I . . l II.- 1. ■I Z �■IIIII � �-1 --I�11111■IN . 111= NII IR: �IlYiiii �Z II'-_�` �■ III :■IIIIII .IIIY 1■1 " N ^INS: IIIIII 'I INIIIIIIIIII� �Mll+� � 1 2 I. j }_ �' 111x III��11111111 III Is111�� •t ■ li — III .��i ■ - J• IIII I IMINN I ■ uuur - rw ■ ■■ NINE on 1 1 , ■ , 11 i • - / i. • 1 1 1 1 . / i 1� C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING Planning& Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 10/3/2023 Radius notification mailed to properties within 300 feet 9/29/2023 Public hearing notice sign posted 10/7/2023 on site Nextdoor posting 9/28/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS(https://www.meridiancity.org/compplan) LAND USE: Existing Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designations: This property is primarily designated MU-C(Mixed Use—Community) on the FLUM with a narrow sliver of Medium Density Residential(MDR)along the western portion of the site consisting of approximately three(3) acres. The purpose of the MU-C designation is to allocate areas where community-servicing uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.Non-residential buildings in these areas have a tendency to be larger than in MU-N(Mixed-Use Neighborhood) designated areas but not as large as in MU-R (Mixed Use—Regional)designated areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to but also walk or bike to (up to 3 or 4 miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. The MDR designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. Proposed FLUM designations: The I-84 and Meridian Road application(H-2021-0099), currently in process for the adjacent property to the east,requests an amendment to the FLUM from MU-C to Commercial for that property and from MU-C to Medium High-Density Residential(MHDR)for the subject property(see exhibit in Section VIII.J). The narrow sliver of MDR is proposed to remain along the west boundary to ensure transition of uses as previously desired by the Comprehensive Plan Committee which is accounted for on the proposed plat. The MHDR designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively 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 and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity. Note: The initial FL UM amendment request for the property to the east was from MU-C to Mixed-Use Regional (MU-R). The Commission recommended denial to City Council based on their belief the proposed use isn't consistent with the general mixed-use development guidelines, the existing MU-C or the proposed MU-R Page 5 guidelines; they also felt a Traffic Impact Study (TIS)was needed. Council heard the application and remanded it back to the Commission in order to be reviewed concurrently with the subject application in an effort to determine consistency with the Comprehensive Plan for the overall property. After review of these applications, it's Staffs opinion theproposed development plans for both projects are largely inconsistent with the purpose statements and development guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan for the general mixed use and specific land uses (i.e. MU-C and MU-R)for the following reasons: I)Junctional and physical integration of land uses is desired—these are two separate residential and commercial developments with only a pedestrian pathway proposed for interconnectivity—no integration of uses is proposed; 2) a mixed use project should include at least three (3) types of land uses—only two (2) are proposed[i.e. residential and commercial(includes retail, restaurants, etc.)]; 3) community serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools,parks, daycares, civic buildings, or public safety facilities are desired—none are proposed; 4)supportive and proportional public and/or quasi public spaces and places, including but not limited to parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries, and schools are expected—none are proposed; 5) mixed-use areas should be centered around spaces that are well-designed and integrated public and quasi- public centers of activity that are activated and incorporate permanent design elements and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from leisure to play—no such public/quasi-public areas are proposed; 6) a mixed use project should serve as a public transit location for future park-and-ride lots, bus stops, shuttle bus stops and/or other innovative or alternate modes of transportation—no such stops or lots are proposed; 7) community-serving uses and dwellings should be seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric for an integration of a variety of uses to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings (MU-C)—single-use developments are proposed that are not well-integrated; 8) vertically integrated structures are encouraged— none are proposed(MU-C); 9) integration of a variety of uses together, including residential as a supporting use, to avoid predominantly single use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses (MU-R)—no residential uses are included in the proposed MU-R designated area, which creates a single use development with only commercial uses; and 10) retail commercial uses should comprise a maximum of 50%of the development area (MU-R)—most if not all of the proposed MU-R designated area consists of commercial/retail uses, no residential, office, civic or other uses are proposed. For this reason, Staff recommended the Applicant of the adjacent project(i.e. I-84 &Meridian Rd.) change their request for a map amendment from the MU-R to the Commercial designation and include a map amendment on the subject property from MU-C to MHDR, as agreed to by both Applicants. This change better aligns with the proposed development plans for both properties and in Staffs opinion is more compatible with adjacent existing and future residential development in the area and provides a good transition between these uses to the proposed commercial uses to the east and is more appropriate than the existing and previously proposed designation. Proposed Use:A mix of residential uses(i.e. single-family detached and attached and townhouse dwellings and multi-family apartments)is proposed at an overall gross density of 10.72 units/acre,which is consistent with the proposed MHDR FLUM designation. Pathways and sidewalks are proposed throughout the development for internal pedestrian connectivity as well as to the multi-use pathway planned along the Ten Mile Creek and to the proposed commercial development to the east. The proposed site design provides a good transition of uses with larger lots on the periphery of the development and smaller lots internal to the development, and higher density residential uses (i.e. apartments) on the eastern portion of the site adjacent to proposed commercial uses. DESTINATION:DOWNTOWN The subject property is located within the downtown urban renewal district.Future development of this area is guided by the Destination:Downtown vision plan,which was adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan.Note: This plan is currently mid-way through an 18-month update process; however,Meridian Development Corporation (MDC) does not anticipate the vision changing much for this area. Page 6 The subject property is part of the Southern Gateway Entertainment&Hospitality District,which consists of 260 acres generally located between Franklin Rd. and I-84. Major characteristics of this district are as follows: 1)bike paths and trails;2)hotel and upscale restaurant uses; 3)expand and upgrade park& speedway;4) extensive landscaping; 5) locate a multi-purpose sports facility; and 6) gateway features. Land uses desired in this area include retail/dining(25%), office(25%), light industry(25%)and roads/utlitites/institutional(25%). The proposed use of the property is not consistent with the vision of the Plan for this district. Bike/pedestrian paths and trails are proposed along the frontage of the property along Waltman Ln. and along the Ten Mile Creek as desired. While the existing conceptual development plan that was approved with annexation of the property in 2006 is largely consistent with the vision of the Plan, it doesn't seem feasible as the property has sat vacant for the past 17+years, largely due to access and transportation issues associated with such a high intense commercial development. Other considerations exist that have a part in contemplation of a different,less intense,land use in this area,as follows: • The amendment to the FLUM to MU-C in 2019 supersedes the commercial elements envisioned under the Plan. • Regional entertainment uses have instead developed south of I-84 with several major expansions(i.e. Wahooz,Pinz,Roaring Springs and the Galaxy Event Center). • Growth in the downtown district has evolved differently that initially expected. MDC hasn't reserved funding originally planned to support large-scale public-private partnerships,and no public improvements were made in advance to incentivize development in alignment with the Plan. Additional land consolidation has also not occurred to accomplish the vision of the Plan. • Recently, City Council showed some willingness to consider the type of development proposed when they remanded the 1-84 and Meridian Rd.project back to the Commission to be heard concurrently with the subject application. The desire was for both properties to come in with a master plan for the entire area to be more consistent with the mixed use development guidelines and specifically the MU-R designation they were requesting and for the transportation issues to be addressed. • A lesser intense land use such as residential will result in less traffic congestion in this area and will be more compatible with existing and future adjacent residential land uses. TRANSPORTATION: Access is proposed via Waltman Lane, a local street, at the project's north boundary and via the extension of W. Ruddy Dr., a local street, at the project's west boundary. ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM) designates Waltman Ln. as a collector street from Meridian Rd. west to the future extension of Corporate Dr. Due to the increased traffic anticipated with this development,ACHD recommends the collector street designation is extended to the west to Kearney Ave. Improvements are required to Waltman Ln., including reconstruction of the bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,with the second phase of development as outlined in the ACHD staff report. The extension of Corporate Drive, designated as a collector street on the MSM,including construction of a bridge over the Ten Mile Creek, from the north to Waltman Lane is proposed to be completed with the first phase of development prior to issuance of a building permit. This will provide additional access to the site while the bridge across the Ten Mile Creek on Waltman Lane is being reconstructed with the improvements to Waltman Ln.See ACHD report for more information. The proposed change to the FLUM from MU-C to MHDR and development agreement modification to allow for residential uses to develop on the site instead of commercial uses as currently entitled,will greatly reduce the overall traffic impacts in this area on Waltman Ln., at the Waltman Ln./Meridian Rd. intersection and the Meridian Rd./1-84 interchange. For comparison,the ACHD report states this development is estimated to Page 7 generate 2,884 vehicle trips per day(VTD)(260 vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour). In the ACHD report from 2008 for the Browning Plaza preliminary plat(PP-08-001) application,the entitled commercial development was estimated to generate approximately 10,300 VTD (975 vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour)at buildout according to the TIS submitted at that time. Although traffic impacts will be reduced if the proposed change to the FLUM is approved,there is still existing congestion in this area that will worsen significantly if this property and the adjacent property to the east develop at this time as proposed. Based on the findings of The Traffic Impact Study(TIS) for the proposed I-84&Meridian Road project to the east,which included the subject proposed development,the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection would exceed ACHD's Acceptable Level of Service thresholds. With previous development applications for these properties,ACHD did not recommend any mitigation at the intersection due to right-of-way(ROW)constraints, impacts to existing businesses, and substantial intersection redesign and construction,making the recommended mitigation infeasible. A letter prepared by Six Mile Engineering, dated 1/23/23, in response to comments and feedback during the City Council hearing for the Meridian Rd. &I-84 project was submitted to ACHD proposing phased alternative improvements at the Meridian Rd./Waltman Ln. intersection to address traffic impacts from these developments. A three-phase concept design was proposed in which the first two designs did not require any additional ROW dedication and the final phase did. ACHD reviewed their proposal and does not recommend any modifications to the intersection as under all concept designs,these modifications would negatively impact existing operations of both the interchange and ramps. ACHD's concerns also extended to the impacts the proposed modifications would have to the Central Dr. and Corporate Dr. intersections at Main St. and Progress Ave. While the proposed improvements may benefit both of these proposed developments in the short-term, they'll likely negatively impact the already congested area roadways and intersections. These improvements without significant widening increase corridor travel times and interchange queue lengths,further compounding existing congestion in this area. ACHD believes there are other alternatives that may be considered such as converting Central Dr./Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr. to a one-way couplet,which is anticipated to reduce both queue lengths and the impacts to the Meridian Rd. and the 1-84 interchange system(see ACHD's letter for more information). The construction of the Linder Road overpass (1/2 mile to the west),scheduled in ACHD's IFYWP for construction in 2026-2027,should greatly improve traffic conditions on Meridian Rd.by providing another north/south connection over I-84.The Commission and City Council should consider if higher levels of traffic and congestion in this area are acceptable when acting on this application.If not, consideration should be given to the inclusion of a provision in the Development Agreement,which limits development to the single-family and townhome portions of the development at this time and delays the multi-family portion of the development until such time as the Linder Road overpass is completed or other area improvements occur that allow for an acceptable level of service to be provided, as determined by ACHD. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancibV.or /g comp�lan): Goals,Objectives,&Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed single-family detached/attached and townhome dwellings and multi family apartments will contribute to the variety of housing types in the City as desired. A mix of alley- and front-loaded units are proposed for added variety in the style of the units. • "Improve and protect creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial,industrial, and residential areas."(4.05.01 D) Page 8 The Ten Mile Creek, which runs along the project's east boundary, is proposed to be re-vegetated and improved with development on the west side that lies within the subject property. The creek should also be protected during construction. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval,and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "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) Four(4)different residential housing types are proposed in this development(i.e. single-family detached, single-family attached, townhome and multi family apartments).A range of lot sizes are proposed for these units, which will accommodate a variety of housing styles consisting of I-and 2-story units. • "Limit canal tiling and piping of creeks, sloughs, laterals, and drains to man-made facilities where public safety issues cannot be mitigated or are not of concern."(4.05.01C) The Ten Mile Creek, which runs along the project's east boundary, is required to remain open as a natural amenity and not be piped. • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land."(3.07.00) The proposed single-family, townhome and multi family residential uses should be compatible with existing and future medium-density residential uses to the west and north. The proposed design, with larger lots for single-family detached homes on the periphery and smaller lots for single-family attached and townhomes on the interior, transitions well to existing and future adjacent residential uses and the multi family apartments on the east side of the site adjacent, which in turn transitions well to planned commercial uses to the east. The proposed design should minimize conflicts and maximize use of land. • "With new subdivision plats,require the design and construction of pathway connections, easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities."(2.02.01A) Pedestrian pathways areproposed to the amenities in the central common area in the single-family portion of the development, which connect to pathways in the central common area in the multi family portion of the development and extend to the multi-use pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. The large central common area in the single-family portion and the linear open space in the multi family portion of the development provide much usable open space with quality amenities as desired. • "Encourage the incorporation of creek corridors as amenities in development design." (4.05.02C) The Ten Mile Creek corridor is proposed to be improved as an amenity with a segment of the City s regional pathway system along the west side of the creek. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems;services are proposed to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) Page 9 Although there are some County zoned properties at the northwest corner and to the north of this site, the larger area is surrounded by properties that have been annexed and developed in the City. Development of this infill property will result in more efficient provision of public services. (Note: The County zoned property to the east is part of the I-84 and Meridian Road annexation application that's currently in process) • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities." (3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks is required to be provided with development as proposed. • "Require collectors consistent with the ACHD Master Street Map (MSM), generally at/near the mid-mile location within the Area of City Impact."(6.01.03B) The MSM depicts the extension of Corporate Dr. and the portion of Waltman Ln. east of Corporate Dr. to Meridian Rd. as a collector street. Due to the increased traffic anticipated with this development, ACHD recommends the collector street designation is extended to the west to Kearney Ave. • "Slow the outward progression of the City's limits by discouraging fringe area development; encourage development of vacant or underutilized parcels currently within City limits."(4.05.03B) The proposed vacant parcels are within the City limits and the larger area is surrounded by properties already developed in the City. The development of this property will result in better provision of City services. Based on the analysis above, Staff finds the proposed development plan is generally consistent with the requested FLUM designation of MHDR for this site and is compatible with adjacent existing and future residential land uses.Note:If the proposed amendment to the FLUM is not approved with H-2021-00099, Staff finds the proposed development is not consistent with the existing MU-C FL UM designation for the reasons noted above. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION(MDA) The existing Development Agreement(DA) (Boise Waltman—Inst. #108131100), approved in 2008, allows for the development of commercial/office/hotel uses on this site. Because that development plan has not been viable and the property has sat vacant since that time,the Applicant proposes a change to the development plan for the site. A modification to the DA is proposed for the purpose of replacing the agreement with a new agreement allowing for the development of a mix of single-family detached and attached dwellings,townhome dwellings and multi-family residential apartments on the site consistent with the plan included in Section VIII.I. The existing DA includes two (2) different conceptual development plans for the site as shown in Section VIII.A. These plans depict approximately 400,000 square feet of professional office,hotel,big box retail and smaller retail spaces. The proposed development plan with single-family detached homes adjacent to existing single-family detached homes to the west in The Landing subdivision and future medium-density residential uses to the north across Waltman Ln., single-family attached and townhome dwellings internal to the development, and multi-family apartments on the eastern portion of the development provides a good transition to proposed commercial/retail uses to the east across the Ten Mile Creek with the concurrent 1-84 and Meridian Road application(H-2021- 0099) (see Section VIII.C). History: Two(2)previous development applications for this site were denied by City Council, one in 2018 (H— 2018-0023) and another in 2020 (H-2020-0024). The first,which included a request for an amendment to the Page 10 FLUM from Commercial to MHDR,was denied due to the finding that the proposed amendment wasn't in the best interest of the City for the following reasons: 1)Concern that the property will not be maintained consistently due to different ownership of the structures and associated areas; 2)Desire for the applicant to participate in the Comprehensive Plan update that's currently in process,rather than requesting an amendment to the FLUM outside of that process; 3)Preference for commercial employment type uses to develop on this property rather than residential as the original plan proposed; 4)Concern related to impact on area schools, proposed density and traffic (i.e. resulting safety hazards); and 5)Conclusion that the timing wasn't right for an amendment to the FLUM(a City initiated update to the plan was in process at that time) and the development of the property as proposed.Note:Between the application in 2018 and the one in 2020 the FLUM designation for this property was changed from Commercial to Mixed-Use Community(MU-C)with the City's update to the Comprehensive Plan, which allowed the subsequent application to be submitted without an amendment to the FLUM. With the second application, Council found the proposed rezone was not in the best interest of the City because the sole residential use of the property was not consistent with the MU-C designation. Further, Council didn't want to set a precedent by"floating"a FLUM designation(i.e. MDR)and burdening the adjacent property to the east with providing only the non-residential component of the mix of uses desired for this area per the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed residential development plan is largely the same as those previously submitted for this site. However,the key difference is that a development application is concurrently in process for the 70+/-acres of land directly to the east across the Ten Mile Creek as mentioned above(i.e. I-84 &Meridian Rd.H-2021-0099) and an amendment to the FLUM is proposed to MHDR,which supports the proposed uses and is compatible with adjacent existing and future development. Because the proposed development plan for this site has completely changed from the conceptual commercial development previously approved and the terms of the agreement are no longer applicable, Staff is supportive of the request for a new DA to replace the existing agreement based on the proposed development plan. Staff s recommended provisions for the new DA are included in Section VIII.A.I and the development plans for the overall site are included in Section VIII.Note:If the amendment to the FLUMproposed with H-2021-0099 is not approved, Staff is not supportive of the proposed MDA (and consequently the RZ, PP and CUP applications)per the analysis above in Section V due to inconsistency of the proposed development plan with the MU-C designation. B. REZONE(RZ) A rezone of a total of 41.89 acres of land, including adjacent right-of-way, from the C-G to the R-8 (12.16 acres),R-15 (12.27 acres)and R-40 (17.46 acres)zoning districts is proposed for the development of a mix of single-family detached and attached dwellings,townhouse dwellings and multi-family apartments. The proposed uses and zoning districts are consistent with the amendment to the FLUM proposed with H-2021-0099 to the MHDR designation.Legal descriptions and exhibit maps for the areas proposed to be rezoned are included below in Section VIII.B. The Allowed Uses table in UDC Table 11-2A-2 for residential districts lists single-family detached and attached dwellings and townhouse dwellings as principal permitted uses in the proposed R-8 and R-15 zoning districts; and multi-family developments as a conditional use in the R-40 zoning district, subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. Because a DA already exists on this property,the Applicant requests a modification to the DA(MDA)to replace the existing agreement with a new agreement consistent with the proposed development plan as discussed in Section VI.A above. To ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends the provisions included in Section VIII are included in a new DA for the subject property. Page 11 C. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP) A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 130 buildable lots [83 single-family(16 alley-loaded, 67 front- loaded),45 alley-loaded townhome and 2 multi-family] for a variety of housing types and 20 common lots on 38.05 acres of land in the proposed R-8,R-15 and R-40 zoning districts. The single-family lots range in size from 3,850 to 10,536 square feet(s.f.)with an average lot size of 5,132 s.f.A total of 16 alley-loaded homes and 67 front-loaded homes are proposed with lot widths of 40, 50 and 60 feet.A total of 45 alley-loaded townhomes are proposed with lot sizes ranging from 2,400 to 3,884 s.f. with an average lot size of 2,739 s.f. The proposed plat results in an overall gross density of 10.72 units/acre and a net density of 16.44 units/acre, which is consistent with the FLUM amendment proposed with H-2021-0099. Phasing: The plat is proposed to develop in four(4)phases as shown in Section VIII.C. The Applicant requests flexibility in the phasing to adjust the number of lots,combination of lots and number of phases to reflect changing market conditions. Staff is amenable to this request unless otherwise restricted in the Cooperative Development Agreement with Ada County Highway District(ACHD) or as otherwise approved by City Council. Because noise from I-84 will greatly affect future residents in this area,Staff recommends noise abatement in the form of a berm and wall is constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D in its entirety with the first phase of development as a provision of the Development Agreement. The Applicant requests these improvements be constructed with Phases 3 and 4,prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancies within each phase. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There are several existing structures on this site that are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat for the phase in which they are located. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the UDC dimensional standards for the associated zoning districts is required,as follows: Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district; Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district; and Table 11-2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district. The standards for all development in residential districts are listed in 11-2A-3. Depict zero(0)lot lines where single-family attached and townhome units are proposed to span over property lines. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): One(1)public street access is proposed via the extension of W. Ruddy Dr., a local street, at the west boundary of the site and two (2) accesses(one public street and one driveway)are proposed via W. Waltman Ln., an existing local street to be designated a collector street from Meridian Rd.to S. Kearney Ave. with this development. A stub street(S.W. 7'Ave.) is proposed to the out-parcel(Cooper property#S 1213428090) at the northwest corner of the site for future extension and/or access. UDC 11-3A-3A.3 requires all subdivisions to provide local street access to any use that currently takes direct access from a collector street unless otherwise waived by City Council. Because the adjacent property to the east only has access via Waltman Ln.,a collector street, a local street with a vehicular bridge over the Ten Mile Creek that includes a minimum 5-foot wide pedestrian walkway on at least one side,should be provided in lieu of the proposed pedestrian connection. Three(3)common driveways are proposed off internal public streets that are required to be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. Exhibits for these driveways are included in Section VIILD that demonstrate compliance with the required standards. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat application should be revised to depict 5-foot wide landscape buffers planted with shrubs,lawn or other vegetative groundcover where solid fencing is proposed adjacent to the common driveway as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D.5.A perpetual ingress/egress easement is required to be noted on the final plat,which Page 12 shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment.Address signage should be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes. Three(3) alleys are proposed off internal public streets that are required to comply with and be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5.Include a cross-section of the typical alley on the plat. For addressing purposes and for wayfinding in the event of an emergency,the Fire Dept. is requesting private streets are provided within the multi-family portion of the development. A private street application shall be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Road Improvements: The Applicant proposes to construct the extension of Corporate Dr., a collector street, off-site from its current terminus north of Ten Mile Creek to Waltman Ln. within existing ROW with the first phase of development(54 building lots). The construction of Corporate Dr. will include the construction of a new bridge over the Ten Mile Creek. This will provide additional access to the site and provide for additional access while the Ten Mile Creek bridge on Waltman is being reconstructed. The roadway north of the bridge should be constructed as a 40-foot wide commercial street section with vertical curb,gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk. The crossing of Ten Mile Creek will require a 58-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. Staff recommends the roadway south of the bridge to Waltman Lane is constructed as a complete street section with detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathways along both sides of the street.These improvements will occur with the first phase of development(54 lots)and shall be complete prior to issuance of any building permits. The Applicant proposes to construct Waltman Lane as %2 of a 36-foot wide street section with curb, gutter, an 8- foot wide planter strip/parkway and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk within 29-feet of right-of-way(ROW) from centerline with 7-feet of the sidewalk located outside of the dedicated ROW abutting the site. All improvements are proposed to be constructed south of the existing edge of pavement for Waltman Ln., shifting the centerline 8-feet south to the south. ACHD is requiring the Applicant to construct the north side of Waltman with a minimum of 12-feet of pavement from centerline, a 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a borrow ditch to accommodate the roadway storm run-off. Center turn lanes are required to be constructed on Waltman Ln. at the apartment driveway. The improvements to Waltman Ln.will require reconstruction of the existing bridge over the Ten Mile Creek as a full 36-foot street section with curb and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalks. This will require a 54-foot wide bridge with 2-foot parapets. These improvements should be completed as required by ACHD in the Cooperative Development Agreement. Pathways(UDC 11-3A-8): A segment of the City's regional pathway is depicted on the Pathways Master Plan along the west side of the Ten Mile Creek.A 10-foot wide multi-use pathway is proposed consistent with the Plan with a pedestrian bridge over the creek for connectivity with the proposed commercial development to the east. A pedestrian easement is required to be submitted to the Planning Division for this pathway in accord with Park's Dept. requirements. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks are required to be constructed adjacent to all public streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17 as proposed. The UDC requires 5-foot wide detached sidewalks to be constructed along all collector streets(i.e. W.Waltman Ln. and Corporate Dr.). Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are required to be constructed and landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E. Landscaped parkways are proposed along W. Ruddy Dr./S.Kearney Ave. and W. Waltman Ln. in accord with UDC standards. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): Street buffer landscaping is required to be provided as set forth in UDC Tables 11-2A-6 for the R-8 district, H- 2A-7 for the R-15 district and 11-2A-8 for the R-40 district and planted in accord with the updated standards Page 13 listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. Street buffers are required to be placed in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement, maintained by the property owner or homeowner's association. A 20-foot wide street buffer is required along W.Waltman Ln.,to be designated as a collector street with this development; a 37-foot wide buffer is proposed with a 3-foot tall landscaped berm and a 10-foot wide detached sidewalk. Common open space areas are required to be landscaped per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-5B. Landscaping is proposed in these areas in excess of the minimum standards. The open space landscape requirements on the Landscape Requirements table on the landscape plan should be revised to reflect the updated standard of one(1) deciduous tree for every 5,000 square feet of common open space. Landscaping is required to be provided along pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. Minimum 5-foot wide landscape strips are required along each side of all pathways planted with 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; shrubs should be added on the west side of the pathway along the creek in accord with this standard. Include mitigation information on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat application as applicable for tree preservation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-I0C. Qualified Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G): The single-family and townhome portion of the development is subject to the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3.A minimum of 15%qualified open space is required to be provided for the R-8 and R-15 zone in accord with the quality standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2 and shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B. Based on the acreage of the R-8 and R-15 zoned portion of the development(i.e. 22.03-acres), a minimum of 3.30-acres of qualified open space is required. The open space exhibit included in Section VIII.G depicts 3.66- acres of qualified open space, exceeding the minimum standard by 0.36-acre. Proposed qualified areas consist of 100%of the collector street buffer along Waltman Ln. (on the single-family&townhome portion of the development),which is required to have enhanced landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.3 for entryway corridors and comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B.2. The multi family portion of the development is also required to provide common open space per the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C in addition to this requirement(see analysis below). Based on the acreage of the R-8 and R-15 zoned portion of the development(i.e. 22.03-acres), a minimum of four(4)points of site amenities are required per UDC 11-3G-4A; a list of qualified site amenities and associated point values are included in UDC Table 11-3G-4. The following amenities and associated point values are proposed: a tot lot with benches(1 point), a half basketball court and a pickleball court with benches(i.e.paved sports court at 4 points each= 8 points),multi-use pathway along Waltman Ln. and along the Ten Mile Creek (1/4+mile—2 points), exceeding the minimum standard by 7 points. The multi family portion of the development is also required to provide site amenities per the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 in addition to this requirement(see analysis below under Conditional Use Permit). Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. A combination of 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing and 6-foot tall wrought iron fencing is proposed as shown on the landscape plan. A 9-foot tall berm with a 6-foot tall rhino rock stamped concrete wall is proposed within the street buffer along the southern boundary of the site as noise abatement to buffer the residential uses from the traffic on 1-84 in accord with UDC 11-3H-4D;the wall is proposed to be staggered every linear 300' in accord with UDC standards to avoid a monotonous wall(see detail in Section VIII.F). The detail of the wall should be revised on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat application to include the centerline of the west- Page 14 bound travel to demonstrate compliance with the requirement for the berm/wall to be a minimum of 10 feet higher than the elevation at the centerline of the state highway. Existing Easements: There is an existing 100-foot wide irrigation easement(50' each side of centerline) for the Ten Mile Creek held by NMID along the east boundary of the site as depicted on the plat, some of which lies on the adjacent property to the east. A 20-foot wide City sewer easement also exists along the east boundary of the site as depicted on the plat. Waterways: The Ten Mile Creek runs along the east boundary of the site and is required to be left open as a natural amenity and not be piped as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.1 as proposed. Flood Zone: A portion of the site along the east boundary lies within Flood Zone"A"per FEMA Map #16001CO232H. This site is not within the floodplain. Utilities: Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. An existing 15-inch sewer main lies along the east half of the Waltman Ln. frontage and along the west top of bank of the Ten Mile Creek through the site. The 8-inch sewer main connection will be in Waltman Ln. and will serve the entire site via gravity sewer. An existing 12-inch water main is located in Waltman Ln. along the full frontage of the site. This subdivision will connect in Waltman at two locations and also to the existing 8"stub located at the Landing Subdivision stub street(Ruddy)at the west boundary. See Section VIII.B below for Public Works comments/conditions. Pressurized Irrigation System: A regional pressure irrigation pump station is proposed to be constructed with this development to NMID standards with a Ten Mile Creek takeout in the northeast corner of the site near Waltman Ln. Pressure irrigation distribution lines and individual lot services will be provided to all lots in the subdivision. Pressurized irrigation systems should comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3A-I5. 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 shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18.A Geotech report was submitted for this development. Storm drainage is proposed to be mitigated by underground seepage beds and/or retention ponds in accord with ACHD design criteria. Stormwater swales incorporated into required landscape areas are required to be vegetated with grass or other appropriate plant materials and designed to accommodate the required number of trees as per UDC 11-3B-7 if located in a street buffer or other required landscape area. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential structures on the site as shown in Section V111.1. One and two-story single-family detached and townhome dwellings are proposed with a mix of front-loaded and alley-loaded styles in a mix of materials and colors. Single-story homes are proposed along the southern boundary adjacent to I-84 to minimize the sound impact to residents. In the multi-family portion of the development, one(1)2-story and 11 3-story apartment buildings are proposed containing 16-units and 24-units,respectively along with a single-story clubhouse.A mix of materials are proposed consisting of stucco and horizontal and vertical siding with stone veneer accents. The 2-story multi- family building is proposed along the northern boundary adjacent to Waltman Ln. to minimize bulk and wall effect. Staff recommends The rear and/or sides of new homes facing Interstate 84 and W.Waltman Ln. incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections, Page 15 recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public streets.Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. All single-family attached,townhome and multi-family structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual; single-family detached structures are exempt from this requirement. An administrative Design Review application is required to be submitted for approval of the design of all single-family attached and townhome structures in the development prior to submittal of building permit application for those structures.An application for Certificate of Zoning Compliance is also required to be submitted along with Design Review for the multi-family portion of the development. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CUP) Conditional use permit for a multi-family development consisting of 280 residential units on 15.88 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. A total of(94) 1-bedroom units, (152)2-bedroom units and(34) 3-bedroom units are proposed in 12 structures on the eastern portion of the site. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): The proposed use is subject to the following standards: (Staff's analysis/comments in italic text) 11-4-3-27: MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT: Site Design: Buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten feet(10')unless a greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or title 10 of this Code. Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances,porches and patios, and how they impact adjacent properties. The proposed site plan complies with this standard. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas,waste storage, disposal facilities, and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. The site plan depicts screened trash enclosures not visible from a public street; all proposed transformer/utility vaults and other service areas shall comply with this requirement. 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 11-513-5 of this title.Floor plans were submitted that depict porches or balconies for each unit in accord with this standard. 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. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles,boats or other personal recreation vehicles shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and screened area. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in chapter 3, "Regulations Applying to All Districts", of this title.Ninety-four(94) 1-bedroom units, (152)2-bedroom units and(34) 3-bedroom units are proposed(parking is not required for the clubhouse). Based on the number of units proposed, a total of 575 spaces are required with 280 of those in a covered carport or garage.A total of 581 spaces are proposed with 280 of those in a covered carport or garage, which exceeds the minimum standard by six Page 16 (6)spaces. Based on the number of vehicle parking spaces proposed, a minimum of 23 bicycle parking spaces should be provided dispersed throughout the development. Developments with twenty(20)units or more shall provide the following: • A property management office. • A maintenance storage area. • A central mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access. • 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 property management office and maintenance storage area are depicted on the floor plan for the clubhouse. Central mailbox locations are proposed at the trash enclosures and a directory&map of the development is provided at the clubhouse. The site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance should clearly depict the location of these items. Common Open Space Design Requirements: The total baseline land area of all qualified common open space shall equal or exceed ten(10)percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of five(5) acres or more. When multi-family is approved concurrently with single-family,the minimum open space requirements in UDC 11-3G-3 shall apply to the gross land area of entire development (i.e. 15%).Based on 15.88 acres, a minimum of 103,760 sf. (or 2.38 acres) is required that meets the standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-2 7C.2, 3, 4 and 5. The proposed common open space areas all have direct pedestrian access,high visibility, comply with CPTED standards and support a range of leisure and play activities and uses as desired. Open space is accessible and well-connected throughout the development by pathways and visually accessible along the collector street in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27C.2. All multi-family projects over 20 units are required to provide at least one(1) common grassy area integrated into the site design allowing for general activities by all ages,which may be included in the minimum required open space total. The minimum size of common grassy areas shall be at least 5,000 s.f. in area and is required to increase proportionately as the number of units increase and be commensurate to the size of the multi-family development as determined by the decision-making body. Where this area cannot be increased due to site constraints, it may be included elsewhere in the development. Several open grassy areas are provided that exceed 5,000 s.f. in area,which Staff feels is commensurate with the size of the development. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum outdoor common open space is required, as follows: 250 s.f. for each unit containing more than 500 and up to 1,200 s.f. of living area(246 units x 250 s.f. =61,500 s.f. or 1.41 acres)and 350 s.f. for each unit containing more than 1,200 s.f. (34 units x 350 s.f. = 11,900 s.f. or 0.27 acre),which equals 73,400 s.f. or 1.68 acres. With the baseline requirement(i.e. 103,760 s.£ or 2.38 acres), a minimum of 177,160 s.f. or 4.06 acres of qualified common open space is required overall.A total of 4.37 acres is proposed to be provided as shown in Section VIII.G; however, there are a couple of areas that don't meet the standards for qualified open space as follows: the 10'wide strip along the west boundary of the site consisting of 10,196 sf. (or 0.23 acre) is below the minimum width dimension of 20';and the area at the northeast corner of the site on the other side of the creek consisting of 3,802 sf. (or 0.09 acre) is not well-connected or accessible from this development except by the pathway along Waltman Ln. Without these areas, 4.05 acres is still provided, which rounded down to the whole number, meets the minimum standard. Page 17 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')per UDC 11-4-3-27C.5. The common open space areas depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VIII.G meet this requirement except for the linear area along the west boundary adjacent to parking as mentioned above. 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 per UDC 11-4-3-27C.6. The multi family component of this project is proposed to be developed in two (2)phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VIII.C and appears to comply with this standard. 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 per UDC 11-4- 3-27C.7.A 3-foot tall berm is proposed within the street buffer along Waltman Ln., a collector street, which should be increased to 4-feet in height. Site Development Amenities: For multi-family developments with 75 units or more, four(4)amenities are required to be provided with at least one (1)from each category listed in UDC 11-4-3-27D (i.e. quality of life, open space,recreation,multi-modal). For developments with more than 100 units,the decision-making body should require additional amenities commensuarate to he size of the proposed development. The applicant proposes amenities from each of the required categories as follows: a 5,750 s.f clubhouse with a fitness facility, dog washing facilities, a cycle shop and tenant storage closets; a covered patio with BBQ at the clubhouse, a gazebo at the pool deck, a picnic gazebo at play area, greenbelt plaza, swimming pool&spa with changing facilities &restrooms, children's play structure/tot lot, a pickleball sports court,a bicycle repair station and charging stations for electric vehicles. Staff is of the opinon the proposed amenities are commensurate with the 280-unit apartment project proposed and meet and exceed the requirement. Landscaping Requirements: Landscaping is required in accord with the standards in UDC 11-3B. All street facing elevations are required to have landscaping along their foundation as follows: the landscaped area shall be at least three feet(3')wide; for every three(3)linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a minimum mature height of twenty-four inches(24") shall be planted; and ground cover plants are required to be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area.Landscaping is depicted along the foundation of elevations that face Waltman Ln. that appears to comply with this standard. 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 and submit a recorded copy of this document to the Planning Division prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the first structure within the development. Police access under exigent circumstances: Multifamily developments with units that take access via secured common corridors are required to install and maintain a keyless entry system, or suitable alternative, to provide police access to the common corridors under exigent circumstances. The keyless entry system or alternative shall be subject to review and approval by the Meridian Police Department. Private Streets: As noted above, for addressing purposes and for wayfinding in the event of an emergency, the Fire Dept. is requesting private streets are provided within the multi-family portion of the development. A private street application shall be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. Page 18 VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed MDA,RZ,PP and CUP applications per the provisions included in Section VIII in accord with the Findings in Section IX if the proposed amendment to the FLUM is approved with H-2021-0099. If the proposed amendment is not approved, Staff recommends denial of the proposed MDA, and consequently the RZ,PP and CUP applications per the analysis in Section V due to inconsistency of the proposed development plan with the MU-C designation as noted above. Page 19 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Conceptual Development Plans Included in Existing Development Agreement N7 IE 91 tZ tn mnow IN Ji -------;Mf-------------- ............ HH*MM F. mmmrL' DIHIIIIHH .......... 110 Waltman Annex MwkMrL Idaho Page 20 B. Rezone Legal Descriptions and Exhibit Map Legal Description Tanner Creek Subdivision —Zone R-8 A parcel being located in the SE '/a of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 518 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of said SE la (C ,/ Corner),from which a brass Cap monument marking the northeast Corner of said SE'/d(%Corner) bears S 89952'43"E a distance of 2642.71 feet; Thence S 89°52'53" E along the northerly boundary of said SE Y4 a distance of 250.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing along said northerly boundary S 89°52'53" E a distance of 543.81 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0°01'45" VV a distance of 196.36 feet to a point; Thence N 89°56'05"W a distance of 129,13 feet to a point, Thence N 88`43'36"W a distance of 59.52 feet to a point; Thence N 89`52'43"W a distance of 305.30 feet to a point; Thence S 0°04'14"W a distance of 331.54 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 199.11 feet along the arc of a 125.00 foot radius curve right, said curve having a central angle of 91°15'53"and a long chord bearing S 44°25'59"W a distance of 178.72 feet to a point of tangency; Thence N 89°56'05"W a distance of 46.97 feet to a point; Thence S 0'01'30"W a distance of 422.85 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 84.04 feet along the arc of a 53.50 foot radius curve left, said curve having a central angle of 90'00'13" and a long chord bearing S 44°58'37" E a distance of 75.66 feet to a point of tangency; Thence S W58'43" E a distance of 427.00 feet to a point; Thence N 88°33'04" E a distance of 56.77 feet to a point; Thence S 89°56'05" E a distance of 129.17 feet to a point; Thence S 0°00'04"IN a distance of 301.28 feet to a point on the centerline of Interstate 84; Thence along said centerline S 89'59'24"W a distance of 795.12 feet to a point on the westerly boundary of said SE 1A; Thence along said westerly boundary N 0003'55"E a distance of 1189.59 feet to a point; Tanner Creek—R-S Zone LrfSt�Jut><o1'JS Lr.a s­yi�y,.a Page 1 Of 2 Job No.2$-Q4 Page 21 Thence leaving said westerly boundary S 69°44'33" E a distance of 249.82 feet to a point; Thence N Y0636" E a distance of 242.69 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 12.158 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use. Clinton UV. Hansen, PLS p,�-EAND Land Solutions, PC 110 G s October 19, 2023 T 11118 L�irar�5lfr �ls Tanner Creek—R-$T_ona �_. ann su••er•�7 a.a[gnso ins Page 2 Of 2 .lob No.23-54 Page 22 Le al Description Tanner Creek Subdivision — Zone R-1 a A parcel being located in the NW"/of the SE'/d of Section 13. Township 3 North: Range 1 West, Boise Veridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particu€arly described as follows: Commencing at a 518 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 'I (C % Corner), from which a brass cap monument marking the northeast corner of the SE "la (K Corner)of said Section 13 bears 5 89°52'43" E a distance of 2542.71 feet; Thence S 89°52'53" E along the northerly boundary of said NVV '14 of the SE la a distance of 793.81 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0'0V45'W a distance of 196.36 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing 5 090145" W a distance of 427.80 feet to a point; Thence N 6965V 7" VV a distance of 112.70 feet to a point; Thence S 0006'20° E a distance of 104.81 feet to a point; Thence S 89059'36" E a distance of 11 2.51 feet to a point; Thence S 0900'04"VV a distance of 399.55 feet to a point; Thence N W56'06° VV a distance of 129.17 feet to a point; Thence S 88'33'04" VV a distance of 56.77 feet to a point; Thence N 89°68'43° VV a distance of 427.00 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 84.04 feet along the arc of a 53.50 foot radius curve right, said curve having a central angle of 90'00'13" and a long chard bearing N 44058'37"W a distance of 75.66 feet to a point of tangency; Thence N 0'01'30" E a distance of 422.85 feet to a point; Thence S 89055'05" E a distance of 46.97 feet to a point of curvature; Thence a distance of 199.11 feet along the arc of a 125.00 foot radius curve left, said curve having a central angle of 91'15'53" and a long chord bearing N 44025'59" E a distance of 178.72 feet to a paint of tangency; Thence N 0"04'14"E a distance of 331.54 feet to a point; Thence S 89°52AY E a distance of 305.30 feet to a point; Thence S 86043'36" E a distance of 59.52 feet to a point; Lzi � �� �ons Tanner Creek—R-15 Zone land survayln9 Ana canwrnq Page i of 2 Jab No.2M4 Page 23 Thence S 89'56'05" E a distance of 129.13 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 12.272 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use. Clinton VV_ Hansen, PLp L LAly� Land Solutions, PC tio s r � October 18, 2423 �4 �N VV LAnd olution Tamer Creek—R 15 Zone Page 2 of 2 -�-- �w sup or.y+�c cv�uidn9 Job No.23-64 Page 24 Le al Descrirytion Tanner Creek Subdivision —Zone R-40 A parcel being located in the SE /A of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows. Commencing at a 5f8 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of said NW% of the SE "/ (C l Corner), from which a brass cap monument marking the northeast corner of the SE 'fa(%Corner) of said Section 13 bears S 89°52'43" E a distance of 2642.71 feet; Thence S 89°52'53" E along the northerly boundary of said NVV % of the SE '/d a distance of 793,81 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence continuing along said northerly boundary 5 89°52'43" E a distance of 527.62 feet to a point marking the northeast corner of said NW%of the SE'l4; Thence along the easterly boundary of said NW'/of the SE'/S W19'27"VV a distance of 1428.67 feet to a point on the centerline of Interstate 84, Thence leaving said easterly boundary and along said centerline S 89°59'24" W a distance of 519.85 feet to a point; Thence leaving said centerline N 0000'04" E a distance of 700.93 feet to a point, Thence N 89059'35"W a distance of 112.51 feet to a point; Thence N 0°06'20"W a distance of 104,81 feet to a point; Thence S 89'58'17" E a distance of 112.70 feet to a point; Thence N 0`01'45" E a distance of 624.16 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thisparcel contains 17.455 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS ��,L LAND Land Solutions, PC ���� is r s October 19,2023 4 fi _ 11118 c, a 10 0 F \O �n�ollutions Tanner Creek-R Zane U e Su yinq.na co�u innq Job NO.o.23-$4 Page 25 TANNER CREEK SUBDIVISION - ZONING EXHIBIT CITY OF MERIDIAN REZONE - R-8, R-15, R-40 LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 ❑F SECTION 13, T3N, R1W, BM.ADA COUNTY, IDAHO HAM CF BEARING 1/4 C 1/4 W, WALTMAN IN. 589.52,43,E 2642.71' 138 256.D0' 543,81' 52T62' 1321.�aQ1�i x l POINT OF POINT OF ;o CFJ BEGINNING POINT OF BEGINNING Q R-8 BEGINNING a R-40 I `4 305.30' R-15 589'44'33"E NB9'52'43"W L5 L4 N + 249.82' � I ¢ � w u� ZONE R-8 AREA=12.158 z ACRES ZONE R-40 L AREA=17.458 ACRES Zn LQ L6 ZONE R-15 AREA=12.272 ACRES LIME TABLE r L1 LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 112.51' N89'59'36'W Lo onp L2 104,51' NO'05'20'W �n My cv - p Cj a rn L3 112.70' S8958'171 o L4 129.13' N89'56'05'W L5 59.52' NOM'35"W °n L6 46.97' N89'56'OTW P o 589'58'43'E L7 L8 L7 56.77' N88'33'04"E 42TDO' 27 LS 129.17' S89'56'05`E co N O r'7 S89'59'24"W 795.12' S89'59'24"W 619.85' CURVE TABLE INTERSTATE 1-84 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA BEARING CHORD iopLLAIyj>� r G1 199.11' 125.00' 9115'53" 544'25 59"W 178.72 � p -C 1 c2 84.0¢' 53.50• 90•00•13• s44.58'37°r: 75 sa' W. OVERLAND RD.24- �, .+�°l t 11 � 734$ 1/4 0' lab' 2U0' 404' Lan o� ns ' �� OF ~� Larsd 5urvayinp and CanaUWO .p ¢. 231 E.STN 37..37�A NE RF�IAM 16 93842 {Z�}288-2646 [2GB129B,2557 fax _.:i:::• n L Page 26 C. Preliminary Plat(date: 7/6/2023) &Phasing Plan � 4 --�-••--•--�-'--- u � ,..,L.�-._-,- €fig " g C cl MH re I g.® G) it � �og�ge9 :; i jl jl _ m.M grsg 7^ n `� _•_—as:"�_ _'_'_:_—— a lil II .®...:w��.,..`.w.,w.�::,��.��<., �Z eat 7 M- - % Hdd e III '� — .�.a�� �•a f..Ga 'g !{ m J zm.a!re al. «ra:wo ----- _I 00 I ., $ ] 1 •L III r- �--' &I"nIXG EEr9ICM qlr�:per' :� {y �' a � � •�'� L 1 I �: ��� .� q .�..a.w f y O S 3�5 - T �i• L�— I�� � _�LEGENU �V=i�e��'s I _•;. PRE-1 Page 27 ! er- (� e - ;si o --- ----. II — — __ i i •N,ar�w....NE.A�NEo s�NEwAN, M Wy�F j! l % = e e �xv E -�—��� ea'Beni-w-wAY fwnLeuAN Lu,E1 � � N�o��,e�w�N PRE-2 ..,w.w. w. r �. X �e a 74 e , v , r r I e n _, � ti ��� � --------�ems...• 1 - f ° e - � PRE-3 Page 28 D. Common Driveway Exhibits a 0 ACCESS FROM SW 7TH AVE.PER CITY OF MERIDIAN UDC 11-6C-3D.5 z o 0 o c � 0 3 52 �' 11 =; NOTE:IF A 6'SOLID FENCE IS INSTALLED + N. ADJACENT TO THE COMMON DRIVE A 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL BE REQUIRED +' `----------------------z.- 5'SIDE ' N 51 W.JACKSNIPE DR. ---20'FRONT -- 20' N FENCE(WILL NOT EXTEND PAST a FRONT PLANE OF DWELLING),(TYP.) x20's -- -- ,. RONT �,; ai�fWar a Y ------20' FR----- HOME ORIENTATION HOME ORIENTATION ACCESS FROM W, N $ JACKSNIPE DR.PER ACCESS FROM W. 5 .., CITY OF MERIDIAN UDC JACKSNIPE DR.PER a 11-fiC-30.5 CITY OF MERIDIAN UDC - 11-6C-3D.5 LL 49 48 47 0 46 BLOCK 3 R-8 ZONE PRELIMINARY PLAT .w. L________________J ----------____-; ------------_- -________----_; TANNER CREEK 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR SUSDIKSION COMMON ORIl7£EXHIBIT 1) 50 fENCE(SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) 50 1" = 30' 10 31 BLOCK 3 Q. a 5�SIDE z 0 3 o a o ------------- ----- Y � I F v 32 � N. ACCESS FROM S.MALAYAN AVE.PER NOTE:IF A 6'SOLID FENCE IS INSTALLED CRY OF MERIDIAN UDC 11-6C-30-5 ADJACENT TO THE COMMON DRIVE A 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL BE REQUIRED i 55'SIDE 33 W. JACKSNIPE DR, 34 0 20' 20 FRONT N FENCE(WILL NOT EXTEND PAST 25' DRIVEWAY FRONT PLANE OF DWELLING),(TYP.) - - 20'FRONT VFW ____20•fRONT ACCESS FROM W. } f } ,MCKSNIPE DR.PER CDY OF MERIDIAN ODIC HOME ORIENTATION HOME ORIENTATION HOME ORIENTATION 11-8C-3D.5 39 as: 38 0 0 37 0 0 36 0 R 35 BLOCK 3 o = R-8 ZONE PRELIMINARY PLAT L------------ ------------ --------------- -------------- TANNER CREEK 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR SUBDIVISION (COMMON ORIVE EXHIBIT 2) 50 FENCE(SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) 50 1" = 30' Page 29 1 FENCE (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR 12'REAR 4 N BLOCK 3 6 -- 7 -- 8 11 w ACCESS FROM W. BROWN TROUT DR. PER TI T HOME ORIENTATION HOME ORIENTATION CITY OF MERIDIAN UDC HOME ORIENTATION 11-EC-3D.5 - o 1 L --20 FRONT J L_____________J L T DF RIVEWAY� 20'FRONT 20'FRONT 20' - FENCE (WILL NOT EXTEND PAST 5' FRONT PLANE OF DWELLING), (TYP.) SW n. o L 20'FRONT �a 10 a W. BROWN TROUT DR. W 3 NOTE! IF A 6'SOLID FENCE IS INSTALLED ADJACENT TO THE COMMON DRIVE A 5' LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL BE REQUIRED 5'SIDE 12 R-8 ZONE lw LLI ACCESS FROM S.MALAAYAN AVE.PER PRELIMINARY PLAT B 9 ¢ CITY OF MERIDIAN UDC 11-6C-30.5 - TANNER CREEK g 5'SIDE J SUBDMS/ON 13 BLOCK 3 (COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT 3) Page 30 E. Preliminary Plat Legal Description&Exhibit Map/Area Subject to Development Agreement Legal Description Tanner Creek Preliminary Plat A parcel being located in the NW'/4 of the 5E Y4 of Section 13,Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows Commencing at a 518 inch diameter iron pin marking the northwest corner of said NW 'l of the SE % (C % Corner), from which a brass cap monument marking the northeast corner of the SE %('/Corner)of said Section 13 bears S 89°5743" F a distance of 2642.71 feet; Thence 5 89'52'53" E along the northerly boundary of said NW '/n of the SE Ya a distance of 250.00 feet to a{point, Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0°06'36° VV a distance of 17.74 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of W. Waltman Lane and the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence along said southerly right-of-way 5 89'42'17" E a distance of 1071.35 feet to a point on the easterly boundary of said NW'/a of the SE%: Thence along said easterly boundary S 0'19`27°VV a distance of 1260.57 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way of Interstate 84, Thence leaving said easterly boundary and along said northerly right-of-way the following described courses and distances: Thence S 84'03'21"VV a distance of 43.25 feet to a point; Thence S 82`20'06"VV a distance of 275.70 feet to a point; Thence N 89`57'23" VV a distance of 999.43 feet to a point on the westerly boundary of said NW'J of the SE%-1 Thence leaving said northerly right-of-way and along said westerly boundary N 0°03'55" E a distance of 1082.73 feet to a point, Thence leaving said westerly boundary S 89°44'3X E a distance of 249.82 feet to a point; Thence N 0"06'36" E a distance of 224.95 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING_ This parcel contains 3a.05 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use_ � L LA�yp Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC ' October 15, 2023 d 0. 11118 VV Lan_�iolutlo IS Tanner Creek Preliminary Plat �� ra.wsu Qrnua»dconwip Job No.23-64 Page 31 TANNER CREEK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT EXHIBIT LOCATED IN THE NVV 114 OF THE SE 11.4 OF SECTION 13, T3N, R111V, BM„ADA COUNTY, ID AH0 BASIS OF BEARING 1/4 C 1�d W. WALTMAN LN. 589'52'43"E 264171' 13�18 ——— — — — — 1321,28' W r� S89'4217"E 1071.35' cc POINT OF a o cn In N ¢ BEGINNING p 42Q EE p N I � � S89'44'33"E "' 249.82' -JT PROPOSED TANNER GREET{ SUBDIVISION AREA=38.05 ACRES Li Ln ta Ln N M d 43.25' S84'03'21" f ' 275.70 N89'57'23"W 999,43' Sg2'20'06"W Lq M INTERSTATE 1-84 I I �t�p,L LA h1p ST 3 4 4 iM W. OVERLAND RD.21 a 11118 a fl' 100' 200' 00' " ;� q4Larldl iolutions �Gr raj. J£ OF 7� Land Surveying and Consulting �+Y *' T' 2MCRIDIAN,D 83642 (20B)2862040 {20B)25&2557 Im XB+i0-2.Y- Page 32 F. Landscape Plan(dated: 8/10/23) CITY OF MERIDIAN R40 LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS JTS REQUIRED mrnd­o�...Pbw�� WE TRIJ�OYONIVE/W K—NEYPVENNE eSo�as�n ue o� —LSIZi REQUIREMENTS ry PMKING LOT&kFER REWIREMENTS t III �} I > �vW.ws�arrcx II 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN R 8&R 15 _ n AMENITY REE. UIREMENTS gill ® a 11 J Q ® ... rnmw,. nor. amawrc 'i'1 H Sri I P e y m v�oovox. a. Kmsnmw,r rcxw. .n�.r aNwrm wa �� � — z Q �oR al% ❑Q w N c In w z Wz UJ—9Q o Y _O =o - w �z ❑ PROJECT INFORMATIONP�� _�— Q � s a C mw„,roa�k� U III I w w LEI. w Q�,x ..n„ rt�omrot.s Z U rn-j s z e � ll il w 3 a ER LL LA D ADC DI AKI cE $ LANDSCAPE NOTES: 9 Page 33 C . 1 ° �'0�~--O �"P�¢I. 41➢t%Lit}�}Ss-i.�: .a!s a O 0 E• O r,• e Y aW BROWN TROUTo L1 m Im o v o'�'I '� - s •F .3 ..I... •u ®91 • ° '� [cxr���s_-uaaa�a•:i?,�:� - °o U + t-.a.-,' a dm o IItRIHIF \ 0i° w �~U 11 O v pp ■ I ■•y O sly IN a^r J • •��# ,CRv M� N .. I..:...3 � m � ' [�SIiG!Mii'�13 1'tfi:L II .alraia•1111 la■ ■ a.i nni» Inoue 6. 'n �� s''• q "r 3YY�e�i;;w 'ti.' Wn�YP � :' �� o WA E LU O Uy 11 i I, O O �� • '�� O 'S)p:i ROG � O �_ A �_ � Z:� • Y u = � ny:•di^.nrvvi�a:.��w•::rv:le,•.iwEmaanr x�:si IA�Ji�:i•:rY�+_ 4 --- • O �/flf`fFf!}F/f}f/-/Fllfl/fI//f//f//N/////NFU// f//fHINN//bU.Y.S'///filffllffN Ff/}F/f�A'H/�/Nq4/e 7�tl1Yif� r G _ !d G'_, III•. :� �, R W 0 F o 0 o y, w r • n O �: bet44x Lv11:_ �._ I f::�i l"I:!1JS: I '..:1!❑!Ii ICG]'.::5: G�e DRYLAND SEEDING REQUIREMENTS LANDSCAPE AREA TOPSOIL NOTES TURF AREA PREPARATION NOTES: ,,.,, PREPARATION NOTES: s hF; TREErePROTECTION NOTES m. 4 WEED ABATEMENT NOTES s�w.,»r `"""`�°°'°"""°""�°"`"'"' •.»" ...� ,... vow.rwx.x ruxu�w �,....m,w„... � �i 3RGATON NOTES: ,�•.°..�.a Z� rere...o•. .....m,m..a y Y 0 0 0 Z�� o,�..,.1 cc 1 BUFFERAREAWITH I5'WIDE BERM ` w�aQ ,«...,.... SECTION 1 a ,K.. ..� w /1BOULDER INSTALLATION IN SHRUB/PERENNIAL BED c i TREE MITIGATION NOTES -�F •GI BERM ADJACENT TO I-84 SECTION ' ,.,..•�,» .,. WITH 8'-0'STAMPED CONCRETEWALL PLANTER BED CUT EDGE p�m •••1e'?� 6 '4NTE BI-D L�1 Sae Pi I » ,.r— n SHRUB PIANTING�tl�e•�♦� ��,u � � °" ,,,,,, � IL »� 4�DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING 0� a f _ _ (1PERENNIAL&GROUNDCOVERw Od PLANTING'^.. "'^'^ 4 "y,,��tt,_ ....*.m UQ¢jp_ L,2 W� 0 TEX= 0 WROUGHT IRON FENCE H z TREE PLANTING ON a ` °�„""°" 'T •L....'.....�^ .,.» °'.""® 3 BERM OR SLOPE �r551 CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING Li.6 Page 36 —_—Mu RIr71 Rhinanonk am CONCRETE FENCING RHINOROCK FENCE SPECIFICATIONS IOU" 75" 7 I Fr,utiny drNth:7yq.36- Tap View 1Z" TECHNICAL.INFCIRMATIM FthinoRock Fence Panel D1men5 on of panel I8Z otl s 259 crn 7;"002` Welght of Panel 105 Kg 2301bs Welght per area 21.5kg/m 4.91bs1ft Thickness of Panel 115mm 4.5" EPS Foam Core thickness 63.95mm 2.5.3-75" Glass 11ber reinforced concrete s 2 thickness 9mm 5/16" %glass Flber by volume 4-4.50% Compressive Strength of proprietary concrete mix design 4x10'NJm^2 5800 psr Ultimate tensile strength of glass fl ber reinforced concrete 9.6x106-Mx10t Nfm2 1400-2100 psl wind load capacity of panel 225 kmJh 140mph with 1.6 safety factor axlal load capaclty of pannl 1644 kg/lineal meter 11001bs{lineal foot moisture ak},orptlon of EPS foam fore by total immerylon e4% Com u5ti i ity of glass fiber reinforced concrete shell Nan tnmbtjstiblc Freeze/thaw performance 200 freese thaw cycles with no damage Derby.fungus,or mushroom attack none Termite food source none Page 37 G. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 8/7/23)& Site Amenities CITY OF MERIDIAN SINGLE FAMILY (R-8 AND R-15) OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE I�6 OPEN 5PA0! IRE17 YOfAL APEA• REQUIRED: PRwIDEl7: (d1ALI I IID OPBd WA I WA,302 5F I0.0 5 0-W AW �134AE2 MM AQ -NI 7FIE 5UiI g1ALIPIED OPEN 5PAGE AfKPMT OF 2002 5.P.IN 7NE RAO ZME(SEE D04181T XI,O),EXr,FFrM THE OAALIF1Ep OPEN SPACE pEFIOIT OF IIPeI8 5F.IN 74MM R9 ANO 1213,7FIE VP.PU*IN RAO IS TO M AmLIPP TO aCp AN;'III LANDSCAPE LEGEND M WALTMAN LAND d1ALIFl3<D d'1<N 9PA6f s I'- AREA=18,901 30.FT. W.BROWN TROUT DR AREA=1,932 SQ.FT. AREA=5,594 80.FT. W 7 d AREA=28,3715O.FT. } W AREA=1,9013 SO.FT. 0`- W Y W.EID w 4 J. vv.. ;�Y C:•R. li AREA=74.342 SO.FT. O I I Q D z d r Vr'BACKWOODS DR. S a L d ui = a � Y W J � � J C a 0 52 ff J O [ri I13 d A R E C.1.790 SQ.FT. W.JACKSNIPE DR. � 1"=200'-0" arT12023 TANNER CREEK PR❑JECT#:23051 WALTMAN LANE, MERIDIAN OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT X1.1 Page 38 2�,_ - � ► R�!�atrs��1, r� ` _ _ .__ .,. ._ _ - __ �.�• IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi! .I ■ a■ it �_ apt .•� 11>> 1) a�• � e�c�i 1 _ _ I/� i i l �/1 � ✓; , ��I) III f --'■Iwo::::�::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::� lllllll+�::T :::: II��. � l ' ;,�� I-'■■■�'11 1��IIIIIIIII 1111111111��, � I � I �, MEN - 001 _ _ MW r ■ ■1 M ■ �./ / r� y i; ■' � � ;�1111111111111%i ll11U1U�� 1 7111111R 11Its, TANNER CREEK 'C23051 4 ► ► LANE, , ► OPEN SPACE r '• •'• - EXHIBIT 6RECK01M r I a_ kit R� co le ■ ,RECREATIONI CBH j TO l Pag . ,0 z Id j k H. Site Plan for Multi-Family Portion of Development(date: 7/12/2023) TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS _ _ _ _ ---- - DEVELOPMENT DATA WALTMgN LAME,MERIDIAN,IDAXO osrslP%sx IT THEARLHRECISOFIK I cILLIIII�E.scnPx% .%.gnu onRo c>6,: xx6NxTx xc sownoxa LiP I ., I ^wm.n o.p o. . x rrs.u5v su, mm SITE DATA ..-- APARTMENT BUILDING DATA uuvnwr mv - ,wzercm a. ,swm s am. ta.s- s�wwn pxs Ruxrs x-w mx. a�vs�a s ITT ITT wrAnon eu�ezu xmn.s rt �RR,A m TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS 0-42-1- uwc wALTLww LME _ _ - ! r*nl.x a McRmIRw,I¢nna a� m ' inn unr .... xP J jM VICINITY HAP PROJECT AMENITIES ---_-� PARKIN9G0 A ANALYS a runs izxl L I .�-,., - � �.�- -• -oxsc.xcmoEs nE vn,mxQ �� NALYSIS j I o.�•�xT�xa ,� ---- AEREILL MAP _ T�' ..wwmnx¢ mi .T, a m'. .=�.eax+:w � � _ yl OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS�R re,x d mra awxm wxwx -..� r� sm AS1.0 SITE PLAM '" d =nU. TAB �` — � � REHMIfi1TGRIDG EEC T } t CONCRETE PETAILag ACCESSIBLE PARKINS SEA OMO A 4 TANNER CREEK k APARTMENTS 16 T� 5ACCESSIBLE PARKING.,oaa. 6 BNCNARON"TALL 7681"WNOETAIL AS2.0 Page 42 —— NEYNHIE6 m TAB y THEARO REMOFFIV T 3TRASx ENCLOSURE PLAN 4 TRASH EYCLOSURE PLAN------------------ Yy 1TRASHENCLOSUREPLAN a 2TRISNENClOBUREPIANN �n � mn '•'V ti'�� LW y' n ,�� `"M "�, TANNER 1 CREEK APARTMENTS wauMax�� GENERAL NOTE6���v 5TIGsx ERRLOSRRE PLAN 6 THASN ENCLOSURE PU 7 N TRASH ENCLASURE PLAN 1 MAILBOX GENERAL NOTES nT �' EF mm.t k - ® � 4 F _ A53.0 L` ---- ---- A` ----- ---- nrmuTRusx $TIGSNERCLO8UREELEYA71Ow$ 9ExC1ASURE WALL SECTION 10MAllBOx EIEYATION � l W:.raW� ma snECLlu AL CARPORT CODE ANALYSIS ;gyp � :_ .. nEnmstsom�K ------------ CARPORTPLAN TUT CARPORT PUN r. °ry .ate. CARPORT QUIRK NOTES TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS _ � wuLMax uM: - .xm..u.•v mor..n.nw�.®.w uw MEXIdul,IxnXO CARPORT FRONT ELEYATIOR CAMORi SIDE ELEYATMN ~ CARPORTSCHEOULE �i 3FIRE SEPARATION INSTANCE um A54.0 AP.CHITECUAL o*Km Page 43 I. Building Elevation Photos &Renderings Alley-loaded single-family detached units: �� -- $ Alley-loaded single-family attached units: _ f Imam - x — n Alley-loaded townhome units: r iff - na Page 44 Front-loaded single-family detached units: Af i ~� II p rt'. Ir �� I, t t NN SRN NN - i HE ate 9 Page 45 r j _ _ _ _ - .:.. .:.:.:::..:..:... 11ll �II �II� �11111�1�I II I II �� 1■11 ����I��yl I�_�IIIII� 11 11 III o IIIIII �� � I11!IIIIIIIIIIII(IIIIII_ IIII II IIIIIIII IIIIII I I!I!!I,iiiii:uulllu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11 IIIIIIIIIIVIII IVIIII _ IIIIIIII(IIII _(IIIIII(IIIIII IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII ° I�I— :IIII III IIIIII IIIII��--=I�h �I�II _IIII II IIIIII I IIII_;__=I� o —11 ! nT _ 111 mill. 1'IY IIII �n��_ 11 ❑= rr - 1u1lluuullu1u Illi ll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII t IIIIIIIIIIIIII �i ° ��� I__I�iuii__IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII__I�ui�__!!����P_��'���� �_��❑IIIIIiiuilllllllllllllllll__Ilu_ii��!__!!i❑I_��i,�_I o im o um o uu uu o �����I� II�I�IIII�I�II 111I�� �, ���� ■ ❑II I�� � m .................... .......-...-..-.....-......-.-.........-.-......-.....-..................-...-....-......-.... --- ____________________ _ _____________ _ _ = _ -_-=_-=-_________ _ _ _____- ------------- - .... :,:._.::.:::....:..:...:...:.. ` ------------------ ` II11 11® '�Illlil!1■!lalllll® I III11 11 I �11111�1�ill I�Illlr ' �111®11 �-f-111 III o IIIIII VV IIIIIIII II�IIIIIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII_z IIIIIIIIIIIIIII-IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !NINI 11IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII!I!!I, ® � ®� �IIIIIII o s I! MINE -ten- ■�-�n�- --7n�_-�■� _=11 : ❑1� ®11 :11-11 z �111®11� ® (IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII(IIIIII —m=� P��I(IIIIII(IIIIII I � I���III IIIIII II!ii�i= �® ��I a O 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---- -:: --- ---------------_::-::.:----------------:,::-:::-.-__::::_::::_::._::,:_._:::_:::_ 1 O ® ®x xilll s =- .--- v 111111111�II�fll�llhl111!=�Ir■� IIIIII�III����II�IIIIIIII®IIIIII���11lI ill I�IIII Illli�l II111!I o Il slim®1 � _ i�II=_II__��d�_ �11 -11 Hill No �'ii�oNiglio II 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 o O m m o p 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,...-nx.,: ..-..�..x.:a:: .,------_: _ :-:_____.�.�h.-r�-�- •.hn-n.�,.-�.�naanx.�.,.-�.�h:.�a::::ri,,�. =� o n �o Alill 11 Illlli 1■1 BIKE 11 11—=11 IIII!' I■� I16111�'�11!170111f111!II�� II� I�I � o�IIIIII�lIIIIII _ MIMIl, =ire® =:�� - hi■� =rare I+l�r,� -_rm■ ®�m4�'I,rr o Nor m o 0 0 o e o 0 0 I 1 " ■ :��1. imp gr rr ������_op rrl i rr r� �'I�IIIl�' 111 �rr�• fir■ ■r■ �MA�R ��jr�r jdr ��■�■ �■■� r■ 111 ��rrUf r�l A i THEAL{NR[Ci50FflLf Mdlc- m_. 6'I Tr'T,r.. I1 -11n BUILDING ELEVATION x .ram TANNER CRSEK +5i APARTMENTS waTuw u� Mgu�mWG WILMNB SHATgN rur .B� ol .r— BUILDING ELEVATION JM AC5.Q BUILDING ELEVATION EuT cwExou.� `":•-•• xIIR0.1G OP:RITWIS Page 48 TAOt .� ,L�! W , THEAtCHFFE[TSOFFIfH I � I Ll I I I � I � � I TANNER CREEK APARTMENTS m WALTMAN LANE r—— MERIDIAN,IDAHO 13 6D U 13 a 114 goo EFAL O �� 3 �,r�erm.�yaa�iY d.krlm --yy�_y� � �I �Pf110]IIIKI'J GfiR1LLC } ❑ ❑ t93Bl Aft¢ WRPHEES IfYI$Ipl$ yli ,Y aYI E6d ,Y�' SYEEI CLUBHOUSE FLOOR PLAN AC 2■Q cwaHousE FLOOR PLAN Page 49 J. Architectural Plans/Renderings of Subject Property and I-84&Meridian Rd. Property TANNER CREEK C& 1-84 MERIDIAN DEV ELOPM ENT CONCEPTUAL,SUBJECTTO CHANGE r _ �3f_ Omni scone � ` r f Ids I1J � I Page 50 a TANNER CREEK PEDES-RIANBRIDGE - ' BUILDING r PEDES r ONNEC'TION, PLAZA Ia mu REEK 'ERSPECTIV E: 1, SHOP &MERIDIAN - `— PLAZA C 7 I-84&MERIDIAN SHOP I PLAZATYPE C, w PEDESTRIAN CONIVECTION PERSPECTIVE 2, PAD4 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE �ec ria.� �e r�,+•�'f,�_ -'iSa ILNNllth LHLEK 4✓ v TANNERCREEK f. PLAZA t .- z'�� :11r _ PEDESTRLAN CONNECnON -- PLAN VIEW - ? SHOP 1 J Y O w u TANNER CREEK PL AZA PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 4 - _ FANNER CREEK PLAZA PERS BULDING L-. BULDING E .BOLDING D 1:lr f TANNER CREEK PL � M.- jig !F PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Iff TANNER CRIEEK PLAZA �► PERSPECTIVE 2 MERIDIAN RD. BUILDINGK - r a RETAIL I PAD 4 TEN MI LE CRE EK 10'MULTI-USE PATHWAY INTERSTATE84 _ SHOP PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TANNER CREEK PLAZA i 6- - • -.- TANNER CREEK PLAZA PLAN VIEW M.I � �:` �.� \RN TANNER CREEKP., O PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE y � W u W J Z K. Proposed Change to the FLUM with the I-84 &Meridian Road Project(H-2021-0099) Date: 10/12/2023 Adopted Land Uses ' %_ — ia Sao 1,000 ���% Feet �P/.0� Al..0, � 400f// Legend ® Area of City Impact aj ��f I Future Land Uses w` ��j Citywide 0 ■ �i�/%iy' ■ Low Density Residential ■- �II L Medium Density Residential i // 11 Med-High Density Residential r - High Density Residential r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ MENEM - Commercial OAF - Office i / Industrial Civic Old Town Proposed Land Uses ® Mixed Use Neighborhood _ Mixed Use Community III / �10of , " �z�P r y ► Ili,'/ / I�r M �M Mixed Use Regional ���+ ��� � - Mixed Use Non-Residential Will A I I �!'i I��/ V Mixed Use-Interchange Ten Mile Specific �f�/ - Law Density Employment ■ ■ ■ ■� ■�■ ' ____�►/y}J. "50 , Lifestyle Center ■ 1 y I - High Density Employment ■ /iqo, ��'/ / ��I �0, _/_._./'/_ _�Q ® Mixed Employment I F� —� �� OF © Mixed Use Residential 0 �` ; / /rEd %%IPH ,�,' ® Mixed Use Commercial ■ FAA 1. ■ -- �; f + ++WAIA0,04 Ira **■ Opp For, ///,% , ----------- I / I 0 I Page 54 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION Development Agreement Modification: 1. The subject property shall no longer be subject to the terms of the existing Development Agreement(DA) (Inst. #108131100)upon the property owner(s) entering into a new agreement. The new DA shall be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the City within six(6)months of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision&Order for the Development Agreement Modification and Rezone request. The new DA shall include the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual site plan, conceptual building elevations,preliminary plat,phasing plan,landscape plan, and qualified open space exhibits included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. Flexibility in the phasing to adjust the number of lots,combination of lots and number of phases to reflect changing market conditions is permitted unless otherwise restricted herein or in the Cooperative Development Agreement with Ada County Highway District(ACHD). b. The Developer shall construct a bridge across the Ten Mile Creek and extend Corporate Drive from the north to Waltman Lane as a complete street section with detached 10-foot wide multi-use pathways along both sides of the street,prior to issuance of any building permits within the first phase of development. c. The Developer shall widen W. Waltman Lane and reconstruct and widen the bridge across the Ten Mile Creek after the Phase 1 improvements have been made,which include the Corporate Drive extension, as required in the Cooperative Development Agreement with ACHD. d. Noise abatement shall be provided for residential uses adjacent to Interstate 84 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D. The berm and wall in its entirety shall be constructed with the first phase of development prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the development. e. The rear and/or sides of new homes facing Interstate 84 and W. Waltman Ln. shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public streets. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. f. No building permits shall be issued for this development until the property has been subdivided. g. At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this site be allowed to access this site using Ruddy Dr. through The Landing Subdivision. Preliminary Plat: 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Depict zero(0)lot lines where single-family attached and townhome units are proposed to span over property lines. b. Include a cross-section of the typical alley that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. c. Depict a local street/driveway connection from S. Malayan Ave.to the property to the east with a vehicular bridge over the Ten Mile Creek,that includes at a minimum a 5-foot wide walkway on at least one side, as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council, in lieu of the pedestrian bridge proposed. If City Council garnts the waiver,the applicant shall construct the pedestrian bridge and connection as proposed. Page 55 3. The landscape plan included in Section VII.D shall be revised as follows: a. Depict shrubs within the 5-foot wide strip of landscaping on the west side of the multi-use pathway along the creek in accord with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C. b. Depict a driveway across Lot 1,Block 2 to the outparcel at the northwest corner of the site(i.e. Martinez property#S1213428080)in alignment with W. Brown Trout Dr. for future access. c. Revise the detail of the wall along 1-84 to demonstrate full compliance with the noise abatement standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D,including the depiction of the centerline of the adjacent highway (i.e. 1-84). d. Depict 5-foot wide landscape buffers planted with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover where solid fencing is proposed adjacent to the common driveway as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D.5. e. The open space landscape requirements on the Landscape Requirements table shall be revised to reflect the updated standard of one(1)deciduous tree for every 5,000 square feet of common open space as set forth in UDC 11-3G-5B.3. f. Include mitigation information as applicable for tree preservation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC. g. Stormwater swales incorporated into required landscape areas are required to be vegetated with grass or other appropriate plant materials and designed to accommodate the required number of trees as per UDC 11-3B-7 if located in a street buffer or other required landscape area. h. In the street buffer along Waltman Ln.,depict enhanced landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.3f for entryway corridors and comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3B.3. i. Depict a perpetual ingress/egress easement for the common driveways on the plat and include a note with a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D.8. 4. Address signage needs to be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes. 5. All alleys shall be constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3B.5. 6. All common driveways shall be constructed per the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D as depicted in the exhibits in Section VIII.D. 7. Address signage shall be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common driveways for emergency wayfinding purposes. 8. All existing structures on this site are required to be removed prior to signature on the final plat for the phase in which they are located. 9. A 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. 10. A private street application shall be submitted for the streets within the multi-family portion of the development. All private streets shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. 11. The proposed plat and subsequent development is required to comply with the UDC dimensional standards for the associated zoning districts is required, as follows: Table II-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district; Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district; and Table 11-2A-8 for the R-40 zoning district. The standards for all development in residential districts are listed in 11-2A-3. Page 56 Conditional Use Permit: 12. The multi-family development shall have an ongoing obligation to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. 13. For each of the multi-family units,a minimum of eighty(80) square feet of private,usable open space shall be provided for each unit as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27B.3. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Floor plans with square footage noted for patios and balconies shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that demonstrate compliance with this standard. 14. The multi-family development shall record a legally binding document that states the maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development, including,but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development features as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F.A recorded copy of said document shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the development. 15. The site and/or landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance shall be revised as follows: a. Depict bicycle racks capable of holding a minimum of 23 bicycles dispersed throughout the development; include a detail for the bicycle rack that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3C-5C. b. All transformer and utility vaults and other service areas shall be located in an area not visible from a public street,or shall be fully screened from view from a public street in accord with UDC 11-4-3- 2713.2. c. Depict a directory and map of the development at the entrance or convenient location for those entering the development; and a central mailbox location,including provisions for parcel mail,that provide safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.7. d. Depict landscaping along the foundations of all street facing elevations adjacent to Waltman Ln as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27E.2. e. The berm along Waltman Ln. shall be at least four feet(4')in height as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27C.7, unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process. 16. Developments with units that take access via secured common corridors shall install and maintain a keyless entry system, or suitable alternative,to provide police access to the common corridors under exigent circumstances. The keyless entry system or alternative shall be subject to review and approval by the Meridian Police Department. B. PUBLIC WORKS https://weblink.meridiancit yLorglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=307656&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=309297&dbid=0&repo=MeridianQV D. POLICE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancioy.or lWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=305428&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiV E. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancit .00rglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=305439&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City&cr=1 Page 57 F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) hops://weblink.meridiancity.or lWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=306794&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City G. NAMPA&MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https://weblink.meridiancitE.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=306844&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitE H. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) hops://weblink.meridiancity.or lWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=305961&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City I. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridianciV.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=305608&dbid=0&re2o=MeridianCiU J. MERIDIAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION(MDC) https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308453&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX K. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciU.oLvlWebLink IDocView.aspx?id=308348&dbid=O&rgpo=MeridianCiu Traffic Impact Study (updated): https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=308355&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity Response to Review Comments on TIS Update: hops://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308356&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU Traffic Trip Generation Study(2018) & Updated Calculations: hops://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=187103&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU hops://weblink.meridiancity.oLy WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308358&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU X. FINDINGS A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-5B-3E) Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: I. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the Applicant's proposal to rezone and develop the subject property with a variety of residential uses is consistent with the associated FL UM amendment to MHDR with H-2021-0099 for the property and the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as noted above in Section V above. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment/rezone and development complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will provide for a range of housing opportunities for the community consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 58 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,and welfare; Stafffinds the proposed map amendment/rezone should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing residential properties to the west, north and east and provide a good transition to proposed commercial uses to the east. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Stafffinds City services are available to be provided to this development. Comments were not received from West Ada School District. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Stafffinds the proposed rezone is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-613-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; (Ord. 08-1372, 7-8-2008, eff. 7-8-2008) Stafffinds the proposedplat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the Development Agreement provisions and conditions of approval in Section VIII. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Stafffinds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's CIP. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Stafffinds 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 Stafffinds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9- 15-2005) Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. C. Conditional Use Permit(UDC 11-513-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit requests upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Page 59 Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-40 district(see Analysis, Section V for more information). 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Stafffinds that the proposed use is consistent with the proposed future land use map designation ofMHDR and is allowed as a conditional use per UDC Table 11-2A-2 in the R-40 zoning district. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds the proposed design of the development, construction, operation and maintenance should be compatible with the mix of other uses planned for this area and with the intended character of the area and that such uses will not adversely change the character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,streets,schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures,refuse disposal,water, and sewer. Staff finds that essential public services are available to this property and that the use will be adequately served by these facilities. Page 60 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation TANNER CREEK SUBDIVISION November 2, 2023Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Public Hearing 0048-2022-MDA RZ PP CUP H TANNER CREEK Aerial Map– TANNER CREEK Vicinity Map– TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK – TANNER CREEK Pathwayuse -Area Connecting to the Ten Mile Creek Multifamily -friendly Crossing into the Multi-PedestrianRuddy Drive through the central common area wide pathway from S. Kearney Avenue/W. -foot-10Benches and Pathways Half Basketball CourtLarge Play StructureCentral Common Area consisting of 1.70 acres percent.Qualified Open Space is 6.49 acres, or 17.06 family Amenities-Single– TANNER CREEK use Pathway along Ten Mile Creek-MultiPicnic Shelterpaths and pathways-Linear parks, microCharging Stations for Electric VehiclesIndoor Bicycle Repair Station and Dog Wash AreaPickleball Sport CourtChildren’s Play Structure and Picnic GazeboSwimming Pool, Hot Tub with Cabana at Pool DeckPlaza AreaGreenbelt at ClubhouseCovered Patio with BBQ Area Community Gathering AreaClubhouse with Fitness Facility, Kitchen, Conference Room and 3.39 acres qualified (21.35%)–3.76 acres of open space (30%) family Amenities-Multi– TANNER CREEK Townhome Elevations– TANNER CREEK load SFR Elevations-Alley– TANNER CREEK family Elevation-Single– TANNER CREEK family Elevation-Single– TANNER CREEK family Elevation-Single– TANNER CREEK family Elevation-Single– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Elevations– TANNER CREEK Pedestrian Connection– TANNER CREEK Pedestrian Connection– TANNER CREEK Plaza Perspective– TANNER CREEK PLAZA TANNER CREEK – C E IDIAN�-- Public Presentation(s) I Clair and Carrie Manning 84 and Meridian Rd- Area View Future DevelopmentExtensionRoadApartmentsHigh Density (30 Houses)R4 (27 Apartments + Clubhouse)R40(45 Houses)R15 Ruddy Drive EntranceredniL Problematic Entrance to Waltman Left Turn Onto Waltman Typical 7:30 AM Commute Typical Rush Hour Green Light Traffic Study Under Evaluation Thank You Backup Waltman Left Turn Bottlenecks on Waltman 485 ft turning lane accessCar LimitsBackward View:herecar in turning lane Only room for one taneNo turning Trip Generation Area View Future DevelopmentExtensionRoadApartmentsHigh Density (30 Houses)R4 (27 Apartments + Clubhouse)R40(45 Houses)R15 Ruddy Drive EntranceredniL