Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-26 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Doug Taylor Councilwoman Anne Little Roberts Councilman Luke Cavener Councilwoman Liz Strader Mayor Robert E. Simison ABSENT Councilman John Overton Councilman Joe Borton PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics PROCLAMATIONS \[Action Item\] 1. Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day (Historic Fourth Consecutive Title) 2. Proclamation - National Vietnam War Veterans Day RESOLUTIONS \[Action Item\] 3. Resolution No. 24-2445: A Resolution Appointing Heather Giacomo to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Proposed Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department 5. Resolution No. 24-2443: A Resolution Adopting the Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 6. Public Hearing continued from March 6, 2024 for Pathways (H-2023-0061) by Mussell Construction, Inc., located at 965 E. Ustick Rd. Application Withdrawn A. Request: Annexation of 1.11 acres of land with an L-O zoning district. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an education institution that takes access from an arterial street without a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. Motion to accept withdrawal of application made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 7. Public Hearing for Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0002 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to request a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 8. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 9. Development Agreement and Development Agreement Modification (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 H-2023-0011/H-2024-0002) Between City of Meridian and Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. for Property Located at 7080 W. McMillan Rd. Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilman Cavener. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 10. Public Hearing for Kilgore (H-2023-0063) by Alexi Kilgore, located at 1105 N. Meridian Rd. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0063 A. Request: Rezone 0.16 acres of land from the R-4 zoning district to the O-T zoning district for the purpose of converting the existing home into a hair salon. Motion to approve made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilman Taylor. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 11. Public Hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering, located at 820 S. Black Cat Rd. Continued to May 7, 2024 Continued to May 7, 2024 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 May 7, 2024 made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader 12. Public Hearing for Reveille Ridge Subdivision (H-2023-0050) by Bailey Engineering, generally located on the west side of S. Eagle Rd., approximately 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. Continued to April 16, 2024 Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0050 A. Request: Annexation of 59.97 acres of land with an R-8 (34.69 acres) and R- 15 (25.28 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 247 building lots and 37 common lots on 59.77 acres of land in the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts. Motion to continue to April 16, 2024 made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader ORDINANCES \[Action Item\] 13. Ordinance No. 24-2049: An ordinance (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 – H- 2023-0011) annexing the west half of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit “A”; rezoning 71.28 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Approved Motion to approve made by Councilman Taylor, Seconded by Councilwoman Little Roberts. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Cavener, Councilwoman Strader FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 10:36 PM Meridian City Council March 26, 2024. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:03 p.m. Tuesday, March 26, 2024, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Liz Strader, Luke Cavener, Anne Little Roberts and Doug Taylor. Members Absent: Joe Borton and John Overton. Also Present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Stacy Hersh, Kyle Ludwig, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Liz Strader Joe Borton _X_Anne Little Roberts John Overton _X_ Doug Taylor _X_Luke Cavener X Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is March 26th, 2024, at 6:03 p.m. We will begin this evening's Meridian City Council meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next up is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: Tonight's invocation will be delivered by Jason Billester of the Boise Rescue Mission. If you would, please, join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence or reflection. Mr. Billester, thanks for being here. Billester: Thank you so much, Mayor. Everyone please join me in prayer. Heavenly Father, I thank you tonight, God, for your servants, our Mayor, our city manager, our city staff, our City Council Members and the Meridian community. We come to you tonight, God, asking for your guidance, your wisdom, your keen discernment and your support as we begin this meeting. We give this meeting and time to you and I pray that you will guide our discussion that brings meaningful discussion and stronger bonds for our community. Help us, Lord, to trust you more with an impartation of your godly wisdom and discernment I pray that they will be able to solve our city's problems and make good policies. Please bring a new level of peace and clarity to everyone involved in this Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 2 of 87 meeting. Grant them excellence in their governance. In your precious mighty name, amen. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: Thank you, Jason. Appreciate it. Okay. Next up we have adoption of the agenda. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Strader. Strader: There are no changes to the agenda, but just one note that Item No. 6, the Pathways Project on Ustick, is being withdrawn for anyone in the audience that was waiting on that project. With that and no changes to the agenda, I move that we adopt the agenda as published. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone who has signed up under public forum? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we do not. PROCLAMATIONS [Action Item] 1. Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day (Historic Fourth Consecutive Title) Simison: Okay. Nothing under public forum. So, with that we will move into our proclamations this evening for the Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day. Here they come. They are all the noise outside. You guys know the drill. I don't even have to say anything. Man, I so much love doing the wrestling team more than like doing the basketball team. So, much more enjoyable from that standpoint. Well, it's an honor to be here tonight -- as we got a few more people kind of coming in. Once again celebrating our state champions at Meridian High School for the wrestling program. This will be the fourth time in four years. Are we ready to call it a dynasty or do we wait for one more before can make it an official dynasty for next year? Okay. Next year we can use the D word. This -- this year is just for a four-pete from that Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 3 of 87 standpoint. So, I'm going to go ahead and read a proclamation and, then, we will ask Coach Muri or whoever to come up and represent the team at that point in time and we will have each individual state their name and weight class and class year, so we get that on the record. But with that whereas being a Meridian High School wrestler is more than scoring points, escapes, takedowns, pins and achieving state titles, it is training to build leadership, character, confidence, teamwork and resilience, all traits needed to succeed on the mat, in the classroom and in the real world and whereas the hard work and dedication the Meridian Warrior wrestling team and coaches resulted in winning the 2024 state wrestling championship and whereas their determination racked up 14 places and four individual state champs to post 273.5 points and whereas the Meridian Warriors took their place in history becoming the first in Idaho of 5-A wrestling team to achieve a fourth straight championship and whereas the leadership, training and discipline of their coaches helped team members to focus their talents, passion and fortitude to become a dynasty -- sorry -- with each player making valuable contributions to their victory. Therefore, 1, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim March 26th, 2024, as Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in congratulating the Meridian High Warriors on their remarkable athletic achievement and for representing Meridian so proudly in the state tournament. Team, congratulations. Muri: Awesome. Yeah. I will keep this short. Thanks for coming out. I'm just really proud to be a part of what we have built at Meridian High and this is just a small group of what we have going on. We -- I think we have 22 coaches, volunteer slash official coaches, and we have about 80 athletes on the team. But, yeah, I'm just -- I'm really proud of the culture we have cultivated over the years and these are really, really good kids, not just good wrestlers and a little bit just on the history. Meridian High -- we had our first four time state champ Jason Mara over there. He is -- he is going to a little school in Cali called Stanford, which is pretty -- pretty neat. We also have Hudson Rogers going to Oregon State. And then -- man, we got -- we got a bunch of other guys that are still trying to find homes, but I think after next year we should have right around ten kids competing at the college level. So, we are just really proud of what we are building and the type of kids that we have at Meridian High. So, thank you. Simison: If you want to -- name, year in school, weight class you are wrestling. Just run through and, then, we will get a picture with everybody after, if that works. Mara: Jason Mara, 152, and I'm a senior. Gooley: Carson Gooley, I was at 195, senior. Gonzalez: Jeremiah Gonzalez, 113, junior. Morrill: Brigg Morrill, 98, freshman. Ramirez: Andrae Ramirez, 138, junior. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 4 of 87 Shaver: Logan Shaver, 145, sophomore. Bourner: Gabe Bourner, 138, sophomore. Argana: Fabrizio, 172, senior. Thornton: McKenzie Thornton, 106, freshmen. Guillen: Tobias Guillen, freshman, 106. Suter: Hezekiah Suter, 160, sophomore. Papa: Matthew Papa, 126, and I'm a senior. Bones: Bradley Bones, 182, sophomore. Hillesland: Fahad Hillesland, 152, senior. Amoureux: Ryan Amoureux, 132, sophomore. Lowe: Tagen Lowe, 195, sophomore. Beck: Jackson Beck, 113, freshmen. Torrez: Vincent Torrez, 120, freshmen. Miller: Draken Miller, 126, freshmen. Twait: Elise Twait, 152, junior. Rogers: Hudson Rogers, 182, senior. Ostoja: Adam Ostoja, 106, freshman. Jayne: Drake Jayne, 98, freshmen. Muri: Thanks, guys. Great job. Simison: And as they are -- actually, I just want to say thank you to the parents as well. I know this is a family affair and a lot of time and effort and energy over a lot of years. So, appreciate them. 2. Proclamation - National Vietnam War Veterans Day Simison: All right. Next up we have a proclamation for National Vietnam War Veterans Recognition Day. So, if I could have Helen join me up here, as well as the rest of the Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 5 of 87 group from the Meridian Emma Edwards Green Daughters of the American Revolution Chapter. Thank you all for being here and making this request. So, we will go ahead and read the proclamation and turn it over for any comments you have. So, whereas, the National Vietnam War Veterans Day is observed every year on March 29th, to thank and honor our nation's Vietnam veterans and their families for their sacrifice and whereas the Vietnam War was a time in our nation's history where service members of different backgrounds came together to complete a daunting mission and whereas we have a strong commitment to recognize and acknowledge the accomplishments of all individuals in the diverse community we serve and whereas the City of Meridian wishes to highlight the services of our armed forces and support organizations during the war, pay tribute to wartime contributions at home by American citizens and allies and acknowledge the technology, science and medical advances made during the war and whereas we respectfully say thank you for your service and welcome home to our communities' Vietnam veterans who served and let them know they will be remembered for generations to come. Therefore, I, Mayor, Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim March 29th, 2014, as National Vietnam War Veterans Recognition Day in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities that commemorate the anniversary of the Vietnam War, dated this 26th day of March 2024. So, with that, Helen, you are welcome to make any comments you would like. Helen: I wasn't prepared for this part, but I would like to say that if you have ever heard of the Daughters of the American Revolution, Emma Edward Green Chapter, is less than two years old. It's a brand new chapter here in Meridian and one of our pillars is, of course, patriotism and so any chance that we get to recognize our veterans we step forward and do that. This is all part of a concentrated effort throughout the nation to recognize the National Vietnam War Veterans Appreciation Day, which will be this Friday and so if you have the opportunity there will be a celebration at Kleiner Park right across from the Senior Center -- Senior Center and it goes on from 1 :00 to 3:30 and we will have proclamations on display from other communities here around the Treasure Valley. So, it's a great time to come out. I did invite Vietnam veterans to come, but they must be shy, because they weren't able to show up, but they are aware that we are doing this and they are very happy that we are taking the time to appreciate them and recognize them and I would like to thank the Mayor and the City of Meridian, because they have been so supportive of our chapter and anytime I have asked for any proclamation or anything they step forward. So, thank you and thank you, Mayor. Simison: Thank you. Council, that was -- while my mom didn't leave the country, she was serving during that and so the -- the Vietnam era for her and I is a little bit unique and special, so I was happy to do that one, too. A little special. I will tell my mom that. RESOLUTIONS [Action Item] 3. Resolution No. 24-2445: A Resolution Appointing Heather Giacomo to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission; and Providing an Effective Date Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 6 of 87 Simison: Okay. With that, moving on to the next item on our agenda, is Resolution No. 24-2445, appointing Heather Giacomo. That's -- I wanted -- I knew I was -- like it's not what I'm trying to say. Heather Giacomo, Seat 7, of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission and providing an effective date. As always, Blaine and I sat down and we interviewed the candidates and we had three applicants, they -- they were all excellent candidates for different reasons and purposes, but it felt that Heather was going to provide a couple of different things to the commission moving forward, one of which, you know, she combines both the historic -- having a history degree, but also an engineering degree, which is one of the identified professions in our ordinance that we need to have and let's say if Mr. Johnston decided to step down tomorrow we wouldn't have anybody that had that type of requirements on our commission and so rather than have to go out and seek someone right away to fill that requirement, we thought it would be great to get another person that had that specific ordinance requirement on the commission and would also provide a different perspective to things. So, you know, we -- I think she will be a great addition to the Historic Preservation Commission. She's newer to the community, but been here long enough I think to get her roots established and that and she's at a point in time in her life where she is ready to give back in this fashion and so we are excited to welcome her to the Historic Preservation Commission and she is here for any comments or questions should you have them before or after you make any motions. With that happy to answer any questions or stand for questions. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Welcome, Heather. We are really excited to have you and you are a woman of many talents and we appreciate your background that combines those two very different disciplines. With that I move that we approve Resolution No. 24-2445, approving -- appointing Heather Giacomo to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Resolution No. 24-2445. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the resolution is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Simison: Heather, would you like to make any comments to Council since you came all the way down here? Giacomo: Thank you. I'm just excited to be here. Excited to give back to this community. I have only been here for almost eight years, but I just love Meridian and I'm glad to put my talents to use. Thank you very much. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 7 of 87 Simison: Thanks, Heather. Good luck. And, Blaine, thanks for sticking around for the appointment. ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Proposed Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Simison: All right. With that we will move on to Item 4 on the agenda, the public hearing for proposed summer 2020 fee schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department. We will open the public hearing with staff comments from Mr. White. White: Mr. Mayor and Council, thanks for having me tonight. Good to see some of you guys -- or all you guys. I listen to over here; right, so -- our department brings our fees to you guys about three times a year, April, August and December for our Activity Guide before we publish it, just to confirm all the fees and show you guys what we have to offer for that activity guide. So, with that in front of you is the summer 2004 activity guide fees and be happy to stand for questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions -- or at least substantially -- if you want to speak for the record -- at least substantially similar to previous years, have they changed a lot, just for those that don't have the document in front of them? White: Sure. Mr. Mayor and Council, some of them have changed. In there is a document that kind of shows the increases, decreases, or no change in particular. Some of those changes do come because if there is five Tuesdays in a month and classrooms on Tuesday, compared to four Tuesdays, so they fluctuate here and there and that's relevant and, then, it documents, but they are primarily the same. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Garrett, I appreciate you putting this in the memo that this is in line with our cost recovery model. Maybe for our new Council Members, maybe a quick CliffNotes overview about what that model is for and what it's intended to do. White: Yeah. Mr. Mayor and Councilman Cavener, yeah, so our cost recovery pyramid is what we call it. It's basically we -- we do -- provide our fees based on what public benefit they get out of each program. So, for example, special events -- city special events. A lot of times they are free to the public or they benefit the whole public in itself; right? The top of the pyramid is like the individual one-on-one stuff that we do full cost recovery on. So, I hope that makes sense. So, in -- as you go down the pyramid it's like five different levels and as you go down to the thicker part of the pyramid I would say it's less cost recovery, more public benefit. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 8 of 87 Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Garrett, love seeing the new programs. I'm not sure if I'm excited or dreading family golf. It isn't planned for the Caveners this year, so thank you, maybe, but I may be offering some comments unsolicited after this season, but I appreciate just the department's trying to bring new programs and offerings into our community. Looking forward to it. White: Thanks. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Garrett, I just would like to say thank you. Year after year you guys do a great job. I am currently enrolled in two classes right now. I think I -- your staff laughs about me being one of the forever yoga people and so you guys do a great job. I don't know the definition of family golf, so I was going to ask you what family golf consists of in the case of this definition. White: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Little Roberts, good question. A lot of those descriptions I don't know by heart or off the top of my head, but I think it's getting all the -- the family together and going out and playing some golf and getting a little bit of lessons here and there. Mr. Cavener probably knows a little bit more than -- you know, read the description. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Mr. Garrett, I wanted to compliment you. I know you guys have listened to feedback and you provided a table that had the previous year with the recommended fee and the percentage increase. That appendix was perfect. That is a best practice for any kind of change going forward. That makes it so easy for us to review that memo. I just really appreciated you providing that information so it's right there upfront. Unless there are other questions, Mr. Mayor, I move that we close the public hearing. Simison: Well, we -- Strider: We haven't had the public hearing. Simison: Do we have any -- these wonderful people that are here that may want to come up and testify on this issue tonight, so -- so, you are good -- Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone that's signed up? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 9 of 87 Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present who would like to come up and provide testimony on the 2024 Parks Summer Fee Schedule? And if you are online you can use your raise your hand. Let's see if we have anybody -- nope. It's just Garrett who is here. So, that would be impossible. So, with that do I have a motion to close the public hearing? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: So moved. Simison: Motion to close the public hearing. Do I have a second? Cavener: Second. Simison: Motion and second to close the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 5. Resolution No. 24-2443: A Resolution Adopting the Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we approve Item No. 5, Resolution 24-2443, adopting the Summer 2024 Fee Schedule for the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Resolution 24-2443. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the resolution is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 6. Public Hearing continued from March 6, 2024 for Pathways (H-2023- 0061) by Mussell Construction, Inc., located at 965 E. Ustick Rd. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 10 of 87 A. Request: Annexation of 1.11 acres of land with an L-O zoning district. B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for an education institution that takes access from an arterial street without a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. Simison: Thank you very much, Mr. White. Okay. Next item is Item 6, the public hearing which is continued from March 6th, 2024. We will continue this with any comments from staff regarding what they have asked for. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, pleasure to be here with you tonight. Yeah, the applicant has just asked to withdraw their application for the Pathways Middle School. It looks like they are going to pursue -- or not Pathways Middle School, but Pathways School. It looks like they are going to pursue an opportunity on a different property and they will come back and meet with staff at a later date. They saw that it may not be in their best interest to move forward on developing a school on an arterial roadway, so they have just asked for you to acknowledge their withdrawal this evening. Simison: Council, any questions for staff? Is the applicant here tonight? Not seeing the applicant being here -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we accept the applicant's withdrawal of their application on Item No. 6, Pathways, H-2023-0061. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to accept the -- to accept the withdrawal. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is withdrawn. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 7. Public Hearing for Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to request a 6- month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 11 of 87 Simison: Up next Item 7, public hearing for Cole Valley Christian, H-2024-0002. Open this public hearing with staff comments. Parsons: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. Next item is the MDA -- development agreement modification for the Cole Valley Christian School. Not -- not a lot of details for you here tonight. Originally when we accepted the application we didn't -- it was our process -- the application -- the DA hadn't been signed or executed yet and in our ordinance we require them to be done within a six month time frame. Well, I'm happy to report since that time the DA has been executed, including the addendum before you this evening, so, really, this is just more of a formality tonight. The reason for the delay was the fact that the applicant was given -- required to record a property boundary adjustment in the county prior to the ordinance and the DA being executed. I'm happy to report that on March 7th the applicant did conclude that property boundary adjustment with the -- in the county, so they have met that requirement of their DA and all they are asking for you is for you to approve their development agreement tonight and their ordinance. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just a quick question for legal. It looks like we could move to approve the DA modification and extension at the same time as the findings and the DA modification. Is that right? Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, Council Member Strader, we actually separated them intentionally, so that we would approve them individually. Strader: Okay. Simison: Any other questions for staff? Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up on this item? Or, actually, is the applicant here? I just wanted to go so fast tonight, just -- thank you. If you can state your name and address for the record. Van Ocker: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Amber Van Ocker, LKV Architects, representing Cole Valley. Don't have any additional comments, other than what Bill has covered. It just took us a little bit longer to get all the legal documents in place, but we are pleased to say that's all happened and we are just here looking for your approval and moving things forward. Thank you. Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant? Perfect. Anyone signed up on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody indicated they wished to speak. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 12 of 87 Simison: Thank you. Is there anybody present who would like to provide testimony on this item this evening? Seeing none. Applicant waives any final comments? Applicant waives. Council, your direction on closing the public hearing or -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we close the public hearing on Item No. 7. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we approve the modification for the six month time extension in order for the property owner to continue the development agreement required under H- 2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 7. Is there any further discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Borton, absent; Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, absent; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea. Simison: All ayes and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 8. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian (H- 2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. Simison: Next up is Item 8, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian, H-2024-0002. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 13 of 87 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we approve Item No. 8 as stated. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 8. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Borton, absent; Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, absent; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 9. Development Agreement and Development Agreement Modification (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 H-2023-0011/H-2024-0002) Between City of Meridian and Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. for Property Located at 7080 W. McMillan Rd. Simison: Next up is Item 9, which is a development agreement and development agreement modification for H-2023-0001/H-2024-0002. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I move that we approve the development agreement and development agreement modification on the same application. Cavener: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Borton, absent; Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, absent; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 10. Public Hearing for Kilgore (H-2023-0063) by Alexi Kilgore, located at 1105 N. Meridian Rd. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 14 of 87 A. Request: Rezone 0.16 acres of land from the R-4 zoning district to the O-T zoning district for the purpose of converting the existing home into a hair salon. Simison: Next item up is Item 10, public hearing to Kilgore, H-2023-0063. We will open this public hearing with comments from staff. Hersh: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. The applicant has submitted an application for a rezone. The property -- the site exists as 0.34 acres of land, zoned R- 4, located at 1105 North Meridian Road. History on the property is none. The comprehensive FLUM designation is Old Town. The applicant is requesting to rezone 0.34 acres of land from R-4 to Old Town to operate a personal service for a hair salon on the subject property. A legal description exhibit map for the rezone are -- are included with the application. This property is within the city's area of city impact boundary. The proposed 11 ,193 square foot hair salon will be located in the downtown area within the Meridian Urban Renewal District. The building was built in 1948 and is slated for further improvements to meet city code requirements to enhance the customer experience. The rear -- rear porch will be expanded to include an ADA ramp and the applicant will be required to pave the alley adjacent to the property. Additional five parking stalls are proposed to be paved adjacent to the alley. The proposed hours of operation will be from Tuesday to Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Due to the size of the development staff does not believe a development agreement should be required. The existing home meets all the dimensional standards. Access is provided via an alleyway to the north from Washington Street. The public street to the south of this property West Carlton Avenue operates as a one way only leading eastward towards North Meridian Road. The existing home has unpaved parking off the alleyway with a space up for five parking stalls. There is currently no off-street parking on this site. The applicant is required to pave both the alley and the five proposed parking stalls with the development of the site upon submittal of a future certificate of zoning compliance application. Wheel restraints should be added to -- to prevent overhanging beyond the designated parking stall dimensions in accordance with the UDC. Additionally ACHD recommends paving the entire width of the alley from the edge of the pavement from Carleton Avenue -- Avenue to the site's northern property line and providing 20 feet of backup area from any parking. The alley should be signed with no parking signs. The applicant has since submitted a revised site plan. As you can see that labeled -- that their first site plan that was submitted that this reflects the conditions in the staff report -- or the analysis and, then, they did add additional parking and we will review that with the future certificate of zoning compliance application and compare that to the UDC code. Old Town is classified as a traditional neighborhood zoning district and no off-street parking is required for a lawful -- an existing structure unless an addition occurs. No additions are proposed with this project, except for expanding the rear entry area. The applicant is providing five parking stalls off the alley, which exceeds the required number of off-street parking spaces, as two are only required per the UDC for a traditional neighborhood district. A minimum of one bicycle parking space is required to be provided. The plan does not include the bicycle racks. The applicant should revise the plan and include that rack and as you can see on the revised site plan Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 15 of 87 they did include that. There is an existing seven foot wide attached sidewalk on North Meridian Road along the existing property frontage. Staff does not recommend any additional changes to the frontage improvements. The applicant is proposing installation of a four foot wide sidewalk along the southern boundary of the site extending from the parking stalls to the main entrance. All sidewalks around the buildings and serving public streets shall be a minimum of five feet in width according to the UDC. Both ACHD and staff recommend that the applicant construct a five foot wide detached concrete sidewalk abutting the site along West Carlton Avenue connecting to the sidewalk along North Meridian Road. Additionally, staff recommends that the applicant remove the four foot proposed sidewalk on the south side of the property boundary and add a five foot sidewalk in front of the entire parking area. Staff strongly encourages the applicate to include a parkway along West Carlton Avenue with trees, bushes, lawn or other vegetated cover in accordance with the UDC. Staff recommends that the applicant connect the proposed sidewalk at the main entrance of the building to the required sidewalk to be installed along West Carlton Avenue and they have done that in the revised plan and they currently have fencing, so that would we require them to remove some of the fencing on the south side of the property. The applicant intends to remove the existing fence on the west side of the property adjacent to the stalls. As mentioned above a portion of the fencing on the south side of the property should be removed to accommodate for pedestrian walkway to the main entrance of the building. The existing fencing surrounding a small patio in the front yard does not comply with the UDC requirements for fencing. As the maximum height for front yard fences is three feet for closed vision fences or four feet for open vision fences, no additional fencing is proposed at this time. Staff recommends that the applicant remove the existing fencing surrounding the front yard patio with fencing that complies with the UDC. Building elevations -- conceptual building elevations and perspectives were submitted for the existing structure. The building consists of existing siding, fascia trim, asphalt roof shingles and new wood deck railing and an ADA ramp. Only new addition to the structure is the rear entry and proposed elevations are not approved with this application will be reviewed with the design review application with -- for consistency with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Formal compliance with the ASM is not required based on the limited scope of work associated with this project. Commission recommended approval. Summary of the Commission public hearing. Reed Kilgore was in favor. There was no opposition. No one commenting. No written testimony. No key issues. And key issues of discussion by Commission none. Commission changes to staff's recommendation is none. Outstanding issues for City Council is none. Written testimony since the Commission hearing is none. And that concludes staff's presentation and I stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Stacy. Council, any questions for staff? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 16 of 87 Cavener: Thanks, Stacy. Just one question and I -- I struggled with kind of tracking this in the staff report, hoping you can maybe walk me through it. Some portions of the fence are required to be removed and other portions you are recommending be removed; is that correct? Or is all of it being required to be removed? Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, so you are correct. So, I mean I don't know how they would do that. The front fence, as you can see on the lower left corner, that's over six feet, that is required to be removed. So, the remaining of it that's on the side of Carlton Avenue, in order for them to have the sidewalk attached to the exists -- attached to the proposed sidewalk they are going to construct along West Carlton they will have to have -- remove a portion of it so people can access their business in the rear. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Real quick. I think I'm tracking. Hersh: Okay. Cavener: The fence line along Carlton is the one that is recommended and that the fence line that is on Meridian Road, kind of the little porch area that we saw on that image, is required, is that -- am I tracking that correctly? Hersh: That is a hundred percent correct. Cavener: Thank you. Appreciate the clarification. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Stacy, you -- I want to make sure I heard this correctly. The applicant was proposing a four foot wide sidewalk along Carlton, but is it recommended or required for a five foot wide sidewalk in my -- did I hear that correctly? Hersh: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor, so, yes, that is correct. If you look at the site plan on the west side she was actually proposing a four foot sidewalk on her property and not -- not actually adjacent to the right of way, which it should connect to Meridian Road and the UDC code requires five feet in width for commercial. Simison: Council, any additional questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Like to come forward, please. If you have any -- if you have anything you would like to add. Okay. Council, any questions? I think we are good for now. Okay. Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up to testify on this item? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 17 of 87 Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present that would like to provide testimony on this item? Seeing none, Council, what's your -- discussion before we ask the applicant if they want to waive any final comments? Will you waive your final comments, since you didn't make the first one to begin with, too? Okay. All right. Council, your direction? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Move to close the public hearing on Item 10 Kilgore application, H-2023- 0063. Taylor: Second. Simison: Moved and seconded to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I appreciate staff giving me some good clarification on this. To the applicant I love this property. This property provided me with money for water balloons and soda pops and video games as I remoted as a child. This is a great use. I'm excited for, again, another asset like this in downtown Meridian. Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve application H-2023-0063 as presented by the staff and include all staff comments. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item H-2023-0063. Is there discussion on the motion? If not Clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Borton, absent; Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, absent; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you very much and good luck. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 11. Public Hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering, located at 820 S. Black Cat Rd. Continued to May 7, 2024. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 18 of 87 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. Simison: Okay. With that we will move on to Item 11 this evening, which is a public hearing for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision, H-2023-0045. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Hersh: The next application before you is for Farmstone Crossing. Applications submitted are annexation and zoning and preliminary plat. This site consists of 33.89 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada county, located at 820 South Black Cat Road. History on the property is none. The Comprehensive Plan FLUM designation is mixed employment. Annexation is requested for 33.89 acres from RUT to ME zoning district. 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 ME district consists of offices, medical centers, research and development facilities and light industrial uses, with ancillary support services. The area is intended to development with approximately 378,360 square feet, encompassing various potential uses like office, light industrial operations, flex space and research and development components, such as distribution and light manufacturing. The inclusion of loading docks on elevations for the proposed flex building implies that all of the intended uses are primarily related to distribution or warehousing, which requires a conditional use permit in the ME zoning district. The proposed preliminary plat consists of six building lots and one common law on 27.59 -- 59 acres of land for the proposed Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. The subdivision is proposed to develop in two phases as shown on the preliminary plat. Staff recommends that the collector street be constructed prior to development commencing on the property. Additionally, the first phase of development -- development should encompass the construction of both the ten foot wide detached sidewalks along South Black Cat Road and Vanguard Way, including the entire street buffers. The second phase of development should encompass the completion of the remaining Ten foot wide pathway along the 1-84 interstate. 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. Staff recommends that the applicant preserve some elements of the historic buildings. The applicant presented their proposed plan for the existing silos to the Historic Preservation Commission on January 25th, 2024, with the following option. One. Involve careful disassembling and storage of the structure with the intention to find an interesting -- interested agency that may preserve the silo on another site. An agency would need to be identified before disassembly and prior to the commencement of the road. Alternatively, if no interested agency is identified prior to the commitments -- commitments of the road construction, option two entails utilizing some materials from the silo in the construction of the monument. The meeting concluded with the Historic Preservation Commission expressing a preference for recommending to the Planning and Zoning Commission Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 19 of 87 that both existing silos be disassembled and reassembled at a yet to be determined future location. It was emphasized that the specifics of the relocation be clarified prior to disassembly and the new site would need to be determined within a reasonable period of time. As an alternating proposal the Commission advocates for the creation of a scale replica of the facilities on the current site. The Historic Preservation Commission wishes to review the details of the proposed monument with the initial certificate of zoning compliance submittal for the site. Additionally, the Historic Preservation Commission wishes to retain the ability to provide comments on the final proposed monument presented by the applicant as per the ones that do not conform to the district setbacks must be removed, except for those agreed upon for historic preservation. The proposed preliminary plat appears to comply with the dimensional standards of the district. 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 Ten Mile Area Plan. A driveway is proposed to the adjacent property to the east for future extension. Vanguard Way should be constructed in accordance with street Section C in the Ten Mile Area Plan, which requires two 11 travel foot lanes, six bike lanes, six foot bike lanes, eight foot parkways with streetlights at a pedestrian scale and a minimum six foot wide detached sidewalks. The applicant proposes a modification of the street section to include ten foot wide detached sidewalks and pathways in lieu of on-street bike lanes, which is required by ACHD and as set forth in the Meridian Master Pathways Plan. Prior to submitting the final plat the applicant shall coordinate 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 South Black Cat Road aligns with the entrance of Black Cat industrial projects on the west side of South Black Cat Road. The applicant is proposing two curb cuts -- two curb cuts off of Vanguard Way, planned collector street in the Ten Mile Area Plan and in accordance with the UDC multiple accesses off of an arterial and collective roadway shall be restricted. The applicant has chosen to eliminate the curb cut aligned with the proposed subdivision to the north and has instead opted for the one closest to the intersection of Black Cat Road. Typically staff recommends that curb cuts aligned directly across roadways, however, staff supports the offset change given that the entrance effectively highlights the features of the proposed plaza provided it adheres to ACHD's requirements. Additionally, the applicant has proposed establishing a shared access on the east of the site in collaboration with the property owner to the east for intended for future shared access. A ten foot path -- ten foot wide multi-pathways are proposed on the site in accordance with the pathways master plan. One segment follows Vanguard Way across the northern portion of the site and one segment runs along the southern boundary within the street buffer along the I-84. Another segment runs along the west side of the site adjacent to South -- South Black Cat Road to the plaza on the north. The proposed pathways are intended to cross the drive aisle between Buildings 1 and 2 where my cursor is. Staff recommends removing the loading docks from the rear of the Buildings 1 and 2 to mitigate potential conflicts between pedestrians using the pathway and delivery tracks accessing that area. All proposed sidewalks and pedestrian walkways have to meet the UDC code requirements. A minimum of a 25 foot wide lane Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 20 of 87 street buffer is required along all arterial streets. In commercial districts a 20 foot wide street buffer is required along all collector streets. The buffer may be placed in an easement rather than in a common lot in accordance with the UDC. A minimum of a 50 foot wide street buffer is required along 1-84. The proposed buffer dimensions appear to meet the requirements of the UDC. However, there is a lack of a combination of planters within the buffer along Vanguard Way. The applicant has provided 52 trees and only 34 are required along Vanguard Way. Staff recommends that the applicant enhance the street buffer by reducing the number of trees and incorporating additional planters. The landscape buffer along south -- along South Black Cat Road adjacent to the open drainage swale lacks vegetation in front of the ten foot pathway, not meeting the requirements of the UDC. The applicant proposes a plaza area between Buildings 1 and 2 featuring benches, a pergola, landscaping and a potential historical monument of the existing silo on the site. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to reflect landscaping within the required buffers along Vanguard Way and Black Cat Road adjacent to the drainage swale in front of the ten foot pathway in accordance with the UDC. To improve the integration of the property with the neighboring ME zoned property to the east staff encourages the applicant to consider removing the entire landscape buffer along the eastern side and coordinate with the alignment of the parking with the adjacent property owner. This would facilitate shared access to the east, improve integration between -- with the property to the east. The proposed fencing complies with the UDC code. There is -- off-street vehicle parking is required for the proposed commercial subdivision as set forth in the UDC based on the approximate 378,360 square feet of proposed floor space a minimum of 757 off-street spaces are required. A total of 764 off-street parking spaces are proposed. Based on the 764 parking spaces proposed a minimum of 31 bicycle spaces are required to be provided. None were proposed with this application and bicycle parking facilities should comply with the standards in the UDC. Bike racks should be provided as close as possible to each building entrance, totaling the 31 spaces or designated area within the plaza. Staff is recommending the removal of the loading docks on the rear of Building 1 and 2, which will create additional parking. Staff recommends that the applicant submit revised plans incorporating the aforementioned changes with the CZC application. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed flex buildings and light industrial. Building materials consist of horizontal metal, Hardie plank siding and white wood colors, stucco in dark and light grays, metal awning and gray wrapped cornice molding. The proposed conceptual elevations are not approved. Final design must comply with the design standards in the architectural manual and the design standards in the Ten Mile Area for the commercial designation. A certificate -- a certificate of zoning compliance and design review application is required to be submitted for approval of the site and zoning design prior to submittal of a building permit application. Commission recommended approval. A summary of Commission public hearing. In favor was David Bailey. In opposition was none. Commenting was David Bailey and Blaine Johnston -- Blaine Johnston, president of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission. Written testimony is none. Key issues. The applicant's consideration and proposal for the monument sign is appreciated. However, it would be nice to see the historic silos preserved somehow. Key issues of discussion by Commission. Retaining the historic silos on another property. Ideas given were northeast corner of town. On Franklin in Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 21 of 87 the middle of a roundabout. Questions to the Historic Preservation Commission regarding funding to move the silos to another suitable location owned by the city. The proposed timing for the extension of Vanguard Way and the disassembly of the dual silos to relocate them out of the right of way. Concerns with the silo being placed somewhere else in the Treasure Valley and losing its distinguished heritage as being part of Meridian. Commission changes to staff's recommendation is none. And outstanding issues for City Council is Commission would like to recommend to City Council to retain the dual silos as a historical monument somewhere within our city, preventing them from being given or sold to another part of the Treasure Valley are discarded and the developer build a monument on site to commemorate the silos. Written testimony since the Commission hearing is none. And that concludes staff's presentation and I stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward? Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. David Bailey, Bailey Engineering, representing Trilogy Development. My office address is 1119 East State Street in Eagle. Thanks, Stacy, for the great presentation you had there and start a presentation here. Do I -- do I maximize that? There we go. Okay. Great. So, we are here for the Farmstone Crossing Subdivision and, again, appreciate Stacy's presentation of that. I think she covered it pretty well. As she stated, we have been a fairly long path on this and gone through several revisions and worked back and forth with quite a few of the items. So, will go through the project first and, then, I will ask for any questions you might have about what -- how we got where we are. Here we go. Okay. So, she stated the property's at 1-84 and Black Cat Road, the northwest -- northeast corner of that. Vanguard Street is to be constructed to the north of us and that will connect from the existing Vanguard project -- actually include the major mega project that's been recently proposed to the east and northeast of Vanguard and the Ten Mile Area to the east of us. To the north of us is the Avani Subdivision, which I understand was before the Council here recently and went back for some changes with a -- with an approval for that. So, think -- I think we are in line of what we are going to do with the Avani Subdivision as well. Am I doing this wrong? All right. Thank you. The -- as Stacy stated, the future land use map designates this as ME. ME to the east. ME to the west. And medium high residential to the north -- north of the project. We are proposing an ME zone consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and uses consistent with the ME district, which is flex space, office space and light industrial and uses in that manner. Light manufacturing. I will jump right into the solo -- silo. So, this has been kind of a central piece of -- of what we are doing through the project and we initially, you know, investigated the project, we came to a -- to a pre-app meeting with the -- with the city and we were informed, you know, right away, you know, that this is something that we -- we want to look hard at and we have, you know, since that point. So, this is a double silo and I won't say that I know all the details on the historic details of the project, but we understand it's important. It was built in the early 1900s and it was representative of some granaries that were built with this double silo look on -- on the project. I assume for -- for feed of animals. So, you could say to store the grain on the site and provide Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 22 of 87 this as a -- as a -- as a feeder place. There is another large silo on the site, which is quite a bit taller than this, which is a single silo by itself and there is another barn in between. As I understand this -- this was documented by the State Historical Preservation Commission at some point in the past and was listed there, but it's not listed on any registry, nor with the National Registry, although I understand it's eligible for -- for listing there. So, in doing some -- some investigation we have taken pictures of it, looked at the thing, measured it, you know, and set it on the site. I have had a structural engineer evaluate the thing as it is and how it was built and it turns out the blocks that are used in this are actually still commercially available to build from, but it was -- it was a -- an interesting structure as they could build it quickly and it has the hoops around the outside, but it was meant to be held in place structurally by the grain filling it out and holding the blocks in place, because they are not mortared or held together in any way, except for the hoops on the outside of it and this will come up a little bit -- in a little bit longer. So, we have had that structural evaluation done and we said we think we could brace this thing and maintain it on site if we did that, you know, if we were able to keep it on site. So, we looked for options to do that and we looked for options for moving the road and for where we could do that, where we could do our alignment, the site distance problems and, then, the project to the west was approved and the road alignment was designed and approved by ACHD in a way that this is right in the middle of Vanguard. So, there is just no way this is going to move. We did reach out to ACHD and ask them if that alignment could possibly be moved and they indicated that it was not. So, the -- the bottom line conclusion is this has to come down in some way for anybody to move forward. There is quite a bit of interest with the property owners to the east and to the west and with your fire department and with this project, too, is to get Vanguard built going through there and so now all of the properties around they are interested in doing that. So, that's going to happen at some point here coming forward. We would like to make sure there is a resolution for what's going to happen with the silo, you know, before that road gets constructed. In all likelihood this development will not be building Vanguard Street. So, this provides a good opportunity to have the condition in place of what we are going to do, so that -- so that we can -- we can get moving forward with -- with the rest of that project and have a -- have at least a disposition in place on this. So, we have worked and met with that -- with Blaine several times on this and, as Stacy said, we have met with the Historic Preservation Commission and Ken Freeze on the Commission had suggested that we look into another company to provide an estimate as to whether we could pick this up and move it and I have had it evaluated by a structural engineer and they looked at it and hemmed and hawed and came back with a -- a number that was, frankly, really, really, really, really not usable and I'm concerned that this thing cannot be moved based on the structural engineer. It's more practical and cheaper to take this down and rebuild it somewhere -- is definitely -- is capable of being done in that way. So, we have said that we would participate in getting this thing disassembled and stored and save the additional materials from it if somewhere could be with it. The developer of this project does not feel that this site is the appropriate place to have it for the -- for the industrial site, the size of the plaza we have and the pieces that -- that we are going to have on this thing and moving it 50 feet or moving at a mile or taking it apart and putting it back to somewhere else -- you know, together somewhere else is probably not a significant Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 23 of 87 factor in what we do. We don't have the size in the plaza and, then, we don't want an enclosed structure on the site that could be -- and I'm not sure that we could get a permit from the city to make that a structurally sound piece after putting it back together. They built it from scratch, reinforced it with concrete on the inside or put it in a different location -- there are ways to do that, but we didn't think it was practical for this site, so we would like to move it there. So, going through that -- that piece of it, the collector street location on the left-hand side and you can see on the thing on the right-hand side here, that's the location of the silo compared to the -- to the -- compared to the road alignment that's required and that's the Vanguard project, which is designed on the left- hand -- on the west side. On the east side of this project we have been working with -- with the developer's engineer John Carpenter with Ardurra on the connection to the road there and on our -- our shared access there and we have provided them plans as we have gone along, so they are on this. It's my understanding that they are actually under the progress -- in progress in designing Vanguard at this point, but I don't -- I don't know that for sure. So, our plan would be to disassemble that, if we can identify an agency in advance of that -- that road construction and, then, we will construct a monument on the plaza and we have gone through several iterations and we probably have a few more, but we have had a rendering done here that shows that we would do a plaza. The scale on this thing is that -- that plaque in the middle, actually, we worked -- we worked a couple times with -- is it Coach Paul Crutchfield and -- and Barbara Bauer and they are with a private, you know, historic preservation firm and so we did have them provide us a mock up and some ideas of -- of our monument. This would be a four-by-eight monument -- or four-by-eight plaque in the center. It was laminated and has pictures of the existing silo and the write-up professionally done by an historian to document what we would do there. And, then, the outside of this would be made with some of the materials of the building and scale wise we are talking about those towers on the -- on each side are about four to six feet in diameter and they would be built on and stuccoed so that they would look like the tile that's on there now with the bars and I think that we probably -- if we can use some of the materials from that we would probably include that in the base of this or have those as a partial wall that would be adjacent to this to show the actual materials from it included in this. We would have the final design at -- at CZC and would be -- we would run it by the Historic Preservation Commission and -- and the city at that -- at that point. Again, on the preliminary plat, six buildings here, central plaza, and this discussion of the -- of the loading docks on this -- and I guess there is -- there is not -- on the buildings one through five there are not loading docks. They are all roll-up garage doors. So, these are intended to be flex space buildings. So, at least the front half of the ground -- or front half of the building is intended to be office space and, then, it could be built out in the rear and, then, there could be a space in the back. Contractors like these buildings. There is a pretty good demand for this stuff. And the buildings are set up to be specifically that way, so they can have a high bay in the back. They can have multiple stores of office. My office in Eagle was in a building like this some time back and I had all of my -- my storage and my extra plans in the -- in the bottom floor and, then, I had offices on the ground and the upper floor. They really make great spaces and they make spaces for smaller contractors and smaller businesses to work out, as well as plumbing supply companies can fit in this kind of -- kind of building. So, it's a great employment use, although it's not, you know, office Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 24 of 87 space -- specifically, you know, pure office space, it's a mixed use in that and we think there is a good demand for those. So, as shown on the plan there is the roll-up doors on the -- on the backs of those -- on the backs of those buildings, one per unit is the way it's shown on their -- their garage side door that's on that and the green part that sticks out there is extra. We put some pieces out there to provide some extra parking in the rear of those buildings, so that we don't have people just parking out there, we just wanted to designate some parking in that area. We do, in fact, have raised loading docks in building six that is shown for that. We intend that to be some kind of light manufacturing and we have definitely made the delivery associated with that -- that type of use. So, it's -- it's our desire to have the pathway that goes along the west side of this project between buildings one and two, but we think we have great visibility on that. We will mark that specifically across there with a box or whatever, but we don't think that there is a significant conflict between pedestrians and -- and the vehicle traffic that would be behind that building. That would be a major problem for us in that area and the buildings as they are designed, to convert that to a complete office building we don't have any inside access to that, so we would have these big long deep offices that would be with that and it would just be hard to convert -- convert this building to that use. So, we would like to keep those garage doors on the back of those and have all of these be of a similar -- similar design project. So, we are asking for that consideration. The plans on that -- we have on this is in accordance with the UDC, has great access, great visibility from our entrance and Stacy had mentioned that we had -- we kept the entrance on the west hand end of this instead of lining it up -- well, part way along the way your Avani moved their entrance to the west on us, so we had to pick -- go between them from the layout here and, then, the other thing is that we will have truck traffic that goes through here to the back and so we need a complete loop going through this project. We will share that access with the property to the east. We don't have that complete design yet as far as how we are going to lay that out or what that plaza is going to look like -- or, excuse me, that -- that landscape strip on the east side, but, as I said, we are working with the engineer to the east to make sure that that -- that provides the best access to both sites. Question as to how that access lines up on the site as well. So, we will work that out and have that final design in for the -- for the construction drawings in the same. Pathway through the site. This site has great pathways through it, along 1-84, along the west boundary, the outparcel there is a storm drainage pond for Idaho Transportation Department, so that won't be developed and we won't move that road -- move the pathway over there and need to. And, then, we do provide the -- the required improvements on Black Cat there and, then, the Ten foot detached sidewalks. The road sections that we show on here, the access locations have all been approved by Ada County Highway District for what we are showing here. Comp plan I think we talked about that. Elevations of the building and as Stacy mentioned these are -- these are conceptual and may go through the design review process and that's -- and we agree to all of the conditions of approval. I will note that we did submit an updated plan on the -- on the landscape plan that addressed some of the issues you had and we are glad to meet all those conditions at the -- at the CZC in any case, so we are in agreement with all of that. Went over a little bit, maybe glad to stand for any questions you might have. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 25 of 87 Simison: Thank you, Mr. Bailey. Council, any questions for the applicant? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: David, would you mind going back maybe five or six slides to your last image that kind of showed the site layout, particularly with Black Cat. That will work right there. So, Mr. Mayor, David, my first question is that -- that strip of land that runs along Black Cat to 1-84 that isn't included in your project, who owns that piece of dirt and what's contemplated for it? It just seems out of alignment with the totality of your project. Bailey: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Cavener, that is actually Idaho Transportation Department owned property, the block out on the -- along Black Cat and it is -- it is currently a storm drain -- storm drainage pond for 1-84, so it's not going anywhere. Cavener: Thank you. I thought you had meant it was the part kind of that shaded area in your Building 6, so that gives me good clarification on that. Mr. Mayor, a follow up if I may. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: So, David, the subject of the silo I think is going to be a big conversation tonight, at least it's going to be for me. It certainly came up in Planning and Zoning and it should not be a surprise to you. Walk me through kind of what actions you have taken since Planning and Zoning Commission around the silo. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, so we haven't done anything specifically new since the Planning and Zoning Commission. Cavener: Okay. Bailey: So, the recommendation that we received from the Planning and Zoning Commission was support for our plan to remove this -- to disassemble the silo, if we could find a place to put that. Their -- and that we would -- we would be building this monument in the plaza in any case and we would -- if the -- if we couldn't find a place for the monument -- or for the existing silo, we would be using -- we will be anyways using some of the materials in there in order to -- to document this and we would be building a monument on the site similar to that. So, that's our intent and it still is our intent to do that. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 26 of 87 Cavener: Thanks. So, I guess, then, that -- that's the question. Who have you reached out to to take ownership of the silo? Should it be disassembled? I mean I guess what I'm trying to see is where does it go? Bailey: Well, we are -- we are -- we don't know that either and, you know, it -- it's -- the question is that the Historic Commission wants it moved, the city may want it moved or want to maintain it somewhere, right, and that we are not interested in maintaining that silo on our site. So, you know, the question is are you going to make that our responsibility to find a place to put that and as of right now that's not something that we have contemplated that -- that we are going to find a place for it or negotiate with someone to find a place for it. Don't feel it's our role. Cavener: And, then, David, you indicated you had a structural engineer that said that it would -- it couldn't be moved or it was on the verge of falling apart? Was that letter included in -- in your application? Has that been provided to the city, anything that -- that comments on that? I just -- I couldn't find it in our packet and I'm -- I'm really curious to read what those findings were. Bailey: It was, Councilman Cavener. So, the documents from them -- the first one was the structural engineer that said that the silo could be -- and the engineer was Bryan Smith with Sage Engineering -- provided the -- the engineering work on that did the work and they went out and visited the building. So, the first one was said that we could shore up the building to maintain it in place if it were going to be there and he talked about putting bracing inside that would hold the things out and probably adding at least a portion of a -- of a retaining wall inside and then -- and, then, we could probably, you know, probably get the big building certified to be, you know, okay to stay in place. The code has changed significantly when you go to move the building, right, as far as recertifying it and it was his impression that it would not be possible to jack up the individual silo pieces and put them on a trailer and move them somewhere and that it would not be possible to -- to jack up the whole foundation, because it's not practical to do that. You might be able to do that -- and, in fact, the moving company suggested that they would do that and, then, they said we will move it over to the site and we will set it there and you guys got to -- we will put it back down. Well, you can't -- when you move a house you jack up the house, you put it over the hole, you pour the foundation and, then, you set the house down on the foundation. We have no way of separating the two. So, it's just not practical to move it. That said they are a fairly easy assembly and disassembly as well and so to take it apart, rebuild the whole wooden structure from scratch, or rebuild the whole thing from scratch using the blocks that you can obtain commercially, right, is a better option than moving it in any case. Cavener: Thank you. Simison: Can you tell me -- how big was this? Is it 30 by 70? How big is the footprint, just out of curiosity? Do we know? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 27 of 87 Bailey: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I think the silos themselves are about 16 or 17 feet in diameter for each -- each silo and so the whole thing across is like 60 feet long and -- and probably 25 or 30 feet in the -- in the other dimension with the building that's on top of it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Some questions along these lines. Is it practical to disassemble it -- like once we disassemble it can it be reassembled? My son is an avid LEGO person. I have had a lot of experience with the idea that we are going to reassemble things that cannot actually be reassembled. So, are you going to have to label each block? Like how would that even work? I just -- I just want to understand what disassembly entails. Is it labeling each piece? So, do you think these can be disassembled in chunks? Like help me understand that, please. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council, Council Woman Strader, the -- I'm a big LEGO fan myself; right? And I'm an engineer and I have been an engineer since I was about yay high and so I take apart things and put them together and one of the things I did is I ran a -- I ran a -- I looked at this thing I said, okay, I'm going to get this crew of this size and get this many people, because you get the lifts that go on that and you could have an operator go up there in a lift, pull it, put it down, take off the top course until you get to the first -- that first band, remove that band and, then, move your way down and actually the disassembly of this is actually very simple. They build back up the same way. You build -- you put the blocks in, you put the band around the outside and, then, I don't know if they fill them with something, you know, as they built them. You know, suppose you could fill it with dirt or something, but -- but as far as the practicality of disassembly and reassembly this thing is actually pretty good. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: So, you -- you are volunteering to disassemble it and store it. I'm a little concerned that whoever disassembles it should reassemble it, if that's the direction that we go, just because it's -- I'm not an engineer. I'm a little skeptical about how it's going to come together, but that wasn't really a question, so in fairness to you -- I guess just a question -- I don't want to totally just direct it at you, but, Mr. Mayor, if you will permit me -- even with staff or with anyone kind of -- do we have leads on -- on -- Simison: I didn't know when to interject -- with a recommendation. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: But I was glad -- I got a preview last week and I have been trying to think about this in terms of -- I -- personally I think Hillsdale Park is a suitable location. I even Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 28 of 87 think there might be some new ground and -- in Hillsdale that maybe it would go well into, but I think the bigger -- the second question for Council is to what purpose is it being preserved. Are you wanting the community to be able to enter it? Are you wanting the community just to be able to physically see it? Yeah. And that's -- I had the pleasure of serving on an advisory council on historic preservation for several years in a presidential appointment and having these conversations and I -- I appreciate historic preservation as much as anybody, but for what purpose? I think that that's an important part of who we are asking to do what at what cost and for what purpose and I think that's an important thing for Council to consider, because short answer is we got someone willing to disassemble it, drive it over to Hillsdale Park, drop it off, give it to us and we can invest our dollars in reassembling it for the community's value and benefit. What do you want the community to be able to do with that? Or where do you want to put it? Well, the neighbors might. That's what I was kind of trying to see how big it is. It looks like it's maybe about 20 feet tall. There is -- 25? Bailey: I think probably less than 20. Simison: Yeah. So -- Bailey: Fairly short on that. Simison: So, it's not going to overtake -- it's inside your structure in that context. I think that that -- at least for me, as you walk through this conversation, is what do you want to do with it? Because we could take it on and do that if it's important to the Historic Preservation Commission and we want to be partners with them in that. Otherwise, I think that the things that they have offered to do fall well within the realm of acceptable Historic Preservation practices and if it was my magic wand I wouldn't actually have them do anything on the property at all if they were -- if they aren't willing to offer to decommission to relocate it to another -- you know, pick it up and take it to somebody else, place it so we put it up and they just want to do a simple plaque on their plaza -- because I look at -- like who is going to come into this property to come and see this monument that's been erected for this? I don't know. You know, especially if you are going to go -- move it someplace else, you know. So, it's kind of like are we going to move it and put up a monument? Is that the -- the right direction? You know, these are all great questions about what makes sense for the community. You know, obviously, we have a development application here where they have the -- I hate the -- I hate the concept personally -- this is the last one of these here, so we have to put this all on this developer to figure out a way to preserve our history. I don't know if there were -- I don't know if I have ever seen one of these before in my life. So, is this the only and the last? I got no clue in that context. So, what is that -- you know, I think we have another -- how do I put this politically correct? The leaning silo of south Meridian. When that property comes in are we going to try to preserve that, because it's been there for a long time and it's the last silo standing in Meridian? I mean that -- it's a little different, but the concept -- correct. The concept is the last one and it's the one we are going to preserve and we are going to put that on the developer to find out where to put it and those things. I think the developer has gone -- personally has given us the option, but it's how Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 29 of 87 much does the city want to invest and for what purposes is where I would leave it hopefully for you all to consider. I have not talked to the parks director, not talked to the other people, but, yes, Century Hill Farm, you know, you got a farm based theme in that area. To me it makes sense. We have got some -- like a property that's not going to interfere with other park activities in that element. So, food for thought. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Excuse me. You know, when you are -- you know, you will remember this, the Comprehensive Plan when we were reviewing and discussing the future of Meridian and I was on the steering committee for that, we talked a little bit about how do we integrate ways in which we can preserve sort of the unique identity of Meridian into the future development of Meridian and I -- and that always stuck with me a little bit, because we don't want to just erase what made this area kind of unique in Idaho's history, but how do you -- how do you preserve that in a way where you are not inhibiting growth and the things that a modern society and community wants? I really like the idea of trying to -- to some level preserve that as a good reminder. There are some larger cities that I have been to where they have got small areas where they have tried to build around it or they have tried to set aside some of the aspects to remind them of the history. So, I -- I'm in support of that idea. Initially I thought in a place like this it was a strange place to put a monument for the agricultural history and so clearly it's not the place where we would want to reconstruct this if we did. I'm very open and supportive of the idea of taking it apart -- and I do know you can take it apart and put it back up pretty easily. It actually is going to be more structurally sound and look better and all that and maybe relocating it -- I think we need to figure out, you know, what does it cost the city if we are going to do that and where we are going to put it. I don't think we want people going into it, but I'm totally open to the idea of keeping it as some kind of an entity that speaks our heritage, but I guess the question may be -- and I'm not sure who this goes to. We mentioned before we did that we would want to know which agency or entity would take possession of it. Are we talking about the city or some other historical preservation entity? If we were to disassemble it -- and I think that's the right thing to do in my opinion. I'm not going to keep it here. I'm going to be persuaded one way or the other as to whether or not we actually even have a monument in this park or not. But who actually has possession of it? Does it become the city's possession or do we need to figure that out first? Simison: Unless David has an answer, I'm -- or Blaine can speak to it, I'm not aware of any historical organization that would want to take this on in the state of Idaho and pay the costs -- any of these costs that could be somewhat significant. I don't -- I don't want to say what -- I couldn't even pretend to guess how much this would cost. They maybe have an idea how much the decommissioning, tear down, and relocate -- you know, moving costs would be you could probably extrapolate. Putting it back up might be similar, if they can even use the same stuff, plus the foundation, plus the site work, plus whatever you want it to look like. You know, do you want to repaint it? Do you want to Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 30 of 87 make it look nice? Is the wood still good? Does it need to be repainted? There is a lot of I think ancillary questions that we just don't have the answer to and I think it is to a certain extent -- I hate to say it's a blank check, but you are taking on the obligation for a blank check. That doesn't mean you have to do it if you don't like the numbers in the future, because I don't think it's going to anybody else. I have not heard that proposal that we are -- have another entity that's willing to take this, but Blaine can correct me if I'm wrong and says I'm not. So, it's really city in my opinion. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: How much was -- how much do you think it will cost to do the monument component in your plaza? Bailey: The construction of the monument itself? Strader: Uh-huh. Bailey: I'm thinking -- and -- and we don't have a full design on it yet, so we just have an artist's rendering on that. So, that one is a hard one to do, but I'm going to get in trouble for this -- probably -- probably almost 50,000 dollars -- Strader: Wow. Bailey: -- to build that. To go a little further, I have done some estimates and I think it's close to that to get it disassembled and stored on trailers on the site, okay? And it may be less. Most of that's labor; right? But we do have additional materials from the other silo, too; right? So, if some fell apart or whatever we could -- we could have enough of the silo piece itself, disassembled on site to make sure it's available from that end, so -- but reconstruction would probably be twice that. I'm guessing that reconstruction and that foundation and stuff would be over 100,000 dollars. Strader: Uh-huh. Simison: And that was going to be where I was eventually going to go was -- suggest we get as much help from them in putting them back up as compared to rebuilding a replica monument on site. I still think you can recognize it -- like we have done here in City Hall, you can do a simple -- here is where a silo -- you know, one of the -- one of the ceramics that we have done. I think if it's good enough for City Hall to remember some space it could be good enough there. I think the same type of people would see it, but much less cost if you want to -- if there is a need to identify it and it's not that dissimilar to what happened out at Owyhee High School. Again, it's about a marker recognizing issues in the area that existed, not necessarily rebuilding or maintaining a replica of it. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 31 of 87 Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I'm not sure if this is a question for you either, maybe it's for discussion, but is it something where you could disassemble it and hold onto it and, then, decide later -- because I -- my concern is that our decision about what we do with this interferes with what we do with the application and I'm not sure if that's a reasonable thing to do, because I know that we are -- we would be asking, you know, the applicant to disassemble it for a cost, obviously, so I don't know if that is reasonable to separate these two issues tonight in a way that makes sense. Simison: Maybe ask the question. What is the timing for this project to move forward where you would get to the point where you need -- where you would disassemble this property -- this silo? Bailey: Mr. Mayor, the -- the timing for this project is probably a couple of years out demand wise; right? As far as when we would be -- want to be building buildings on the site. That said, the demand for Vanguard, as I have said, is that there are other developers besides this who are already designing that road, but the intention to get it through and because they need access to Black Cat, they need access to the fire station -- fire station access, you know, that's going to provide fire access through there and the large projects going around there that are going to push the construction of that, I'm not privy to it, but I'm guessing there is already some kind of letter of intent between four different developers on getting Vanguard built. Simison: Let me ask a different question to staff. If this was approved tonight what's the quickest that they could actually start any of the processes out there by the time he finishes this, gets entitlements -- I understand you can take things down -- you can kind of start work without being annexed, but what's the realistic time before a road could be built on this property? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, definitely it's certainly a tough question, because in all the meetings that I have been part of that road is going to happen before any development occurs on this site and our DA provision that we have in front of you tonight also says don't do anything on this site until that road is built. So, if that road happens the silo needs to come down -- probably six months or faster. It's going to happen very quickly and that's why in the development agreement staff has structured the silo in such a way that they could disassemble it and store it at some point or for the purposes of selling it or maybe even a donation to your point, Mr. Mayor, that's always an option as well or build a plaque. So, we have built some flexibility in there for the applicant, because we are in the same dilemma you guys are, we -- we are not usually faced with these types of dilemmas. We don't really have anything in the UDC that says save this building. It's really at the time of annexation where these come up and the DA is the tool we have to come up with a way to try to preserve or protect these types of structures. I know I was part of a barn in south Meridian and they essentially took Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 32 of 87 photos of the structures -- it had historical documentation. They put a little plaque on the -- on the site that others could look at and certainly that's something within your purview tonight as well, if that's the way you want to proceed with this. But, certainly, if it is the desire of the Council to do something or preserve that, then, we should probably work with the applicant and come up with some language and figure out how long we intend them to store it and whether or not willing -- the city is willing to accept that donation and find that appropriate location. Quicker -- the sooner the better would probably -- is my recommendation. Simison: My translation is that I think we have got a couple of months before we would have to make the determination if we were to put it on a property and where, but I don't know it would slow things down unless that is -- in that context. Any additional questions for the applicant or comments or should we see what Blaine or a few others have to say? Okay. Thank you. Is Blaine signed up? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, yes. Mr. Johnston. Simison: Name and address -- Johnston: Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, thanks again for having me tonight. A little background -- Simison: Blaine, if you can state your name and address for the record. Johnston: Oh. Sorry. Blaine Johnston. I live at 6138 North Demille in Meridian and I am president of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission. I will start with a little background I guess first. If I can find my notes. The history of Meridian and Eggers farm dates back to the early 1900s when the Eggers produced a dairy -- they purchased a dairy farm on Ten Mile and Overland Roads. In 1921 they started a farming operation called Black Cat Farms on what used to be called Post Road, later -- years later Ada county renamed the road Black Cat in honor of the Black Cat sign they installed there. That sign is still there. Ada county historic sites inventory lists the Eggers farm as have historical significance to Meridian and Ada county and it is the only remaining double silo granary in Ada county. So, that kind of answers your question, Mayor. There were some before that, but this is the only one left in existence. Dairy and farming has been a big part of agriculture -- of our history with the growth in Meridian the last couple of years it's gotten busy for everybody and I'm part of that growth. I moved from -- from Boise to Meridian 15 years ago. So, I'm part of that growth. So, I'm contributing to this also. With that said, HPC has been tasked with preserving the history and legacy of the city. Our wish would be that the silos remain on site. That's where the history belongs. That's where we feel the best intent is. We are not against development. We are not against growth. We are just trying to do what's best for the city, its people and everybody that visits here. We feel that the center of this has -- is a good spot for the silos. We feel it can be rebuilt. But we are not all experts. I'm an architect. I have looked at it. I have said I think it can be rebuilt. It's going to take a little bit of work, but think it's doable. So, whether it's on this site or if City Council says not, that's -- that's Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 33 of 87 your guys' decision. It's not up to us. But our belief is historically it would be best on site, but that's how we feel. So, with that I'm open to any questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Blaine, it was shared earlier from -- from David that this structure is eligible, but not on the National Historic -- I guess registry. Johnston: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, that's correct. It's listed on Ada county's historic registry site. If it remains -- let me rephrase that. The way the development is with the farm going away, the barn going away, this silo would not be eligible for listing. It loses all of its historical integrity as far as the National Park Service is concerned. That doesn't mean it doesn't lose its integrity to the city. Cavener: Sure. Johnston: Did I answer your question? Cavener: Yeah. And that -- Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: That was my question was if it was on the historic registry what could be done with it or what would it -- would it have to remain? Help me understand what that designation means for the use or placement of that asset. Johnston: We got a letter back from the State Historic Preservation Office and because everything else is going to go away, if the silos -- don't think it remains, it would not be eligible for listing. So, it can never be listed on the national registry. So, does that answer your question? Yes and no? Simison: Anything listed doesn't mean it can't be torn down. Johnston: Right. So, being on the registry doesn't give it any terms of preservation protection per se. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thanks, President Johnson. So, it sounds like an order of preference. The Historic Preservation Commission's number one preference is keeping it on the site. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 34 of 87 Then we have this concept of potentially could be moved to a city park that does have a farming theme, like an agricultural theme. There right now is a proposal here at the plaza for sort of a small like replica of it. Does the -- does the Commission have a strong preference of wanting that kind of a big replica, as opposed to like a plaque? And kind of where I was going with it -- I was looking for a little bit of a shortcut, but you might tell me, no, we don't want to do that, but I was thinking, well, why don't we put a plaque -- and maybe somehow the funds that would have been used for this elaborate plaza could be directed toward helping to, you know, reconstruct this thing at -- at Hillsdale Park. It's kind of where I was going with it. But if you -- I want to hear feedback from you. If you are like that's a huge mistake. We love the replica. Yeah, just want to hear kind of what your thoughts are about that. Johnston: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, again, our first preference was to remain on site. That would be most preferable to have it in -- in the historical context. Second choice would be to have a monument -- a replica, but built of scale to represent the history of -- that agriculture and farming has of -- in Meridian. So, that would be our first two choices. I may be speaking out of turn, David, but my discussions with -- with David Bailey is that the developer is willing to just give it away. There is a barn in there, he is willing to give it away. So, to get the -- it's not going to cost anybody anything. The assembly is going to be some cost for whoever gets it, whether it's the city or private entity or whomever. We would not like have that silo taken out of Meridian if at all possible. The best historical content would be within the city, so -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just to tease that out a little further, like you would rather have the monuments even -- in order of preference you would rather have the monument -- it's more important to have the monument, even, then, to have the structure itself in a different location. Or am I like sort of posing an unfair -- unfair -- Johnston: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I don't think it's an unfair question, but have never thought of as having both options. Strader: Right. Johnston: So, for us it was always can we get a monument, can we retain the silos on site. That was our first preference. We have never thought of it as having both options available to us. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 35 of 87 Strader: I mean I'm -- sort of where I'm going with it is the developer has agreed to build this monument. It's -- it's kind of to scale. There is a scale to it. It does represent the structure in the place -- around the place that it was. Then it seems like the city is getting somewhat of a free option for now of a donation of the structure and disassembly of the structure and we will have maybe a couple of months to decide, you know, do we want to take on this structure, do we want to move it to Hillsdale Park. agree with you, Mr. Mayor. I don't think it's realistic that another entity is going to swoop in here, but it sounds like we could -- we could -- in theory we could move forward tonight on an application with the monument and agreeing that the city will have a certain amount of time -- the developer will agree if we -- if we want to agree to disassemble it and, then, we will -- you know, we would have some time to figure out what to do. It would be great if we could get it buttoned up tonight. I don't think we are going to get a cost associated with what we need to do with the structure. So, I'm kind of thinking we -- and maybe we do the monument and, then, we could kind of punt on that piece, but I would like to hear other people's thoughts. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Blaine, thank you. It seems like some of the -- a lot of this conversation is being driven by where Vanguard has to go and so that consideration of the roadways is -- brings into other entities, sister agencies, et cetera, in planning our community. So, understand -- I understand the first preference would be to leave it where it is, considering that the infrastructure kind of is dictating to some degree maybe what we need to do. I just want to make sure if I -- I'm understanding correctly your second preference is for the monument and not even to keep the buildings -- or am I misunderstanding? Johnston: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor, we realize that Vanguard is going to go right through where the silos are. We know they are going to have to come down. We are just -- we are asking can we, at least for now, disassemble, save the structure disassembled for future consideration, if it means rebuilding it on site in that -- their central plaza. Fantastic for us. I think that would be our -- our best solution. If that's not an option, yeah, we want to have a monument on site showing Eggers farm, the silos that used to be there, as an historical reference for that. If the city decides in the future with the next couple of months before the roads start getting built that, yeah, they would like to maybe take this on, great. I have talked to another couple of developers -- can't say who -- that are interested in possibly doing it and have it stay in Meridian. Those discussions are preliminary. I don't know where that may go yet. So, I'm still working on -- on saving the structure itself. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 36 of 87 Taylor: Kind of -- I think I would agree with the idea of preserving the -- the physical structure. Obviously, you know, decommissioned, taken down and store is somehow -- I think it needs to be in the possession of the city for now initially, but I like the idea of preserving the options. When considering a monument I -- I'm thinking if I were to go visit a monument in the midst of the development we have I -- I would almost think it's kind of sad, because we are -- it's -- you know, flex base buildings and, you know, loading docks and, then, here is this scale monument to our history. It seems a bit odd. I'm not totally opposed to it, but I think I would be a little sad. I would say we just screwed this up, you know. So, I -- I am very supportive I think initially of the idea of preserving the -- the buildings to some degree with a future determination of like maybe how we actually -- you know, give the -- your -- your body some time to maybe work with other parties I think the city needs to take possession of the materials until we decide maybe how we want to do that. There -- it seems like there is a lot of options for what we do with the silos. Simison: You know, the -- the short answer is a few -- just continue the public hearing or -- don't approve it the road will never get built and, therefore, this issue doesn't have to happen and you can have the road that leaves the silo and goes around it and be done, but it might be something that would be worth continuing to hear from the Parks Department before -- again I didn't even get an opportunity to talk to the director about this and maybe there is other ideas to -- to at least gather the likelihood if Blaine wants to further explore his two private entities, that we could have some of that conversation. I just don't know if you -- you know, the nice thing is that if we don't move forward with the application right away we are not losing any time on -- on the decision and you guys could think about it in terms of that and maybe we can get a rough cost about -- up to. I know historic preservation is not cheap. There is no other way to put it. Johnston: It's not, no. Simison: And so if we are thinking we are going to relocate this for 50,000 dollars and have what we want, I think we are sorely mistaken, so -- Johnston: Thank you. Simison: Thanks. Mr. Clerk, anyone else signed up on this item? Johnson: No one else indicated they wished to speak. Simison: Is there anybody else that would like to come up and provide testimony on this item this evening? Such a great group of people here. I thought someone would want to come up and talk about this item. Would the applicant like to come forward for any additional final comments? Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do have some final comments on the silo, but I first want to reiterate that I did have another request in there earlier that we allow Buildings 1 and 2 to stay as -- if we get to this point, that we allow those -- I want this to overshadow Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 37 of 87 -- that we allow those to stay as flex space buildings as proposed in -- in the application. So, we request that as a -- within the conditions of approval that we be allowed that. On the silos, I appreciate all the comments on this stuff and, you know, we have worked with Blaine several times on this and talked to him, you know, about what's going on and, you know, I certainly appreciate the Mayor's -- the Mayor's comments on this earlier and all of your -- your input into this and -- and I think it's probably worth proposing -- worth going forward with -- with what we are talking about. So, from our perspective what we are proposing is fully consistent with what the discussions have been, which is that we are willing to disassemble and, you know, my intent with that was to disassemble and put on trailers and store it on site; right? In a safe place on site until such time as -- as we have a place to put that. The caveat is is that prior to doing that disassembly we don't want to know, as the Mayor said for what purpose, we don't -- we want to know that there is a purpose for doing that, because it's going to be an expensive operation just to take it down and the developer has already committed and is willing to do that, but not to just -- to throw the money away. My take on that -- and will be a little bold to say this -- is I think you should direct your Historic Preservation Committee to find a place to put that thing and put some budgets together to do that and should be a part of their job to do that. To that end -- and I got to be careful, because I switch on my -- what I want to do and what I can commit the developer to do, okay, on this thing and I'm on the side of Blaine on this thing and I have been and get the developer to commit to do the right thing in association with this. I'm not a short timer in Meridian. I started my -- my business in 1993 on South Black Cat Road and drove by this -- this particular silo quite a bit over the years and I -- I was in Meridian up through 1999 before I moved on to another company there. So, I have been doing stuff here a long time. I get it, so -- but I have gotten the developer to commit to pay for -- pay for taking that down, as long as it's not wasted money. We also have, as a requirement of the mixed employment district and part of the project cost, is to build a public art and one of our amenities is we have committed to build some kind of public art in our plaza that we have there and that's one of the amenities that we are committed to. So, in some scale that's going to happen. If there were some negotiations that we can use that money better somewhere else and just put a plaque there, instead of doing this -- this grand monument that that's better, we would be glad to participate in that as well, right, to the extent that we can make -- make a deal for that. But we are committed to build that and to paying for the silo as long as that we are not just throwing money away. So, we would like to be approved with those conditions that were -- that we are proposing there and with -- with those caveats on it. That's guess the end of what I have got to say on that. Simison: Thank you. And the one other thing I thought I heard said earlier -- and this is -- kind of plays into a little bit of this is if you were going to do a monument you may try to use some of the stuff from the silo if appropriate in that context and so -- Bailey: We have talked with the artists and with some designers about how we could incorporate the actual blocks from the silo in -- in context with that and, you know, I have had that reviewed by the -- you know, we would want to make it look nice and be appropriate. Again, we have already engaged the historic preservation company, who Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 38 of 87 would be a -- do a professional job of doing it properly, you know, in that end. I would also like to throw in, again, with the piece of -- if I can have one more stab at it. I'm committed -- I'm limited is what I can commit for the developer on this, but, like I said, I'm -- I'm -- I like Meridian and I like what -- what we are doing. I like what your Historic Preservation Committee is doing. So, I, as an engineer, would personally volunteer to work with your -- your Historic Preservation Committee. I have estimates on things I have done. I understand how things get put together and taken apart and I understand all the use -- land use stuff and I volunteer anytime I need to for my company to help, if you found a site for us to make sure that it got put together and done right on that end. Simison: Thank you, David. Appreciate that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. Maybe one question -- and I just wanted to double check if you could bring up your site plan, but I did want to make sure that there is not a different place it could go on the site. I don't know. Would it fill in the plaza? What about this -- there is this kind of wedge shaped green space here at the south part of the property. Just want to check did you sort of start with we don't want this on the site, because it's a liability and you didn't check into it or would it -- in theory could it fit on the site somewhere? Leaving your building's footprint the way they are. Bailey: So, there is room within the plaza area we have shown there for the site. So, the silos can -- Strader: Okay. Bailey: -- I mean it would be kind of oversized for the space, but it's certainly -- there is certainly room to put that there and, then, it would overshadow that one building a little bit. That said, the practicality, the cost and the continued maintenance and the -- actually, just the practicality of getting it done -- getting it built on there and the cost of that and the developer doesn't feel that it's the right place to have the monument in the long run and I know that's contrary to what your Historic Preservation Committee says, but it's not going to be seen by people. You know, this is going to be a -- a -- a -- you know, semi-industrial, light industrial site. You know, it's not a residential area that -- it won't have a whole lot of traffic. We are putting a lot of trails on here, but the odds are we are not going to have a huge amount of traffic through those -- or down Vanguard, you know, that's going to be pedestrian traffic that would visit that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 39 of 87 Strader: Yeah. I'm -- but, you know, to play Devil's advocate for a second, if we kept it on site -- I guess what I'm hearing from my historic preservation expert is that that's the best case scenario, keeping the historical thing where it is sited. I mean in theory this is an industrial area, but in theory that's the whole idea of Ten Mile, we have this whole Avani Subdivision just across the street, maybe folks who walk down here, maybe kids could come if they are on a tour of -- historical tour of Meridian. I don't know if I want to foreclose the possibility, you know, that it -- that it could -- that it could be of use, but it's -- okay. So, it could technically fit on the plaza, but it would be crowded. That's what I'm hearing. Bailey: Yeah. I don't think the issue is whether we could find someplace to put it. Strader: Got it. Okay. So, there is -- there is space. Okay. Simison: Any additional questions for the applicant? Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: We have been so busy with the silo issue, I just wanted to make sure that we got the other concerns dealt with. I know at one point we were talking -- or listening about bike racks and some things that hadn't been -- we hadn't addressed yet and I didn't know if we needed to deal with those tonight or if we were going to continue this or what -- what our plan is. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, I can answer that and -- Council Woman Roberts. So, we had a couple of issues that were brought up. One was about the -- the garage doors in the back of Building 1 and 2. 1 have addressed that. The other one is that there were questions about the landscape buffers along those roads and we did address those and submitted a revised landscape plan to -- to the staff and, of course, that will go through the CDC and we will meet all the conditions that are required by that. So, we intend to fully meet all the conditions of -- of the landscape plan approval stuff. We are in agreement with that. Little Roberts: Okay. Bailey: With that plan -- and, actually, I haven't shown on here and they are probably not good enough, but that -- that did include bicycle racks there on the site and we fully intend to comply with the requirements and, again, that will be shown to be detailed at -- at the end here. Integration with the project to the east. We have addressed that. We did actually move that buffer over on the latest plan we had there and we are continuing to work with that developer to the east on how we integrate that and we will be sharing that site at the -- at the access there. So, that was one that she had brought up and, then, the caveat that this needs to go to the CDC and design review to do all these. So, we are fully in agreement with all those conditions and we have tried to address some of Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 40 of 87 them and we will have them all addressed, but certainly with the conditions of approval. The only thing we are asking for that's not strictly in accordance with the conditions of approval or in the staff report is that we be able to build Building 1 and 2 with the same building structure as the three, four and five that include the garage doors in the back. The flex space. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: You have used the term garage door. I thought I heard in the presentation from staff that it was a loading dock. Two very different things. But Building 1 and 2 are garage doors, not loading docks? Bailey: Correct. Little Roberts: Okay. Thank you. Simison: Any additional questions from Council? Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Mr. Mayor, just a final question -- and -- and to that point. You want to preserve the garage doors for flexibility with tenants and kind of -- instead of turning it into office space, you want to be able to preserve the multiple use aspect that comes with that kind of design; is that correct? Bailey: Correct. Taylor: And I think that makes some sense where, you know, I see that the pathway is designed to kind of go between the two and I think the staff makes a good point, but it seems like the design of the building is such that we are not having big 18 wheelers backing up to the loading docks or -- this is more of a simpler use in terms of what you are envisioning. Not a high use with large trucks that would be using those facilities probably. Bailey: Correct. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Deputy Chief. Bongiorno: Hi there. David, after -- I haven't seen the site plan. It doesn't look like the one on my report. So, I just want to make sure -- that shared access to the east, are you going to pave your half? Because you need two accesses into this development. There was three on my plan and now you have one and you have to have two. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 41 of 87 Bailey: We have two and it will be fully paved. It will be fully constructed in -- with the neighbor next door. Bongiorno: Okay. Cool. That's what I wanted to make sure. Bailey: Yeah. Bongiorno: Awesome. Simison: Okay. Bailey: Thank you very much. Simison: Thank you. The -- as of right now we are done. The applicant's gave their comments and -- after -- once the applicant does we are done for now. So, we will see what Council -- if they feel like they want to hear more testimony, then, we just have to give the applicant more time again. Okay. All right. Come up, speak into the mic. Name and address for the record. Billaud: Hello, Mayor and Council people. My name is Lori Billaud. 192 West Lockhart Lane, Meridian, Idaho. One of the things that I saw when traveling through Maine -- they have done a really good job in Vermont of preserving their historical monuments, but, then, also turning them into things for children. So, one of the things that they did at Fish Park is they took a building that was historical to that area, that did have a fire, but, then, they had the architects go through and put swings and things. I know it's not exactly the silo, but there is things that you could do. Somebody had mentioned moving the park to a farm themed park. So, you could actually -- of course, depending on budget -- make it so it's a child friendly thing, so that also on here there were bike paths. You can see my husband. But we had just taken a bike path through and by it, so, then, you could stop off. There was also a skate park that you could also go to and, then, in this other area there was -- they took tires -- large tires and made dragons and so forth out of them, really to show recycling and they did a whole recycling thing. And this was in Vermont. So, just sharing an idea that having something inside the location, chances are it will be money spent, like you had said, Mr. Mayor -- money spent that will not be seen by anybody if it's a monument or -- or a little small thing. People probably -- it's going to be money that Meridian spends and needed or the developer. If you move it somewhere else and turn it into something that's child friendly, that people can do in the park, that could be money that's well used and have the plaque there with the picture of the field, so the kids could actually see what was around in the area. Thank you. Simison: Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you, Lori. David, would you like to make any final comments? Okay. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 42 of 87 Cavener: Just kind of -- appreciate at least kept the public hearing open in case you got any questions. I -- the applications are never easy and -- and I think that there are -- there are just too many details for me that still need to be answered before I would be comfortable making a decision tonight. So, I likely will be supportive of continuing this out for a few weeks to give the applicant an opportunity to engage with our Historical Preservation Commission, Parks Department, maybe Mayor's office -- I think it's important that we have a -- anything we go into this I want it to be eyes wide open, so I think from the applicant standpoint we don't want to say tear it down, preserve it, and six years from now we are like, ah, it was a terrible idea. Get rid of it; right? That was a waste of time and money. I think we have got to have a good plan -- or at least an intentional plan that we want to do. Candidly, I don't like the idea of a monument. appreciate Council Member Taylor's comments, that I have the Joni Mitchell song, like verse two in my head, you know, instead of paving paradise and put up a parking lot or tear down all the trees and put up a tree museum, we -- we tear down the silo and put a picture about where that silo used to stand. I don't like that idea. Ideally I like the recommendation of our Historical Preservation Commission, which would be to find a way to preserve it on site. That would be my preference. That may not work, but that's at least where I'm starting at tonight and -- and, Mayor, you asked a good question, which is to what end and so I just go back to what I see on the website about our historical preservation and what it's designed to do, which is the Commission works to preserve the character and fabric of historically specific significant areas and structures within the City of Meridian, to honor and preserve its rich heritage for future generations. That's why we have the HPC. I think in the ten years I have been doing this I have never had HPC come and say do something with this. Don't let it get torn down. I'm sympathetic to that. I also think many of us hear from people in our committee who have lived here a long time, that preserving our agricultural history is very very important to them. So, when I hear that from our neighbors -- and we have our HPC who is -- this is their job is to bring us these types of recommendations to preserve history saying let's tap the brakes, I think that's important. Again, it's a challenge; right? As the applicant comes in you are like, hey, I -- I got this patch of dirt, you didn't know the historical significance when it was -- when -- I'm sure when the developer was purchasing it, but that's what's before us. So, I -- I would like to continue this probably for a couple of months and get -- these details get worked out, so that we, as a body, should we choose to approve the annexation and zoning, we are comfortable with about what is going to happen to the silo long term. I don't mind, Mayor, if David wants -- David wants to speak. I'm -- public hearing is still open. Simison: Yeah. David, you want to come up and -- Bailey: David Bailey again. Mr. Mayor and Councilman Cavener, you can certainly defer this to do stuff, but -- but we have our offer on the table about what we are willing to do with the project and that is to -- is to go forward with -- with the plan that we have there. The alternative is that -- is that you could add that as a condition of the development agreement as the City Council -- a condition of the development agreement that you keep it on site and -- and do that as what you want to do or I suppose you could deny the project. I suppose you're -- you're -- you're open as to Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 43 of 87 what you can do on -- on that end. But the position of the developer is that if -- if you were to -- to defer this for three months I probably would not do anything different in that time frame. So, I could talk to the -- talk to the city, the city could work on finding a place to do -- put -- put that on that end and so if the city has some work to do, but we have come to where we -- where we need to be from the developer's end in the project. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Dave, I'm going to -- I like given time for -- for the right decision to get -- be made and what I'm hearing from you is either accept our offer -- condition us to do something without involving -- I think maybe getting all the right answers for us the city to be confident or recommended denial -- or issue a denial and I just want to make sure that that's the position that you are at tonight is that you are willing to accept a denial if we are not able to come to a conclusion about what's best for that silo. I just want to make sure I'm hearing you right. And, again, the reason why I'm asking is that's -- that's where I would go is if we don't have an answer on that and there is not a willingness to work collaboratively to find a solution, then, we can save the Council some time and I'm happy to make a motion for denial. Bailey: And Mr. Mayor and Councilman Cavener, there is no intent to say put you on the spot or say this is our -- you know, stick my foot in the sand. I don't have anywhere else to go -- if you defer this I don't have anywhere else to go in the next several months. I would -- I would -- I guess I would prefer that you place what you want to happen -- or what you want me to do as a condition on the project or I suppose if -- I don't know what I would do in the intervening months. I have been through this over and over again and I don't have any other tools to bring you back something different. I can -- and -- and Bryan's not going to change his mind on where he is and I don't know if we are going to find a place to take that to and already said it -- and there is quite a bit of support that -- that's probably not the developer's responsibility. Cavener: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, I -- Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Dave, I think it's also -- it's not just you, it's -- it's us; right? To your point, if we ask your -- the developer to tear it down and we don't have a plan about where it would go or had to be rebuilt, that -- that's unfair to you and that's unfair to the developer and so we -- candidly, I wish after Planning and Zoning Commission that you would have taken the time and effort to engage with the city about building a plan, so we had a -- an option tonight to pick. You chose not to do that and that's okay, but that -- that's where I'm trying to get to is what's the plan. Asking you to take it down and store it with no -- no plan in place and we don't know what it would cost to put it back together, we don't know where it would go and so that's what I'm saying, is if you don't want us to take the Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 44 of 87 time to try and figure that out, I'm okay with that. I'm trying to work collaboratively with you to find the right solution. Bailey: So, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, again, I don't want to be -- come across as putting my foot in the sand. The -- the take is it's not that I'm not willing to be collaborative, we have been willing to be collaborative. The conclusion that we -- that we have come -- come to in this is that that silo is going to come down and that we would love to see it go somewhere else, but we don't want to see it on our site. Okay? Either we don't want to move it on to our site or build it on our site for the reasons I explained on that. From that perspective, we don't know that there is anything else to look at. What we had left open is the option for the city or the Historic Preservation Committee to say, hey, let's do something besides just throwing this thing away, because that's what happens if no one else takes action. If we don't take action, you don't take action, the Historic Preservation Committee doesn't take action on this thing, then, it gets thrown away and -- and so we think that that's probably what's going to happen in the long run. I'm guessing that's what's going to happen in the long run. It's not -- you know, that that's what's -- what's going to happen here and so we are saying that we want to leave this open, that if there is another solution we don't want to close off the door today; right? But it's -- we are not going to know anything more in three months from now -- or maybe we will. You know, certainly -- certainly we are not -- I'm not telling you what you have to do or what you need to do, your -- that -- that's -- that's your side of the deal, so -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I think we should be careful not to embrace a false dilemma. I do think if we made a hasty decision this evening, then, there would be a real risk of disassembling this and having it disappear or be discarded. We definitely are in alignment that we don't want that to happen. So, I have faith that we will work through that. I think if we take a continuance it would give you the opportunity -- I know that your developer does not prefer this, but it would give you the opportunity to take a look at -- if it were reassembled on site what would that look like? Is there a way you could get comfortable with that and that would give you an opportunity to look at that. I think it would give our city and the historic -- the Historic Preservation Commission would have an opportunity to discuss with private parties, who may or may not be interested. Could be even nearby, across street, who knows where it could go. Okay? So, that would give us an opportunity to explore that avenue and it would give city staff an opportunity to look at some parks angles. I loved Lori's positivity with this out-of-the-box creative thinking about play structure. I mean there is just a lot of possibility there, but we really couldn't explore that unless we talked with our Parks Department. So, I would -- we are in the driver's seat, because you are the applicant this evening, so I would encourage you to indicate if you are comfortable with a continuance, because I think that would give us all an opportunity to -- to do our homework as a city and, then, that would give you an opportunity to do some homework on -- if you had to locate it on site what's that Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 45 of 87 going to look like? Is there a way for you to get comfortable? That's just my recommendation. Because we can't force you into a continuance and it's better if you are okay with that, but I think what you are probably hearing from us -- at least a few of us, is that really making a decision tonight may not work in your favor and we -- I think we all agree we don't want it discarded, so that's just feedback from me. I would be in a similar boat to Councilman Cavener in terms of feeling that we are not ready to make a decision, because we don't have really a method yet -- a plan for the silo. But I think if we take time I think we could get that together. Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I really think we could figure it out. Parsons: Yeah. Mr. Mayor -- Bailey: Could I answer that? Parsons: Yes. Go ahead. Sorry. Simison: Please do. Bailey: Council Woman Strader, I -- I agree with you and, of course, we are willing to look at a continuance in order to move -- move this forward and with that continuance I would say that our job during that time would be to -- I will talk to the developer and we will look more at the cost and the feasibility of moving it onto the site. I will ask that question again of the developer during that time and I would hope the city and the Historic Preservation Committee during that time could look at other options for what could be done with the site and I think that's -- that would be great. Thank you. Simison: And -- and just to -- it's sad. I mean from a -- I'm trying to put on multiple hats. It's like -- if we are not willing to relocate it to our property at our cost, why would we expect the developer to put it back on their property at their cost? I think that's a fair question to ask when they didn't -- the road is where the road is. If we really want it to stay where it is, go to ACHD and get ACHD to move the road. I mean that's -- that saves it from that standpoint, but there -- there is a real cost if it's the expectation that this only comes back on the developer's property at the developer's cost in that context and I just want to share one other little story that's kind of relevant to my time in the advisory council on historic preservation was one of the things that they wanted to do was restore a bunch of homes on military bases that were built in the '40s. It seemed like a great thing and I ask the question, well, who gets to -- who gets to see those homes? Well, the people that live in them. So, it was a lot of money to preserve homes that the only people that were ever going to do it was the officers that lived in those homes. They weren't available to the public. It was more of a -- just a general we want them to be maintained in their historic relevance, but no one actually got to have the benefit except for the people there and that was my concern with rebuilding on this property is -- especially if you are not going to create an opportunity for people to visit, it just becomes a building on a piece of property and I think that if you want to have historic preservation meaningful you have to have a way that it's interactive there for the public and just showing up and like, okay, we are here and looking at it and with no Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 46 of 87 other real purpose or -- okay, we saved the building, but have we really met any meaningful long-term purpose and I think that when Councilman Cavener read the comments, you know, there was -- and I don't remember exactly what he said, but some of the stuff at the very end -- I think where does the community get the best value for this? You know, if we are going to start preservation that's where to me is the important part. It is not just to maintain on the property, but the value to the community in this concept. So, I hope that as we have -- as you talk, staff talks, Parks talks, Council talks, the -- at the end of the day we all come around to, you know, real cost, real value, real purpose, not just to say we preserve the building on an industrial property that people are not going to drive to and look at or interact with or value in that context. So, just want to get that out there as we move forward in this conversation. Parsons: Yeah. Mayor and Council, if I can just add to some of the commentary on that, too. I think Council Woman Strader was probably going in the right direction. I'm looking at the southeast corner and there is quite a bit of landscape buffer down there and we have to look at Ten Mile as a whole. So, yes, this is one piece of it, but to the east there is going to be an interconnected multi-use pathway along the interstate there. So, it may make sense to put it along there. You can see it as you drive your car and, then, those who are riding a bike can stop and interact there in that buffer area and not even go through the industrial park. So, there are some other ways -- maybe the developer would be interested in doing that or I think continuing the conversation is probably the right approach and, then, if we really want to get creative we can maybe even put some signage on it and help them advertise their business or -- we can make it dual purpose. Give it some meaning. I don't think people are going to drive to the site to look at it, but I do think people will ride their bikes as Ten Mile area continues to build out and we build that continuous pathway along the interstate there, it will connect Ten Mile to Black Cat and I see people in that area using that and maybe interacting with the silos or at least visiting it as they ride their bike in the evening. Just something to consider. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I'm going to move that we continue the public hearing for Item 11 , Farmstone Crossing, application H-2023-0045 to May 7th. We are going to keep the public hearing open in a limited capacity as it pertains to the silo and its usage. Mr. Mayor, along with my motion I would ask that we also ask staff to draft a letter to ACHD to ask for additional reconsideration about the placement of Vanguard and in -- and as it -- as it pertains to the current location of the silo. And, then, Mr. Mayor I guess along with that asking you and -- and our Planning staff and our Parks and Recreation staff to work with the applicant and their representative on possible solutions and cost to relocate the silo to a yet-to-be-identified location. Simison: Blaine is going to get his workout. So, do I have a second? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 47 of 87 Strader: Second. Simison: Motion and second. Is there discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is continued. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Simison: Council, let's go ahead and take a break. At least five, if not ten minutes. Ten minutes. (Recess: 8:24 p.m. to 8:37 p.m.) 12. Public Hearing for Reveille Ridge Subdivision (H-2023-0050) by Bailey Engineering, generally located on the west side of S. Eagle Rd., approximately 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 59.97 acres of land with an R-8 (34.69 acres) and R-15 (25.28 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 247 building lots and 37 common lots on 59.77 acres of land in the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts. Simison: All right. Council, we will go ahead come back from recess and move on. Oh, I threw away my agenda, so item next is Item 12, which is the Reveille Ridge Subdivision, H-2023-0050. Open this public hearings with staff comments. Parsons: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. Last Action Item or land use application this evening is the Reveille Ridge Subdivision. The applicant is here to discuss annexation and a preliminary plat with you. The site consists of approximately 60 acres of land. It's currently zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at a physical address of 7355 South Eagle Road. What's unique about this property here -- if you look at the center map here, the future land use map designates this property with two designations, both the low density residential designation and the medium density residential designation and how that breaks out its approximately 31 acres is confined in the 31 acres, which is the green and, then, approximately 28 acres encompasses the MDR designation and each one of them have different density requirements as well, but overall the aggregate of the density tonight does conform to both of the designations and I will share that with you in my presentation. But right now the MDR designation -- we are looking at three to eight dwelling units to the acre and, then, in an LDR designation it's three or -- three or less. You can see -- also see in the aerial that there is an existing residence and some buildings that will be removed upon development of the site. So, the applicant is here tonight to discuss annexing this property with an R-8 and R-15 zoning designation. You can see in this exhibit here how much of the area encompasses the R-8, which is 34.6 or .7 if you round up and the R-15 area Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 48 of 87 encompasses 35.3 acres. Here is the plat and the phasing plan for you. So, the -- know one of the topics during the Planning and Zoning Commission were are the -- the number of road improvements happening in the area or lack thereof, so if you have had a chance to look at the staff report, ACHD is planning -- or they should be close to starting construction of widening Lake Hazel from Locust Grove to Eagle Road and, then, rebuilding that intersection, as well as part of 2024 and, then, in 2025 they plan on widening Lake Hazel from Eagle Road to South Cloverdale. So, there will -- traffic and congestion will occur in this area, as those road improvement happen. Currently there are no improvements planned for South Eagle Road, which is the main access into this development currently. So, a preliminary plat is proposed to show 246 lots and 38 common lots, again, on 59.77 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and R-15 zoning district. The applicant -- the developer is proposing to develop the site in four phases. As we wrote the staff report and went into the Commission we looked at the phasing plan, we asked the developer or the applicant to make some changes, which they did, and so the phasing plan that is on the screen tonight is the most recent change and proposed phasing plan, so you can see here a lot of the collector road -- the entire collector road for this development, which is consistent with the master street map, is going to be built with phase one and, then, with phase two we get a bulk of the open space and amenities with the existing pond site and, then, we transition with the larger lots with phase three and, then, phase four is up in the -- in the northwest corner of the development. Again, staff, was supportive of this phasing plan. It did -- it did coincide with not only our recommendation, but the Commission also supported that recommendation. I mentioned to you that the main access into this development will be from Eagle Road, which you can see here, and that is the collector road per the master street map in accordance with ACHD's plan and, then, along the west boundary is also a collector road that will tie into the future park, Discovery Park. So, we are getting a lot better connectivity in this area, not only for subdivisions, but also access for fire department and access to that beautiful public amenity that we are constructing out there in south Meridian. One other thing that I would note with the Council, this proposed plan also has quite a bit of pedestrian connectivity as well. That was a recommendation from -- not only from staff, but the Parks Department. So, all the collector roadways will have ten foot multi-use pathways or ten foot wide sidewalks. The master pathway plan also shows a ten foot multi-use pathway that runs along the gas pipeline -- the Williams Pipeline here through the site and staff has also recommended that an additional pathway be constructed along this north-south roadway, which is known as Tap, that will tie into the Farr Lateral pathway that the applicant is building with phase three and this will ultimately continue and connect into the Vertex No. 2 Subdivision, which is a Brighton development that's currently been approved and under construction -- or should be shortly. So, again, we are not -- we are getting additional pedestrian connectivity for this development, but it's also tying into adjacent developments as well. You can see here that the site currently has an existing pond, which the applicant is proposing to keep as part of an amenity for the development and they are also including a walking path around the pond, which would also include some sitting areas, so the residents can enjoy that. The code requires that they provide 15 percent open space as part of their development and the applicant is proposing in excess of code, which is 19.69 percent open space, which -- which is a Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 49 of 87 great amenity for this development, but also, you know, typically when someone is around a regional park staff is amenable to lesser open space, but this applicant's gone above and beyond to do something more. As far as the amenity package, they are required to have 12 amenity points and they have 12. 1 would probably let the Council know that it's probably higher than 12, if I'm looking at the -- the amount of interconnected pathways that they are providing. So, they are providing miles of pathway with their development, which should be counted for more amenity points, so they do meet -- exceed the minimum requirements per code. Here is the proposed open space exhibit that demonstrates compliance with the UDC standards. You can see here the bulk of the open space is internal to their development. One unique thing about this development as well is the applicant's proposing multiple residential types for this development, so they are having single family detached. I think their breakdown here -- they had -- get to my notes here -- 170 single family detached homes, 14 single family attached, 62 townhome. So, three different residential styles. And, then, the gross density overall is 4.13 dwelling units to the acre. In the LDR designated area you are looking at 2.96, which is, again, under that three. And, then, the MDR areas is at 5.3. So, as I mentioned to you they are meeting the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan as far as the density requirements go. Here are the sample elevations that they are proposing this evening. You can see a mix of single two story elevations taking access off of common driveways and some alley loaded product as well and, then, typical building materials will consist of horizontal, vertical siding, stucco, stone and brick veneers. Any of the attached product, the townhomes and the single family attached, duplex units, will have to go through design review process with staff. Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval of this project to you. Testifying in favor was the applicant David Bailey. There were quite a few residents in the surrounding subdivisions that testified in opposition. If you had a chance to look at the public record you also saw a public comment in that effect as well. Primary concerns voiced in the -- that public testimony was density, transition -- lot -- transitional lot sizes and, then, just -- just the overall congestion and road improvements planned in the area, which will hamper access in and out of this area for growth for the next few years. So, key issues of discussion by the Commission, again, was density. Step back here. So, as you're -- as I showed you this -- this low -- area of the plat is low density residential and some of the discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission was whether or not there was adequate transition to those lots in The Keep Subdivision. So, that's one of the questions that Commission posed to this body this evening is do you feel that this -- these number of lots are adequate enough to transition from that R-2 development to the north. And I'm sure you will probably hear from some of that tonight -- in tonight's testimony as well. Again, safety, traffic concerns. Safety. One other item was also just discussed about R-8 zoned lots, why is there R-8 zoning and not R-2 zoned lots up against The Keep as well and as I think as this body knows when -- back in 2017 we eliminated density requirements from the UDC. So, really, zoning doesn't really pertain to zoning too much as many people still seem to under -- correlate zoning with -- with density and in our code it -- zoning -- or density correlates to the Comprehensive Plan, so someone could still request an R-8, R-15 zone, but still meet the density requirements of the code. It doesn't mean they are getting 15 dwelling units to the acre, it just means dimensional standards. They are smaller lots and meet Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 50 of 87 additional housing needs for the community. So, I have had a chance to look at the public record as well. There was two additional items of public testimony submitted after the Planning and Zoning Committee. I believe they were the day after the Commission hearing, if I remember correctly. Again, same -- same comments and concerns. Better transition. And then -- then traffic and density. So, with that, again, Planning and Zoning Commission and staff have recommended approval with the appropriate conditions and I'm happy to conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions for staff? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Bill, appreciate as always very thorough, but comprehensive report. My question actually is for Deputy Chief Bongiorno. Deputy Chief, in the -- in the staff report it indicated, you know, that we didn't have enough data at the time to determine response times to this proposed application. I don't know when that determination was made and if it was early when an application was submitted. If this -- if that was looked at again recently. I guess I'm trying to get a good sense as to what our response times would be to this based on Station 7 and if we have got the resources to meet the need in that -- in this proposal application. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor and Council, so when this was submitted Station 7 -- make sure get my number right -- Cavener: Yep. Bongiorno: -- was not open yet and so now it's open, so the entrance on Eagle would be at two mile mark -- well, now it would a mile and a half. So super fast. And for me, like Bill had mentioned, with phase one we are going to get a connection from the park to Eagle Road. So, now it's -- we are there, because the fire station is on that road that they are going to propose with phase one. So, we are there. Cavener: Mr. Mayor. Thanks. That was my assumption, but I know when I make an assumption it's dangerous, so I always like to address the subject matter experts to make sure we are seeing things the same way. Thanks. That's my only question right now. Simison: Okay. Council, any additional questions for -- Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 51 of 87 Taylor: Quick question. Bill, on the -- one of the outstanding issues, to leave the Farr Lateral open and just put up a fence, I'm just looking on the map here. It looks like it's at the -- the very top. Currently is that open now in terms of it adjacent to the property to the north? Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Taylor, yes, it is open currently. So, it's just a standard -- just kind of going through asking you to leave it open, because of the size of that facility and other developments have been granted the same waiver. Taylor: Okay. And, then, quick follow up, Mr. Mayor. Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Just that Farr Lateral, does it -- when it gets to the end of Block 2 does it kind of turn to the north, it doesn't continue to transition along the -- the -- the rest of the property in what phase four would be; right? Parsons: Councilman Taylor, that is correct. It does go jog and head north. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: If you have it would it be very helpful or if not if when the applicant presents it would be great if I could see the lot lines and how they match up when we get into issues about transition, since that seems like kind of the sticking point. Thank you. Simison: Okay. Any additional questions for staff? All right. Then invite the applicant to come forward. Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. David Bailey. Bailey Engineering. 1119 East State Street in Eagle, representing Trilogy Development for the Reveille Subdivision and I appreciate the previous conversation. I apologize I'm back. So, we will continue on. But I think that came out great before. I really do appreciate that. So, here for the Reveille Ridge Subdivision. A whole different animal here. We are really proud of what we came up with here. Now, this piece of property has the pipeline running through the middle of it. It had the existing pond on there. The -- the requirement by ACHD to put this east-west collector through this property that's well south of where it should be, so we end up with a collector there. We end up with a full collector in the northwest. Great opportunity had in the park adjacent to this and, then, we have this dual comp plan zone to work with. So, we had a lot of good pieces to work with and we are just really excited about what we came up with here. We are keeping the open space, you know, Bill reported that we do meet the density requirements on this and we didn't just meet the density requirements, we are right in the middle. We are a little high on -- we are close to the high end on the low density, but we are not even near -- anywhere near the Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 52 of 87 middle on the -- on the high -- on the medium density portion of this and the overall density of 4.12 is -- is really great for this area and certainly consistent with all of the COMPASS planning that goes into the -- into the roads in the future for this -- for this area. So, we also had the opportunity on this to provide that connection as was stated between the park, the collector along the -- along the west boundary of this and, then, continue that vantage point through to Eagle Road and -- and, then, we will be building the entire collector. So, on our initial plans we had proposed that we build a half plus adjacent to the property on the eastern end. They have asked us to shift just about two feet and build the whole road, including curb and gutter all the way through. So, that will be done. The only thing the developer adjacent would need to do would be to add the sidewalk on their side when they get there, so -- so, we are going to be building all that all the way through the project on that end of it. So, with that I will get into the presentation here. So, as he said we are about 60 acres and south of Lake Hazel, west of Eagle Road. To the northeast of us is The Keep Subdivision and, actually, this is a good one to look at to see that there are, in fact, four lots adjacent to us in The Keep Subdivision to the north there at the end of the cul-de-sac and The Keep was -- was -- is zoned R-2 and the lots in there -- the minimum lot size in the R-2 zone is 12,000 square feet and, then, the lots in there are very -- that are adjacent to us are about 14 to -- think there is -- one of the big ones on the cul-de-sac corner there is probably almost 20. 1 think almost half an acre on that end of it. To the northwest of that is The Keep West, which was recently approved and the developer on that came and testified, said he chose to do R-2, but liked to do .4 acre lots and so those are -- those are really big lots that are up in that triangle piece there. To the west of that is the approved project Vertex Subdivision, which was zoned as an R-4 and they are all standard R-4 lots that are in there. To the east of us there is some large lots. To the east of us and there is a fairly new home constructed in the southwest corner of that lot that fits in the -- in the panhandle I guess we will call it, of the project. I'm in Connecticut, you flip this over and it looks about like that. As he pointed out, the future land use map shows this map shows this portion as low density and medium density and so we did do this lot transition to move from those areas to -- to what we are doing in here and to the medium density transition density and I will go over that a little more later as far as lot sizes. To the north R-2, R-8, I guess, but it's developed -- the Vertex is shown as -- all the lots are pretty close to R-4 dimensions in that subdivision, but it -- and, then, to the south is a proposed project I think by -- I think Laren Bailey is on it -- working on it that's -- that's going to be an R-8 request in a residential subdivision. So, on the preliminary plat we see we have a hundred single family -- a 170 single family detached homes, 62 townhomes, and -- and 14 duettes and duettes are -- are duplexes with a single lot line. So, it's a two unit townhome that's on this, provided -- a nice variety of housing sizes. As you see on the -- on the boundary we have six lots -- one, two, three, four, five, six, seven -- eight lots, excuse me, adjacent to those -- to the north of us on that project. To the east we are R-4. All along the north boundary we are R-4 lot sizes and then -- then we start transitioning to the south -- I think we are still large R-8 and R-4 that are across from the R-2 lot sizes. Those are all 12,000 square foot, so -- so, while the zone we are asking for is R-2 -- or, excuse me, R-8, those will be R-2 dimensional standard lots that are adjacent to the ones to the north. In addition to that there is the Farr Lateral there, but in between these lots in the Farr Lateral boundary is a 20 foot pathway that we are Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 53 of 87 putting in there. It will be landscaped along that. And, then, there is the entire Farr Lateral easement. So, the -- the waiver we are requesting not to tile the Farr Lateral has us put the fence -- it's pretty common standard city procedure that we don't tile, but we put the fence at the edge of the easement, so that will be between our pathway and the -- and the Farr Lateral is where that fence we are talking about would be and I think we do -- get online here. I think we do open -- open fencing on the back of those lots adjacent to that pathway also is the standard on that. And, then, there is the whole Farr Lateral easement on the other side and, then, the lots of -- of the properties to the north. So, a significant distance between them, in addition to the fact that our lot sizes are the same lot sizes that could be. They aren't the ones that they are in there exactly, but they are the -- they are the same lot sizes that could be within The Keep Subdivision and that same zone. So, we think we provided a really good transit there. As we move towards the pathway to the south and west, we are increasing the density some on the -- on the road out to Vantage Point Drive that goes out to Eagle Road, those are all R-4 size lots, again, adjacent to the larger lots there and they do have an alley load in the back of those, because they can't front on -- on -- they can't have a driveway on to the collector street, so they will all be -- have this back alley load, but there will be nice houses along that drive that will be set back a little bit from the -- from -- at least 20 feet from that. And we also have detached sidewalk along all of the -- the collector streets here, as Bill pointed out. So, we get around closer, we get to the Williams Pipeline and we are providing a pathway through there. It provides a great connection up to the park that way. The pathway along the Farr Lateral also connects into a pathway that's planned in the Vertex Subdivision, so that continues to the park as well along that way and, then, southwest of that we have the -- we have the pond on there and, then, some of the townhouse stuff is all southwest of that -- that there. So, we do have some narrow -- more narrow single family detached lots immediately adjacent to that -- to the -- the pathway in the Williams Pipeline easement there. And, then, we go up and connect with the planned alignment of Vantage Point to the west that goes all the way out and I forget what it's called -- there is a Lennar Subdivision that's out that way that gets you all the way out to Meridian Road on Vantage Point eventually to the west here. Connections to the south on this point -- and also in that open area to the south we have reserved in there a pressure reducing station for the city of Meridian as they requested in their conditions of approval. So, we have a spot reserved for the city in that area. It's the size of a well site is the -- the -- the requirement for that. We are doing the pathways around the pond. The pathway to the north. And the pathways along all of that and through the -- the Williams Pipeline -- along the collectors into the Williams Pipeline in there and we will be doing some minor modifications of that and we will make sure that that's aerated properly and designed property, so it's a maintainable pond and doesn't become a nuisance at all. And, then, the other amenities we have -- think I get to that later on here. There is a product mix on there that shows better where things are and those townhouses are all really adjacent to that pathway and to the park. Amenities. A picnic table, fitness stations, tot lot and a bike repair station. So, the fitness stations go along that pathway and Williams Pipeline along there. The pond itself is really a huge amenity. It's just gorgeous around there and there is a lot of trees that are already around the pond and we will preserve as many as possible. We do have a lot of trees on the site and we are meeting the city's requirement for mitigation Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 54 of 87 and for providing trees -- trees on the site. As far as open space total, again, it's not listed as an amenity on here, but as far as the open space total, as Bill said, we could have asked for a reduction in open space being adjacent to the park on this, but we are almost 20 percent of usable open space on this site that we have provided on here and, like I said, I think we are really -- we are really excited about how this works. Several multi-use pathways. The Farr Lateral we discussed already on that and that does show another good picture here. So, we are talking -- I guess that's a really huge lot in their southwest corner there. So, that would be adjacent to two -- you would have those adjacent to a couple each, those really big lots, and, then, to the east there they would be adjacent to one each -- or one and a half each on the east side. The city doesn't have any particular standard on -- in the code as far as to the transition on that. Having done this, you know, over time with the various standards and done stuff and if we can do one and a half to one or two to one and we provide a significant barrier in between, we feel we are in pretty good shape. For transition to adjacent large lots undeveloped, you know, five acre tracts and stuff, we look at what's the future designation of that as low residential. That could easily be R-4 and we want to make sure that we are less than -- less density than R-4 adjacent to those lots. As Bill said, the phasing on here -- we adjusted with some suggestions from the -- from the city staff on that and we think that works out well. We will be providing the entire collector along the west boundary connecting to the access to the fire station and the entire section of Vanguard -- or Vantage Point all the way out to Eagle Road. Bill pointed out we do have some scheduled improvements in the area, on Lake Hazel, the intersection, and more Lake Hazel widening. This is planned to happen in the next couple years on this project. There is not specifically -- there is not programmed improvements to Eagle Road in this. That's taken into account in our traffic study that -- that is on that. We will do a right turn lane into the project on Eagle -- Eagle Road, so we don't slow the traffic going south on Eagle Road and, in addition, the standard is we will widen that to 19 feet of asphalt from centerline as an arterial street. So, we will make improvements in front of our project of at least that amount, so that opens that up and adds that right turn lane to the north of us. Comp plan alignment we discussed already. And, then, the project timeline -- when we talk about, you know, congestion or the added traffic in the area, you know, we are looking at 2025, hopefully, to start on a first phase on this. Utilities are available on this and we have worked through building those collector streets to connect things. We are doing one and a half to two years typically is what we are seeing on these developments, the buy out -- and, of course, it depends on the market associated with that, but that two year thing -- and I think that's a typo -- we should be looking at 2033 on a full -- on a full build out for the project. So, we are talking several years before we are into the full traffic from the site impacting the roadways. We are into another five year plan that probably has -- by that point the project to the south probably has improvements to Eagle Road planned in there as well. We have quite a few elevations proposed as conceptual. Of course, they are -- on here those are the duettes. And we are in agreement with all the conditions of approval from the staff report and on the ACHD staff report there were two conditions. One was build the entire section of Vantage Point. The other one was that the intersection of Command was in accordance with their code, they said too close to the intersection of Recreation Way on the west end. So, this is a concept of how we would adjust that road to the west and it doesn't Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 55 of 87 change anything in the number of lots that are in the configuration in the open space with this, but if we can't work through this with the highway district, which, you know, often work through things. We have a plan, right, to -- to move that over and, then, we are totally consistent with all their conditions of approval for this. So, it would probably go in that direction. That said go back to this. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Can I let -- Bailey: Love to answer any questions, yeah. Taylor: Question. I recall reading in the -- I think in the packet of material about if the pond having the water kind of circulate somehow. Can you talk to -- speak a little bit to that and give me a better idea what -- how you would do that and kind of -- or am I misremembering? Bailey: It's been a long night, Councilman Taylor. So, the idea is there needs to be a certain amount of turnover within the pond and so we had it designed by a pond expert of the amount of water we do. We will put a pressure irrigation pump station near the pond and that will provide water for the subdivision for irrigation and it will also provide pressure for aerators and sprinklers that go into that. There is also some depth requirements, so we may excavate some shallow portions to make sure that they stay fresh, so -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sorry, not to pick on the pond, but, you know, city -- City Council over the years has run into ponds that have become mosquito havens and so forth. Just want to make sure the pond will be year around. It's not just a holding pressure zone for irrigation. So, it -- all year around the pond will be full of water, so I wanted to check with that. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I don't know fully the answer. It's fed by irrigation water. Strader: Right. Bailey: Okay? And so the intent is not to like pump it dry or anything, but it is fed by irrigation water and we don't -- we probably do not have -- I don't have off the top of my head -- probably do not have another source of water. That doesn't mean it doesn't hold water in the offseason, because it was designed to do that originally. So, it is -- it is a sealed pond. It was -- it's a constructed pond, right, and it was sealed originally. So, we will have maintenance procedures for -- for handling the pond, but the intent is not to Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 56 of 87 just drain it dry in the winter, although there is no other, you know, legal or valid source of makeup water to fill that pond year around. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm going to look to staff to provide any pond feedback. Sorry, it's getting late, but just want to make sure we feel that this is a pond and not going to end up just being kind of an irrigation holding area of -- or do we have standards? I don't recall how we put guardrails around that. Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Strader, there are guardrails around that. The code does allow it to be counted as open space, which it can't be. Two, it's been my experience in some of the subdivisions that I had some have gone dry and some of them had water all year around, it just depends on how much gets drained out of there and how well the pond is built, but the only thing that code requires is that it be circulated so there is not a mosquito breeding ground and it sounds like the applicant is going to do that. So, again, there is -- there is nothing in code that says they can't drain it during the irrigation season and -- and fill it up again, because it is going to be dual purpose. It will be meant for -- as an amenity and as a resource for -- for the subdivision to -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Mr. Bailey, just to -- I want to make sure it's being treated really like an amenity. Will there be like a water feature, like a fountain or something? Will there be fish in it or something? Like help me understand kind of how -- how it's -- how it's going to function. Bailey: Okay. Mr. Chair, Council Woman Strader, the pond currently has been used as an amenity as a water feature in the past and it was built for that. Part of the other thing we do for safety on these ponds is we actually build specific benches on the edge of them, right, so -- so, that -- that you can crawl out of it; right? And that's part of it, making it look like an amenity, as opposed to an irrigation holding pond. It is not intended at all to be an irrigation or storm drainage holding pond for that matter. It is -- I mean we may put some storm drainage in there, because ACHD lets us, you know, but -- but it is not primarily designed for that in any way, shape or form, nor is it designed -- it's way too big -- way bigger than we need for irrigation. So, it's -- it's -- you know, it's a really good pond and definitely with a walking path around the outside, the existing trees that are there and treatment along the banks, this will be a really nice looking amenity. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 57 of 87 Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I think where Council Member Strader is getting is -- is -- is it considered or are you open to -- in an effort, right, we have got to move -- we have got to circulate the water to not have the mosquitoes -- turn that into a breeding ground. Can that water circulation system include something that is a visually appealing amenity? You know, again, to Council Member Strader's -- a fountain or something so -- I hear your intention and I -- and I track with exactly everything that you were saying and doing it, yes, I think the thought is because this is an amenity is there an element that you can incorporate within the pond -- or, excuse me, within -- yeah, within the pond to -- again to use Council Member Strader's -- make it a fountain, so it's -- not only is it circulating the water to help prevent the mosquitoes, but it's also something that's visually appealing. Is that something you guys are open to? Bailey: I believe so. And I think we did that in Shelburne. Cavener: Exactly. It's exactly what I was thinking about where you guys did the -- Bailey: We did the Shelburne product -- Cavener: Yeah. Okay. Bailey: -- sometime back. Katie worked for somebody else then -- Cavener: Okay. Bailey: But she -- she was in that and we were the engineer -- Cavener: Okay. Bailey: -- on that project. So, yes, we -- we have done these in the past. We have done them in Eagle the same way and -- and -- and I think they generally do -- I'm not the expert on designing those, you know, and -- Cavener: Neither am I. Bailey: Yeah. But -- but I think in general I have seen those as part of the aeration system that have fountains or something like that. Cavener: Yeah. Bailey: We didn't propose that specifically as part of the amenity, but -- but, certainly, yeah, that would probably be in there and, then, if we have ideas on how to make it better, you know, when we do that -- I think there is little dots. I would have to ask a landscape architect who does all your landscape stuff, so may specify some of that as well. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 58 of 87 Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Fantastic. Thank you. Perfect. Just -- my only other question is around transition. Help me understand the topography of your surrounding neighbors. So, from visiting The Keep I recall that it's up a little bit higher, but is it -- is it the same elevation as you? Is it higher up? Lower? Like help me understand kind of how your other surrounding properties line up with yours. Bailey: I don't know the exact answer out there. Strader: Okay. Bailey: Reason it's not really hilly. But I think -- I think you are right, they are a little higher, so the Farr Lateral serves this direction and they are above it on the -- on the dry side of the Farr Lateral and I don't think it's a huge elevation difference up there. So, will they see these houses? I suppose. Probably. But not hanging over a cliff onto them or, you know, hanging over them. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sorry. And, then, so you put a finer point on it. So, here along this northern boundary -- I don't -- you showed a picture that had lot lines, but help me understand. So, is it -- what is the most number of houses you have against any one property here along that transition? Three? It looks like three, but I couldn't really -- Bailey: Yeah. I have it on my vicinity map on the preliminary plat. You don't by chance have that, do you? Parsons: Council Woman Strader, I created a map for you, so that I can pull it up. Just a second if you don't mind, Dave. Strader: Thank you. Parsons: I made a map so I can bring it up and share it real quick. Thank you. Bear with me here. Strader: That was exactly what I was going to ask. Bailey: Okay. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 59 of 87 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: While they are pulling that up allow me to compliment Bill Parsons on anticipating our questions and how fantastic that is that you did that for us. Thank you. Oh, there we go. Okay. Parsons: So, this is -- these are The Keep lots here along the north and, then, this is how their lots transition adjacent to it. Bailey: So, the western one is three -- the large pie-shaped would -- excuse me. Two. The large pie shaped one would be three and, then, one and a half each for the eastern lots. Well, it's two in the middle and half and half, so three and a half. We got an awful big long back yard lot line for -- for that. Simison: Do you know what the -- what's the easement size of the Farr Lateral? Fifty feet? Twenty-five from centerline to each side? Bailey: To each side, yes. Simison: Yeah. Speaking for someone who has a creek that runs back -- it may as well be a lateral. I can tell you, you know, we -- I also have a pathway on one side. I couldn't even tell you how close my neighbor -- or the neighbors -- you would never -- it's a long ways. Let's just say -- I don't think that personally -- not everyone and I live in a unique place as well where I don't really have a back neighbor because of this situation, you know, so it's -- that's always how we view it. We don't feel like we have neighbors on the other side of the creek where we are. Doesn't feel that way. Parsons: Mayor, I believe it's 60 feet. Simison: Sixty feet? Strader: Very good. Bailey: Sixty plus the 20 for the pathway then and, then, plus their -- their buildings we set back. And, then, these houses, because the lots are so deep, will probably be closer to the road. Simison: If you can make sure you speak into the mic so people -- Strader: Thank you. Simison: Maybe another comment slash question. I really where they say see recommended, kind of going back to the pond. I feel like moving that -- if you have to move those parcel lines you take away that open space that's there on this south side of the pond, so how do we just tell ACHD their recommendation -- we don't like it and we don't want to comply? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 60 of 87 Bailey: Well, Mr. Mayor, I asked Mindy and she was giving me no quarter whatsoever. Simison: Well, personally, I look at this location of this development and even now where it's accessing off to the park, I -- I don't see there is going to be a backup of traffic trying to turn in or around. The way I understand their policy I think that it actually detracts greatly from what is designed and just takes up, you know, what was very nice space in the south around that to, essentially, them -- yeah. So, I know it's not your -- your thing, I just wanted to kind of throw that out -- out there in terms of if there is a way to -- unless Council disagrees that they think it adds value. But I just don't see the traffic density -- because I think this -- I personally think this design -- you are going to have 50 percent going in one direction, 50 percent going the other direction, in and out of this space and I don't see the mid mile collector being jam packed with people trying to access in or out of this location, so -- Bailey: Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor. And we are continuing to discuss that with ACHD. When we get to the plans we will see -- we might ask them for a waiver on that, but we have a plan to move forward and not really change things significantly is what we wanted to show you tonight, but that -- if we have to meet that condition we will. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sorry. Just one more. Can you talk a little bit about what transition you are trying to provide to the properties to the east? I see that -- you know, I see all of the lots here, but like what's the setback? How -- is there landscaping? Is there a fence? Like help -- help me understand that piece. I think it's great you have the Farr Lateral there to the north. That provides kind of a natural built-in buffer. But what have you got going on to the east, please? Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, as I said before, these five acre large adjacent lots -- and whether they intend to subdivide them or not, they could be subdivided to those levels, right, and, then, so who would be responsible for providing -- so, if we provide more transition, you know, extra for that five acre lot, then, they got to come back and provide more transition if they subdivide in the future. So, what we are doing the transition for and what my intent is is to provide that transition as if that were developed in the mid-range of the -- of the allowed density within that project to the east and then -- so, that's generally the thing. You can see there is a large easement that runs there through to the east and so we are providing a connection there. I think originally the plan was to put the collector street through that area there and, then, that was moved off for some reason. I'm not sure. But that's -- that's the way -- that's the way I normally set these up when I do it as far as transition to those large lots. I think it's a semi-commercial enterprise of sorts to the north and there is a single -- there is a single family home that's newly constructed in the southeast there. So, I do have those lots a little deeper there, but those are R-4 dimensional standard lots is what I do on those -- is what I put them. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 61 of 87 Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Bill, can you -- can you put David's presentation up? Maybe the slide with the phasing plan? And while he's pulling that up, David, I want to start first by commending you in locating the more denser product closer to the open space. Time and time again we see applications come through where the denser it is the further away that it is from the open space and it drives me crazy, because the people with the least amount of yard have to walk or drive or bike the furthest distance to get to it. So, I really commend you for -- for being really forward thinking and making sure that we are providing the open space closest to the densest product. Bailey: Thank you. Cavener: I did have a question, though, about the phasing plan and particularly as it relates to the amenities, because -- and, again, I will get this confirmation when I -- when it's pulled up, but one of the pieces that caused me a little bit of concern is phase one, if I remember correctly, doesn't include the pathway segment and so I'm worried that residents are going to move in -- how they are going to get to the park and does that pond, which is designed to be an amenity, be potentially a nuisance or a hazard until phase two is -- is built out and I'm not very good at talking slow to buy some time while we are working through our technical difficulties. Apologies for that. Bailey: So, I guess there -- there is, in fact, a -- there is, in fact, a pathway along the collector street -- Cavener: Okay. Bailey: -- on our ten foot detached. So, the detached sidewalk is ten foot there instead of bike lanes in the street, you know, is the way we have it. So, to go along the entire north side of the collector street from Eagle Road all the way to Recreation Way and, then, there is another pathway from there all the way up to the park, so that -- Cavener: I may have you walk me through that with the mouse as soon as we get it -- get it pulled up, just so that I can kind of track with -- I know that -- you know this site out very very well and I'm trying to track with what I remember in my mind and so I appreciate your patience on that. Bailey: Okay. Cavener: Awesome. So, it looks like it's up. David, if you maybe want to scroll to well, like maybe your phasing plan and I can maybe kind of walk you through where I -- where I'm a little worried. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 62 of 87 Bailey: There we go. Are you controlling that, Bill? Good. Cavener: Okay. Perfect. Bailey: So, in the pink is the phasing plan and we are providing -- Vantage Point goes from Eagle Road all the way along the south boundary and, then, goes to the north there and ties into Recreation Way on our west boundary. Cavener: Okay. Bailey: And along that Vantage Point, which is the collector street, there is no front-on housing in there at all. We got a lot of road and very few homes going on here. And, then, the southern portion there I guess is the more -- more of the lots, but the Recreation Way, then, goes up to the park and that will connect in. The road from the park is actually constructed to that point. Cavener: Yeah. Bailey: So, we will connect into a -- a road that's already built at that point. Cavener: So -- Bailey: -- and there is a pathway along both of those. Cavener: Yeah. So, kind of to the -- to the greater concern at least for me is you look at, you know, houses, you know, 59 to 49 down kind of that corner on -- is it Cockcrow -- Bailey: Uh-huh. Cavener: -- and Vantage Point, they are going to move in, pretty typical in Meridian, young families or families are moving into neighborhoods in Meridian and I worry about that you have got this kind of natural waterway that's there that hasn't been fully developed out to the point that you talk about with the steps and so help me understand -- I got an eight year old who loves to explore and as a parent I get a little worried about that there is this pond, essentially, in my backyard that hasn't been set up as a true amenity -- I guess I worry as a parent about what's going to happen to kids out there. Maybe walk me through kind of what your thoughts and prospective is on that. Bailey: So, those are -- those are townhouses I think that are in that area there -- Cavener- Yeah. Bailey: -- the area you are talking about. So, they don't have -- they have fences in the backyard. They don't have direct access to the pathway or the pond in this area. I suppose at the corner they could have someone sneak out there from the road out -- Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 63 of 87 Cavener: What about Vantage Point? Is that going to be fenced off? Bailey: No. So, you could -- you could have access from Vantage Point -- Cavener: Yeah. Bailey: -- to walk in there certainly from there. I suppose we could fence off the pond if we think it's a safety problem, so -- Cavener: I don't know. I just -- I -- I'm worried at the time between phase one and phase two when -- when that whole area is really developed what could happen. Bailey: Generally we are seeing that we are under construction in phase two before we are done with homes in phase one as well, right, and, then, for the -- from the practical sense is that we are going to build all this -- all this improvements of the collector streets in phase one and so we need to get some houses up somewhere before we start spending money building the pond and all the pathway to get, you know, even a smaller phase two in this thing. So, we certainly would -- would accept any conditions that you have that -- you know, that we provide safety around the pond from the -- from the people here until that's developed. Cavener: Yeah. Bailey: And all I'm saying is that developing that pond with phase one would put us in -- you know, as -- as required with phase one would put us in a really tough spot here when we probably have some alternatives to that. Cavener: Yeah. And I -- I appreciate the business challenge of that. To your point, Vantage Point is not a cheap solution to have to build that all out. I just don't know what that -- what the solution is for, essentially, a very attractive nuisance before it's developed out for kids and to your point your walk -- kids are walking to and from the park and, again, I guess I'm just looking at it through the eyes of a parent of what -- what is going to happen to my kids and -- and how do we -- I guess I'm asking how do we solve that? Bailey: So, I think we solve it by preventing access from -- from this, you know, collector street to a pond with something that already exists. We will actually -- you see that the pond -- the existing pond now goes out a little further than it is, so we will be, you know, recovering some of that and probably clean up that edge of the pond and probably fence it off as a nuisance. So, if that's a condition that you would like to see or you would like to have the staff put some proper conditions on the phase one development that we keep that area safe, then, we would certainly be amenable to that. Cavener: Yeah. And -- and I almost -- and, again, you are the expert. Sorry, Mr. Mayor, if I -- if I may. Is that part of phase one where Cockcrow is? Moving that to phase two and the product that you have on Command that's in phase two? I mean bring those Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 64 of 87 together. I don't know. I apologize that I'm -- I'm being a sticky wicket on this thing. You are right, the waterway is there, but you are introducing housing to that spot and I don't know if it's that you -- I guess would you support that no -- the occupancy wouldn't be issued for those homes on Cockcrow until the pond portion of phase two is complete? Bailey: I think I would prefer there be conditions that -- that we have the staff make sure that we provide proper safety for the pond issue there -- for the pond adjacent to this and that the staff can review that, then, we have a condition that says -- Cavener: Well -- Bailey: -- we have to keep the pond safe, as opposed to taking lots out of this phase. I don't think -- we still have to keep the pond safe for the frontage on Vantage Point versus the -- versus wherever we do the phase and, then, we could have that -- you know -- I don't know. I don't know what those appropriate conditions are, except for to say that -- that the staff should review to make sure that we maintain appropriate safety out there for the -- for the -- for the tenants between phases, which we do. We fence between phases and we move -- move those things off. We do phases all the time in that area. So, I don't see why it's -- why it would be a challenge for us to provide appropriate safety from that pond with the phasing plan that we have. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Bill, then, I guess I'm -- I'm looking to you and I don't want bad things to happen and certainly when bad things happen an appropriate response is, well, we asked staff to -- can, you know, create conditions for safety and I'm sorry that didn't work. So, that's -- for me as a parent that -- that is a pretty big hill that I am going to have to climb, but if you have got suggestions I'm open to hearing that. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Cavener, certainly you said -- like you said, it's -- that's why phasing was critical to us, too. We wanted to get these things done sooner rather than later. Cavener: Yeah. Parsons: I don't like the idea of holding up occupancy on a home, because that -- we get too far down the road and the building department -- and once you give a building permit it's pretty tough to hold up an occupancy, so we don't want to put any of our other departments in that -- that predicament trying to make that call. Simison: Bill, can you -- Parsons: I do like the idea of maybe a public safety plan and working with maybe the police and fire department to come up with that as a condition of approval and that has Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 65 of 87 to be approved and signed off by the experts that we have at the city to deal with it. I like that. We have -- we have done that where we have had hillsides and we were concerned about fires. They had to come up with a fire prevention plan to show us how they are going to mitigate those concerns. So, that -- that's one tool that I think we could possibly use in the DA and say, hey, prior to you doing anything here with phase one you -- you need us -- to provide us that public safety plan with phase one prior to commencing with development and we can look at that and let you know that it's been taken care of. Cavener: Okay. Parsons: And, then, to your -- that -- that can have things like signage, fencing, educating the homeowners as they are buying homes or to keep your -- please keep your children away from the pond, because it's not a swimming pool, it's not a -- it's a safety concern here. So, there is -- there is ways to mitigate that, if that gives the Council a comfort level to add that as a condition in the DA. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Deputy Chief. Bongiorno: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, so I bought into The Oaks early and my lot -- literally I look over my fence at the pond and the pond that The Oaks built was there well before a lot of the homes were. So, it's -- it's really no different than -- than this. The pond is already there. In The Oaks the pond was already there and, then, they built the houses around the pond. So, this is very similar. I am one hundred percent with Bill, I think we could do something -- we could work together to make sure that we come up with a plan. I mean for me -- if you look at the Google -- Google Earth's map of that pond it just needs to be cleaned up and so that way we can see it. I think -- I think -- and that's going to be true for police as well. We just want to be able to see it and make sure that there is no snags or anything that people can get caught in and clean it up and, then, obviously, proper signage I think would be appropriate also. But, again, we can -- we can totally work with David on something like that. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Chief -- and it would be your intention that that safety plan would be in full effect and complete as part of the phase one development? Bongiorno: A hundred percent. Yes, sir. Cavener: Okay. That gives me better comfort. Thank you. Bongiorno: Yeah. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 66 of 87 Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, not to belay the issue any, but, you know, we are happy to meet any condition we think improves public safety and goes on that end. But what I need on my end, you know, is say here is what you got to do to implement that; right? And so if we have established standards by the -- by the fire department and your staff, you know, to do that, happy to comply, you know, with those things and do whatever we need to on that piece, so that we know -- just so we know what we need to do. Cavener: Okay. Mr. Mayor, if I may? Sorry. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Not -- not about the pond. So, moving on to another topic. Such a cool spot. Such a cool part of Meridian in close proximity to a park and I know there is going to be a lot of demand for this. It makes sense with kind of a small like, you know, play structure for kids that are staying close within the neighborhood, but recognizing there is lots more recreation just down the way. Something that we don't have a lot of at Discovery is -- is court space. Have you guys thought about or discussed instead of doing, you know, a bunch of picnic tables, having a little, you know, basketball court spot or something like that that could be incorporated? I kind of look there, again, as along Vantage Point and Command in that little area and maybe is there anything you guys thought about, contemplated and maybe I don't know why that didn't make sense? Bailey: So, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, we -- we do think about those in all the projects and we do add them to quite a few of them. So, in this project here the open space is -- is gathered around the pond and along the long linear corridor there, so we don't have any open space that's conducive to provide pickle ball court or a basketball court, half basketball court, that -- that kind of play area within this project. So, we don't have a great spot for it there to do that. We probably have room to put something like that there, but we proposed amenities for this that are the picnic tables with the shelters, the fitness stations, the tot lot and the bike repair station because we thought that's what was appropriate for the -- for the site. I'm not sure if those are appropriate or not. We did think about them, right, but we chose these because we thought they were appropriate for the site. Cavener: And Mr. Mayor. I think like the -- the bike and repair station -- incredibly smart. Makes sense along the pathway to and from the park. My bike always seems to break down not at home or not at my destination, but along the way, so I love that. It's just -- that's to me -- and I get it, I could be wrong -- I see that as a pretty cost effective amenity and credit to Council Member Strader, I think -- I think it's listed as number one, that kind of open space along Vantage Point, it kind of, you know, arcs down where your -- I don't -- correct. Right there. Thank you. Again, maybe this is me trying to tinker with things too much and I would appreciate that feedback as well. I'm just trying to make sure that we are capturing the -- Bailey: From the developer's perspective enough is what the city requires, you know, for -- in their code for -- for the development; right? So, we do more than that. We are Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 67 of 87 doing more than that on here; right? That specific space there is reserved for the City of Meridian for their -- for their water reducing station. Cavener: Oh. Okay. Bailey: So, I don't -- it wouldn't be practical to do it in that specific space. I don't think we can build a structure like that in the Williams Pipeline. We could do the landscaping in that, so we can't do it in there. And, then, we have got the area around the pond. We certainly have that spot in there that's possible, but it's not an amenity that -- that we had proposed for the subdivision I guess is the simple answer. Cavener: Okay. Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much. Bailey: Thank you. Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have people signed up to provide testimony? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, yes. First is Bryan Miller. Simison: Good evening. If you could state your name and address for the record and be recognized for three minutes. Miller: My name is Bryan Miller. I live at 6876 South Pemberley Way in The Keep. My house was the one that backed up to four lots along the -- the -- so, I'm here basically because I would like to first comment on the -- thank you for taking time, Mayor and Council people. I'm here because of the concerns about the density essentially. When everyone in The Keep -- I guess that my concern particularly was magnified by when we met with the Planning and Zoning Commission and expressed concerns and the public hearing didn't feel much like a public hearing. In fact, my 16 year old son walked away and said it was a public ignoring. We raised concerns about things like the water hazards and that there is -- the Meridian fire in their comments mentioned that they didn't have water rescue nearby and that concern was never addressed. It was kind of just brushed off. We brought up concerns about schools and traffic and the -- I think the frustrating part is that -- well, I guess we -- we brought up that there would be like conditions for traffic and the developer did point out -- or Mr. Bailey pointed out the -- that ACHD had accepted that, but at the time ACHD hadn't even made any comments and now that they have he mentioned that there was only two conditions of approval, but, actually, there is 34 conditions of approval in their comments. It would be interesting to know if -- if they actually plan to accept all 34 comments. We also asked would they make the voluntary impact fees to the Kuna School District, which about a third of this subdivision is there. Again, they refused to acknowledge or make any attempt to talk about schools and so it's still interesting to hear if the developer is willing to make those contributions to the Kuna School District. I think what is probably most Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 68 of 87 frustrating is that when these concerns were already addressed by Mr. Bailey that the Planning and Zoning Commission felt like went to bat for him. They basically lectured us -- in fact, Commissioner Seal used the word that he was preaching to us about how we should be happy that we are getting such a nice subdivision and it could be much much worse. He talked about schools. He said it's a bummer that schools are overcrowded, but that, essentially, that's the way we do business in Meridian. In fact, think he said that's just the way things work around here. The way we operate were the terms that he used. And, then, he said if we build it -- or if you build it we will come, which seemed particularly troubling in terms of the way that we do planning. Our schools are overcrowded. The developer doesn't want to make impact fees -- it -- additionally I think the other kind of frustrating thing is when we talked about these transitions and density and people who come and made comments about how, look, built in The Keep thinking that I was using the city's long-term plan to guide why I would build here. That it says right now the develop -- the plan was developed in 2002. This would be developed at R-2 if it were to be developed and so those people built houses on those things. What's frustrating is, then, one of the other Commissioners pointed out and said, sorry, you were lied to by your developers or your real estate agents, but we didn't feel lied to by our developers or real estate agents. If you approve this kind of zoning change it feels like the city is the one that's lying to us. I mean when we talked about a change from R-2 to R-15 is a very significant change and it -- I like to think that the city's long-term plan matters more than just, well, the right people bought the land and so the plan goes out the window. Anyway, those are my comments. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Mr. Miller; right? Miller: Yes. Strader: Please don't go far. So, before I get into my questions, so I know that the City Council does take our long-term comprehensive planning very seriously. I am sorry you had a bad experience from your perspective of Planning and Zoning. I would like to focus on your property in particular, because I understand the comments about density. If we compare the density to what is contemplated under our Comprehensive Plan this ends up being just under four units per acre across the whole site. When you look at the Comprehensive Plan, that the part of the Comprehensive Plan I think most applies to you is a concern about transition. So, we always want to have appropriate transition between neighborhoods. You are -- you have a very large part of your -- southern part of your property -- the developer says you are bordering three and a half, I counted four, but what -- what could you live with? What's your concern? I mean so talk to me about your property and what your concerns are about your property, because I think that might be a constructive place to start. If we focus on the transition piece. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 69 of 87 Miller: To be a hundred percent honest, I -- the -- the average lot size in The Keep is 32,000 square feet. The largest in the -- in this new subdivision is 12,000. So, the transition there doesn't seem very fair and the way I guess that we would look at it -- to be -- if you want my honest concern, I don't -- the fact that I'm going to have neighbors is okay. I mean nobody expects bare land in Meridian to stay bare land forever. You want my honest concern, every single morning at 8:00 o'clock I drive out on Darcy Way to try to turn left. If you put 250 homes back there -- I mean ACHD indicated that that -- at prime peak periods that's like 250 cars. It's an extra 10,000 cars a day. I -- yeah. I'm not going to be able to get out of my subdivision is what it boils down to. If things -- and I -- I just look at this, I'm like I don't understand why if the plan -- the long-term plan said develop this at R-2, what -- what has changed in the last two years that says, you know what, if -- if the south part of Eagle Road can't handle this kind of traffic, then, why should we approve a subdivision that's going to put thousands of more cars on there a day? That would be honestly my concerns. I mean I am happy with neighbors. I don't mind the neighbors. It would be great maybe if there was a few less, but that's honestly I don't worry about. It's more about the density in general. The number of cars going in and out of this neighborhood than -- than my particular neighbors. I'm okay with neighbors. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Got it. No. That's really helpful. So, it's really -- you don't have an issue in principle with bordering four properties. Probably don't love it. You can live with it. It's really a concern about traffic, concern about schools. So, I share your concern about schools. A year ago we paused -- paused residential development approvals until we could work with our school district to understand their long-term plan, so -- and I -- Mr. Mayor -- Simison: Two years ago. Time flies. Strader: It's going really quick. Mr. Mayor, I did want to check with Bill. At some point I know we were asking for a letter from the West Ada School District. They didn't provide that, but we were going to see if we could do our own calculations of kind of what we are looking at from a school perspective. Is that something that we pulled together at this point? Simison: Is your mic on? Parsons: We did. We pulled together some numbers. It was very quickly. I just want to be fair that on the record these aren't official West Ada School District numbers and the data that I received from the long -- long range planning division only showed what was for the elementary schools, not necessarily the middle school or the high school. So, I do have that data and it does show some are overcrowded and some are under Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 70 of 87 capacity. I'm happy to show that graphic if you want me to. But there is -- there certainly is some challenges in that area. Strader: Okay. Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: That was it for my questions for Mr. Miller, but there may be others that have questions. Miller: Could I -- Mountain View High School has the highest attendance in the entire school district. Victory Middle School has the highest attendance. About two-thirds of the subdivision would probably go to those two schools. The rest would go to the Kuna School District. Another slightly frustrating thing that the Planning and Zoning Commission pointed out that essentially the city -- that school districts don't make comments anymore, because they, essentially, didn't feel listened to and, then, his son attended private school. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Can't let that one lie. Listen, we have advocated very strongly that we want to continue to receive letters from the school district and we will continue to pass that message along, but thank you. Simison: And I got confirmation from Dr. Bub today that they will do that, they have just been without the staff resources with turnover through a specific time period, but they will be forthcoming once again. But I was just curious. So -- well, how much of this is in -- you mentioned Kuna School District. How much of this is in -- I'm just curious. Miller: Where that little panhandle comes up, yeah, it's essentially, just slightly above that. That cuts through there would go to the Kuna School District. So, most of the high density housing would be in school -- in the Kuna School District. Simison: Okay. Miller: Like at phase one. Simison: All right. Thank you. Mr. Clerk -- Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Mr. Miller, I just -- I want to -- I appreciate you -- and I think you have sat with us all night and -- and your -- your comment about -- about impact fees with schools is -- Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 71 of 87 is an issue I think growing communities across the state continue to wrestle with and, again, if you follow the news it sounds like the city of Kuna is looking at some litigation about what they can request versus what they can't. We haven't waded into that -- into that area for a -- for a host of different reasons, but it's not that -- I think most people in our community share the same opinion as you, which is that those who are contributing to the growth should contribute to the ongoing growth of our schools, just like they do for our police and our -- and our parks and our fire and so I could hear in some of your testimony tonight certainly you are carrying some frustration. I feel a little more frustrated closer to 10:00 o'clock than I do at 10:00 a.m. So, appreciate you being here and sharing your perspective and just for whatever it's worth, I think that Council shares some of those same frustrations as well. Simison: Well, since you are here if you want to come back on Monday we have a joint meeting with the West Ada School Board and one of the things that they are going to talk about is, you know, the legislation that's passed. It's a game changer, because it now means that they will likely have funding to go out to start constructing schools, that I know one in south Meridian is their number one -- there and Star. Hopefully we will get an idea from them about their timing and what it means long term, but it also may be too early to tell, but in case you are looking for something else to do on Monday night, we will be back here with -- Miller: I'm a tax accountant, so it matters -- the tax cut involved mattered to me in particular, but, yeah, I have been following that, so -- Simison: Okay. Miller: So, what I'm doing on Monday night. Johnson: And, Mr. Mayor, Ms. Carrie Miller. C.Miller: Before my time starts can you tell me how to run this, so that I can use -- Johnson: Once Bill brings up the presentation your right arrow -- right arrow on the keyboard is the best way to navigate. C.Miller: My name is Carrie Miller. I live at 6876 South Pemberley Place in The Keep, Meridian, Idaho. So, I prepared a little bit of a slideshow for you today. On the future land map in Meridian it shows the plan for this subdivision and the expectation was a little bit different than we are seeing here. I wrote it down, because, honestly, some of it gets confusing for me, but half of the property is low density, which is supposed to be three or less lots. The other half is medium density or is just supposed to be six to eight lots per acre. As I understand it, they are requesting that each of these zonings be bumped up to a higher density. They are asking for a bump in low density to medium and medium dense to medium high density. So, right here you see the map. We have the medium density that's just -- this is an over general map that we have seen tonight. This next picture is a picture of The Keep Subdivision with a low density plan showing Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 72 of 87 what the plan was for the future land map. As you have noticed, my house is that one that is the triangle. That house is actually a .6 acre lot. So, even though it may look big, I have less than an acre that I'm looking at and we have four homes that are backing up to that. That is not actually what we were told when we built the house. I saved for 17 years to buy my dream home. It wasn't an easy task and it's not that I have a problem with neighbors. I absolutely love neighbors, but I also feel like there is a -- a part to growing and building in your home -- your dream home and to have that be taken somewhat from the plans is a little bit frustrating. Right here it just explains what a low density was supposed to be. In this they said that it was supposed to be single family homes with one to three -- one to three homes in that -- that acre. Okay. I'm going the wrong way. I'm not going to get through it. Okay. So, let's talk about the property itself. I am not an environmentalist, so to speak. I'm really not. Grew up on a ranch. I love wide open spaces and I just love to be out in the outdoors. I think that if we knew what was in the subdivision it would be really hard for us as the City of Meridian to let it go. Let me show you a little bit of what there is. These are just pictures throughout the property that are going to be changed with the subdivision. I understand that we need growth and I understand that change is inevitable, but a lot of these full-grown trees, which, by the way, take ten to 20 years to grow, will be gone and this is the pond that you are asking about, what it looks like now. This is the area that they are saying would be next to the pond, but these are areas that are not next to the pond. These are areas of trees that show a difference in what would be taken away. I know that my time is up, but if I can finish with saying a lot of things -- like, for example, if we look at New York City, at the time that they planned Central Park it looked crazy. It absolutely looked insane. But now if you look at New York City that is a huge advantage to their community. Can you imagine if Meridian city had something like that and, in actuality, we do. Now, I know I can't propose that we don't have a subdivision at all, but this is a gem and it should be kept as a gem as much as possible and the density that they are asking does not do that justice. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Carrie; right? C.Miller: Yes. Cavener: Thanks. It's clear you have put some time and attention into putting your presentation together and you have sat with us all night, so I don't want you to feel rushed. If there are other points in your presentation that you would like to make, I would like to ask you to feel like that you have been able to complete your presentation in the whole. So, if there is anything else I would invite that from you. C.Miller: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 73 of 87 Cavener: No problem. C.Miller: There is, actually. So, the other part of my presentation was with the schools, besides losing this gem, in my opinion are the schools. My son does attend Mountain View High School. All of my children have attended Mountain View High School. The entire time that we have been there our biggest concern has been the capacity at Mountain View High School. My son describes right now in passing period that they are -- no room. They are bumping up against each other. They are shoulder to shoulder. I asked him to take a video today, but he is sick and so he forgot to take that video. So, I can't show you exactly what it looks like, but I have been in those halls and it's pretty packed. My concern is is if we move forward without first resolving the issues that we have right now that we are just going to be compounding our problems. That is a concern for me as a mom who sends their kids to that school and in closing I just would like us to, please, hold fast to the original plan. I don't have a problem with neighbors. As my husband said, we love neighbors. We want to be their friends. But I think the original plan helps with the traffic, it helps with the schools and we need to be cognizant of that. I also think that if we can take into account some of those trees that are fully grown trees, that's such a beauty that our city has. I mean if I had my way I would say that we should have a greenbelt in that area, because I walk it every single day. Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: A couple of -- couple of follow-up questions, then, to your presentation. Your -- your concern about the density is -- is well heard. I'm hearing you on that. Where you have got -- for the totality of that project to have over four units per acre, which is significantly less dense than a lot of other chunks of our community, I also know that it is more than your current neighborhood and that's so we as Council look at, again, transition and transition can be subjective. Some person may say, boy, this is great transition. Others may say this is not appropriate transition. C.Miller: Right. Cavener: So, the option before the Council tonight is not to turn that land into a park and so I -- I always love those -- C.Miller: I realize that. I totally do. Cavener: We appreciate, you know, that the -- the applicant has -- they have used their money to purchase the land and we are now trying to make sense of if this application makes sense to come into our community and so that's what's before us this evening. So, help me understand what you think the right amount of lots per acre are for this project and what -- if you are sitting in this seat what would you be looking at? Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 74 of 87 C.Miller: I think that you are sitting in a difficulty. I understand that you have a lot to consider, but I also think with everything that's been put in place before the plan that was originally placed is one that I think we should be able to stick to. The land that was originally put it was -- as I read to you -- I'm not very good at seeing it right here, but as one to three lots for low density, six to eight lots for medium density and some of these are actually going into the higher density way beyond that and when we built our dream home that was the plan that the city had put forth and so for us -- and even now like in The Keep we have traffic problems on that corner of Lake Hazel and Eagle every single day and you add all of those homes into there, that's going to be a battle, a nightmare that we are going to be facing. It's just the -- the density just was never -- I think it's an overwhelming thought. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, just a quick follow-up if I can. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thank you for that. And so if I'm hearing you right, then, up to three in the -- in the one density area and up to six in the other, you are good with that? C.Miller: Yes. Cavener: And if -- if staff come to conclusion that it -- it meets that, then, that concern of yours would, then, be satisfied, is that -- is that fair to say? C.Miller: It is fair to say. Cavener: Excellent. Then my follow-up question -- it is very similar to I think what Council Member Strader asked the other person with the same last name as you who was up earlier. Don't know that relation. He didn't get a high five as he was headed back to this chair. C.Miller: No, he didn't. And not an appropriate place. My dear husband. Cavener: The concern of having to have neighbors facing back to you -- and I love you say you love neighbors. I love my neighbors, too. I don't know if I would love four neighbors looking into my back yard. C.Miller: If I'm being honest that is a huge concern for me. Cavener: Okay. What do you think isn't it -- what is an appropriate number for you? C.Miller: I would prefer if the ones backing up to me were equal to me. Cavener: Okay. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 75 of 87 C.Miller: I think that would be fair to have the same amount of houses as I have to The Keep. If they are going to build a lot of houses there, then, give us that buffer. Cavener: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate you being here tonight. C.Miller: Thank you. Johnson: That was all the checkmarks, but you probably have -- Simison: Please come up and do so. Billaud: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Lori Billaud. 192 West Lockhart Lane, Meridian, Idaho. I can actually very understand what she is saying. The voters of this area are very disappointed and sad to see the growth that's happening in this community. As I'm going through and canvassing my area, the dissatisfaction I'm hearing from -- about people from the Council is that they are changing areas from low density to high density. Another example at Orchid Park at Chinden and Linder, that was supposed to be all at the Paramount where a lot of us live. Paramount was supposed to be all regular low density and all of a sudden behind Linder we find out afterwards that apartments are coming in, which is fine, but, again, you did not stick to your plan, which I know you say all the time you want to stick to your plan. Voters are very unhappy with that in District 20. Here voters and -- came over here and when they purchased the lot they knew that that lot was a W-2. So, why did they purchase it and, then, decide to change it. Again being true to what you said, then, you constantly say we need to be true to the plan. What did you -- what does the plan say? Well, the plan is a W-2, so what you are doing is going back on your constituency and basically going against their back and their wishes. So, then, you wonder why there is discontent in Meridian. The discontent out of 37 things that I went and -- and had people comment on, number four out of 37 issues was the high density and the traffic. So, right now this is a high issue that you need to consider, because people aren't happy with it. Simison: Council, any questions? Is there anybody else that would like to come forward and provide comments on this application? Good evening. State your name and address for the record. Langston: Jerron Langston. 6865 South Pemberley Place. The Millers are my neighbors. I was the developer of The Keep Subdivision. Currently have application for The Keep West, which will be 21 lots over 16 acres up to the west of The Keep. You know, I'm grateful for the opportunity and the blessing to live in a community like The Keep, as I know a lot of the people that live came there. If you looked at public record most people that were here at P&Z came in and said basically the same story; right? They love Meridian. They wanted a little more elbow room; right? So, they came to The Keep. And, ultimately, that's what we are trying to preserve here. To echo what's been said, that area was designated as low density. That's what they were excited about being around. This project is beautiful, you know, hands -- and there is no doubt about that. I just think really protecting that transition is really what I think the residence of Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 76 of 87 The Keep and -- and lowering that density count and I -- it would be so minor in a 247 lot community to go down to 240 to potentially allow for a better transition. But, like I said, I won't take any more time, but I just want to thank you for your service and -- yeah. Thank you. Simison: Council, any questions? Okay. It's looks like we do have somebody online who has raised their hand. Mr. Luckey. Johnson: You should be able to unmute. Luckey: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, my name is Jeff Luckey. I live at 4355 South Langdon in Meridian. That's in Shelburne. Soon to be moving into The Keep. But that's subject to my ability to drive in there or actually be able to drive out of there, which is the point of tonight's discussion. I wish I had a historic challenge for you is what I really witnessed earlier was an impressive collaborative spirit from the City Council in my opinion. So, congratulations for that. But, sadly, all I really have tonight is a -- is a concern and a complaint and I'm not going to belabor it. You heard it. I won't talk about density anymore. I will just be very specific. I'm wondering at what cost the annexation and the increase in density is going to contribute to Eagle Road -- south Eagle. I spoke -- I met with ACHD twice. They have convinced me that there is no near-term or even a long-term plan on the boards to widen Eagle south beyond a residential arterial and if I might be really specific, there is two entrances and exits -- exits out of The Keep. The second one is called Pemberley and Pemberley now faces Sky Break directly across the street. The center turn lane is a left turn lane southbound into Sky Break. Now you add another 250 houses down the road and we have 500 doors going to and from work and school and everything else every day and we literally will not be able to get out of Pemberley. So, if you are ever in the area I would encourage you to just drive into The Keep and, then, go out Pemberley and you will face Sky Break and you will see what I mean. Imagine trying to make a left turn there to go anywhere of value and you just won't be able to do it. So, I'm sorry. You are tired. I think you do a wonderful job. It's not easy what you do and I thank you. I'm asking you to remember my collaborative comment, because you will see me again. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: So, I can appreciate your -- your feedback and I always hope that we are working in a collaborative manner. Just curious -- your comment about -- about the roadways, I think that's something -- schools and roads are the two things we hear about the most and it's always hard, because we have got the least ability to influence and we rely heavily on communication from the school district and from the highway district and so when the -- when the highway district sends us a staff report and it shows the conditions of the roadway and they identify Eagle as better than D and acceptable is Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 77 of 87 E, I tend to take their recommendation as accurate. I think what I'm kind of hearing from your testimony is either you disagree with the staff report or that you find it to be contrary during peak travel times; is that accurate? Luckey: That's accurate. That's accurate. And we probably wouldn't be having this discussion if within the annexation there wasn't a request for increased density. As it was said earlier, when the developer purchased that land as low density, he knew what he paid for it. He knew what he was going to get out of it and he made some assumptions and that -- that was that you would increase -- that you would agree to increase the density. So, score for them. Not so much for the residents in the surrounding community. Cavener: Thank you. Luckey: Thank you. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Maybe a question for staff. I think it might help everybody here to understand the -- the dimensional standards, but my understanding is that the low density residential piece of this development is less than three units per acre; is that correct? Bill? Parsons: Mayor, Council Woman Strader, that is correct. That's what I presented to you. Strader: Mr. Mayor. And, then, the medium density residential piece sounded like was around five units per acre; is that correct? Parsons: That is correct. 5.3. Strader: Okay. And just for curiosity sake, if this was developed with -- well, let me put this differently. The units -- the properties -- single family homes that transition to The Keep, I believe we heard those were done, according to R-4 dimensional standards; is that right? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe the applicant stated it was R-2, which are minimum 12,000 square foot lots -- Strader: Got it. Parsons: -- with frontage of 80. Strader: Uh-huh. So -- so, just a comment. So, the way that the density works under the Comprehensive Plan -- it doesn't correspond exactly to zoning. I know that that is Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 78 of 87 frustrating. It's frustrating for me. But it still -- I have done this -- this is my fifth year doing City Council and I still find that frustrating. What we look at is units per acre. So, we are looking at units per acre on the low density, units per acre on the medium density. I'm not seeing like an up zoning here. That's not what I'm seeing. But what I am sympathetic to is -- and before I joined the City Council -- I joined the City Council -- again this is -- I'm embarking on my fifth year, so I'm relatively new, haven't been as many terms as others, but we had just approved our Comprehensive Plan and a big frustration for me was actually that we did not have a rural designation any longer in our Comprehensive Plan. A rural designation to me would be a lot more along the lines of what Mrs. Miller is talking about with really spacious properties. That doesn't exist in our plan and that I think is a loss for all of us, especially because of the open spaces and the agricultural heritage that Meridian has had. But that's not in the plans anymore. This is going to develop. We are a very strong private property rights state. We are not going to be able to turn it into a park. I think we can take into account schools and traffic and we can try to work through those things. We don't control those directly. The biggest thing we can help with is the transition. The transition to The Keep we can try to work on that piece I think if the developer is amenable, we will try to work with them on that piece. But, again, because there is townhomes in that middle part of the development, that does make it possible so that the properties next to your property are R-2 dimensional standards. If we used a magic wand, which we don't have, we are developing this and we equalized all of the properties, they would still fit under our Comprehensive Plan, but what would result is on the transition to your lots you would have a bunch of smaller lots, so I think it's important to acknowledge that what the developer has done is they have tried to keep it so larger properties around the edges of this development do have larger -- still a bunch, but larger size properties around, instead of, you know, spreading it out equally. I wouldn't recommend that we start trying to do something like that. I don't think it would be a good outcome for the neighbors. I think you want to have the best transition you can get. So, anyway, that -- I'm just talking out loud, but I hear a lot of their frustration, I share a lot of their frustration. You know, part of why I got involved in City Council and ran for City Council for the first time was I lived in Paramount and I was super frustrated about what I consider to be unfettered multi-family development, large apartment buildings going on roads that were two lane roads that were never going to be widened. So, I understand the concerns about density. I'm just trying to grapple with what we can do here and kind of what's within our ability to help with. Thanks. Simison: Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this item? Would the applicant like to come forward. Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don't -- I don't have any specific rebuttal. I -- I do appreciate the comments of the neighbors on this thing and -- and -- on both sides of this we hear this and we do think about these issues when we buy the property as far as -- we bought the property with full knowledge of what the Comprehensive Plan is and -- and what we could do with that and worked with the city all the way through that to do that and with full knowledge to transition to the neighbors is an appropriate thing to do and with the full knowledge that the city wants us -- wants to see us provide a lot of Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 79 of 87 good quality open space and they want us to also see specifically a variety of housing types, because that's good for the community. To have those variety of housing types within a single community is even better for the community; right? And that's what's espoused in your plan and it's what I follow when I lay the subdivision out and propose to the developer here is what I think we should do with this property and it's not a here is what I think we can get out of this property, it's here is what I think we should do to this property -- do with this property to make this a quality community and we have really tried to do that in that end of it. I will make a little sidebar at the -- at the -- at the expense of getting in trouble, is that I think you have a lot more power over the schools and the roads than the P&Z says and, then, sometimes I hear that City Council say and that power is that you passed your Comprehensive Plan. I have sat three different times on the long range capital improvement plan for the highway district and the first thing they do is take your Comprehensive Plan and say here's how much road we have to -- how much traffic we have to plan for. They spent a lot of money building a long -- a long -- a really large traffic plan and, then, every time a traffic study is done for a project says is consistent with the plan or we already planned for this. We have 30 year plans for what the development that Meridian says you are going to do along Eagle Road we will do to Eagle Road and when we will do that. Unfortunately -- fortunately the -- the policy of public is to build -- not build overcapacity. The public won't pay for it. Okay? And so you can't build great roads before there is a need for them. In fact, they plan all these roads to expand them when they -- when they open the new expansion for it to still be at level of service E. That's the long range planning as done nationwide with that end. That's frustrating to everybody. You know, it's frustrating to us, too. But someone's got to pay for the roads and the public gets to pay for them. The schools are the same way really. They are supposed to take your Comprehensive Plan and plan to take that many students into the schools and they certainly have struggles with the -- with the financing side of this thing, so I will leave it at that end. But -- but I think the cities have more power on both of those than -- than -- than you give yourself credit for. Simison: Council, questions? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: My first question tonight when we were talking about this was to our -- our Deputy Chief and asking about fire service, because that's important infrastructure and certainly it -- we would probably agree that if our fire station couldn't support this development we probably shouldn't approve it. Are we in agreement on that? Bailey: Agreed. Cavener: Excellent. Certainly, again, if -- if we couldn't serve this neighborhood with water or wastewater we probably shouldn't approve it. Bailey: Agreed. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 80 of 87 Cavener: So, I -- I look at roads and schools much like critical infrastructure and one of the things that I look at when an application comes before us is, again, can the road support it and can our schools support it? According to the highway district it looks like the roads can support it. That's a greenlight to me. The question is the schools and I guess my question to you is if -- if the schools can't handle the capacity, we probably shouldn't approve this project then; right Bailey: I would agree. If you had a letter from the school that said they can't handle the capacity from this project specifically, then, you should not approve it. Cavener: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate your honesty on that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you, Mr. Bailey. Okay. Probably the biggest thing it seems like you could do to help with neighbors' concerns would be to lose some density in your development, particularly along the north side along The Keep. Are you open to that? Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, we are opening to -- we are open to increasing -- or decreasing the number of lots along that transition border, specifically for that one lot that has four on there, subject to the caveat that we think we are well within the density requirements. We are in the middle of the density requirements for the overall subdivision. So, we would move that lot within there to within the subdivision. So, we'd like to provide a better transition, no change in the development otherwise, and I could certainly do that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Okay. So, it sounds like what you are interested in doing is not decreasing the density overall, but you would like to increase density in a different part of your project. Yeah. It's hard -- it's hard to envision what that would look like. I have a hard time believing that your business plan would be so fundamentally altered by losing, you know, a couple of lots along that north boundary. I mean -- so, along -- and maybe, Mr. Parsons, do you mind, Bill, just bringing up that lot line -- and you knew we were going to -- we were going to go into this lot line conversation, so you are like clairvoyant on that. Yeah. Like -- so, here on the -- on the -- on the northeast piece it looks like you are almost a one to one. Those are more narrow. It's really -- I do think that the Millers appear to be the most adversely impacted out of all of the neighbors in The Keep. Like I -- I -- if I -- if I were a neighbor I could stand if I had a large lot, I could stand like facing two neighbors. That wouldn't bother me. Facing four neighbors seems like a lot. You know, are you -- you know. So, I -- kind of a suggestion from me at least is that you consider dropping, you know, two of those units -- two of those lots, consolidating the -- Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 81 of 87 you know, a couple of them together maybe in a way that -- that would help with that transition. I think that would help a lot with the transition here and, then, the school piece is such a bigger issue and, boy, we have -- we have tried -- we -- it wasn't easy. mean two years ago we literally paused developing -- paused our annexations while we have worked with the school district to try to help, you know, with a -- with a strategy and a projection model. What's interesting, the school district has capacity in other parts of Meridian; right? And so, then, you are -- what we are asking our school district to do is to really more actively manage their student population with busing and it is -- it is rough in south Meridian right now with the school situation, especially the high school and the middle school. So, I -- I don't think there is an easy answer for that. How -- can you remind me what your phasing plan is in terms of the breakdown of the number of lots that are coming in each phase? Bailey: Like 71 , 60 and, then, 50 and 40. So, they are about 60 average. So, we are talking having 120 homes in here in the next four years probably. Four years from now we would be seeing about half of the -- half of the development build out with homes. Strader: Mr. Mayor, do you mind? I'm sorry, I'm really going on here. Simison: Yes. Strader: Mr. Parsons, what is the student generation rate? What is the math that we apply? So, every year what -- how many students, then, are we looking at realistically? Parsons: Yeah. Here is -- so, Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Strader, here is the numbers here for -- it's broke down for multi-family unit and single family unit. So, it looks like if they go to Mary McPherson we are using .49. If they go to Hillsdale or Lake Hazel, then, it's a little different ratio. But we have based it on our assumptions that the students will -- would be going to Mary McPherson. So, that's where we came up with 120 students that were estimated from this -- this development. Again, not an official school district response, but it's something just -- we wanted to share with the Council. Simison: Yeah. And typically when the school district does it they just -- you generate the numbers and you just spread that out over 12 grades. You don't dump them into one school at one time. Parsons: Correct. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, to answer a little bit of what you asked before -- should I or should I wait? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 82 of 87 Strader: Go -- go for it if you have further comments. Bailey: Yeah. The one about the transition stuff is -- is that -- as I said before, I can -- I can certainly remove one or two lots if you think that's appropriate in that area there and then -- but I would move them within the LID zone, we still wouldn't approve -- and we are not talking about increasing density. We are just not talking about decreasing density and those -- those lots we would provide a better transition for that one lot there; right? And, then, we would just move that probably just down south of that within the low density area; right? Because we would still have the same number of units within that and the density is -- as you pointed out and Bill's pointed out -- is the gross number of units over the gross number of acres, you know, within that area. So, changing lot sizes or moving -- taking a lot out here and putting in a lot down below that smaller size ends up with the same density, just another smaller lot for one of our residents. Simison: Just -- I know this isn't like drawn to scale, it's -- it's just a rough drawing. Just from -- you know, my spatial beliefs. If you take out two on that top, you are still going to have a minimum of three homes that are going to be on that back one, because it takes up 50 percent of that entire line. You know, I think practically if you took out one you can limit it to three. If you take out two you are still going to have at least three. There is just going to be offset. So, you know, it is -- it's going to displace the entire situation. It's not a clean one to one. But that at least gets you somewhere -- I think is what is an acceptable number. If your answer is two, I don't think that you can achieve a reasonable expectation for this subdivision, because those two lots are going to take up 50 percent of that block length to try to do a one to one on -- or two to one even on that one property by itself. I don't know if that's -- if that's good or bad for the other side of the street where you have such long blocks to make that accompanied. Is -- I guess the only other option if you are going to go to four, which, then, you have got one on the end, two in there and, you know, that would -- at least that would align'ish, but -- so that would at least be my recommendation. Remove one or remove four if you want to try to -- try to find a way that would work, but where they go after that -- I'm not saying it's -- that Council can decide if they want to -- want them to go someplace else within the thing, but that's at least from a number standpoint. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I do think -- you know, it looks like if you merged a couple of these together it would match up much better, but I do appreciate that you sort of have to -- it has a ripple effect. So, I -- I can't design it from the dais. I know we definitely need a little bit less density up there for sure. I think that's fair. I think that would work out better for the neighbors. I think that speaks to our Comprehensive Plan's importance on transition. I also think we want to hear from West Ada. I don't feel that it's fair for our own planning staff to do the job of speaking for West Ada. I very much appreciate that you took a stab at it. I think West Ada needs to provide feedback on how they plan to accommodate these students. I know there are other Council Members that -- that have that feeling, Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 83 of 87 too. We feel terrible. Two for two on continuances. That's tough. But I think -- I do think we should hear from West Ada. I don't think it's acceptable for a large development like this to come through without having heard from them and I think maybe taking a little bit of time to -- at least rework the density on the transition could -- could be very positive as well. That's just my feedback. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I tend to agree with Council Member Strader. For both the applicant's benefit and the public here, we try really hard to not make decisions after 10:00 o'clock. We all get a little rummy. I appreciate the nonverbal feedback there. It's been a long day for all of us and we want to make the right decision and not make a rash decision. To Council Member Strader's point, my -- my question for you is, you know, I look at our education like critical infrastructure and I live in south Meridian. I know the impact in Mountain View. I know the impact in Victory Middle. I want the school to tell me that my perception is wrong and those schools aren't already at over -- over capacity. They tell me that, I think what's likely some reduction of -- of lots, I could be very very supportive of this project. Those schools are over capacity. I'm not going to put more kids in a school that can't already handle it. So, I think a -- a continuance gives us the opportunity to make sure that the information that I believe to be correct is correct or wrong. It gives you an opportunity to respond to the feedback from Council and the public. I don't think we need to continue this for a long period of time. I would almost ask the applicant if there is a time certain that would be beneficial to you to come back with some of these answers. Recognize we have got a meeting with West Ada on Monday. To the Mayor's point I know Superintendent Bub has been working with their new staff to get student generation letters to us. I think with a specific request about this I think we can hopefully have that in a week or two weeks, but I want to make sure that you have got ample time as well to take the feedback that you have heard from Council here tonight. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, I'm fine with that. Looking at that. So, again, just looking for specific direction on this is that -- and I agree with the concept, that you shouldn't have to make the decision on what to do without the feedback from your experts, such as the school. They are working for you. They are supposed to be working for you, you know. They follow your lead, as I said before, but -- but, nonetheless, the -- you know, I -- I get that and I certainly understand that and we want to get things done right. I get that. On the issue of the density on there -- so, I will -- I will be looking at increasing -- making a better transition there and -- and -- and moving those lots in a different spot within that area to show how that's accessible with the whole thing. So, I'm probably intending to keep with the same number. You know, if we drop in two lots from the -- from the numbers here they don't change the schools, nor do they change the neighbor's experience, nor do they change the traffic any from my -- from my position on that end. So, I will present that to the developer and tell him what you have asked on that and take that action that direction. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 84 of 87 Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I won't drag the night out any further, but I -- I do think you did a good job striving to address the challenges beforehand with the transition. I think you are going above and beyond what you are asked to do by maybe moving some of those lots around, but I think that's -- that's great. Like that's sort of the collaborative spirit where -- we try to have with the development community and people who have purchased property and spent money and put their hopes and dreams in areas. I totally understand it and get it. I had a -- I could hit a nine iron to a piece of property that was county land and now is going to have 256 units on it. It wasn't my plan when I bought it, so I totally understand the Millers' concerns. I didn't love it, but I accept that as part of where we are with Meridian. It's just a hard, hard thing to do and as we were presented with the idea of whose property rights trump whose in this, right, that's a very challenging situation, so as long as nobody's harming someone's enjoyment or value of the property that's kind of what I look at. So, I -- I do -- I agree with my Council Members, I would like to get the feedback from West Ada. I don't think that would take us necessarily too long, but I do think you are -- in my -- from my perspective I think this is a good project. I think you have done your part to accommodate as best as you can with what you have and I know we are -- we don't all have magic wands to do what we want, but if you are willing to take a look at that northern part, I commend you for that, because I think you are not required to, but that you are willing to I think is great and we really appreciate that. Bailey: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: David, we have got three hearings on -- on April 16. Nothing currently scheduled the week after. You have been with us all day today, so I'm -- I'm happy to ask if -- if you want to add on to an already lengthy meeting I'm supportive of that. If you would rather be on an agenda where we don't have a lot, I would appreciate that, but I certainly want to kind of yield to what -- what you -- the direction you are going to have, so -- oh, the 9th. Excuse me. The 9th we have got three hearings. Thank you to our amazing clerk. On the 16th -- no -- no current public hearings. Bailey: I think that the 16th would be fine. We probably need more than just a week. Cavener: Okay. Bailey: I think that -- that's my -- Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 85 of 87 Cavener: Sincere appreciation for that and I think for the public that have been here all night, too, also appreciate that, so -- all right. Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Before we turn into a pumpkin, I'm going to move that we continue Item 12, the public hearing for Reveille Ridge Subdivision, H-2023-0050 to April 16th. Taylor: Second. Simison: Motion and a second to continue the public hearing to April 16. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye -- Parsons: Mayor, Council, did you -- Councilman Cavener, were you intending to just hold it over for two specific topics, transition and -- oh. Okay. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, appreciate staff asking about this. With this particular application. I think keeping the public hearing -- if someone wasn't able to be here and there was sizable participation in the Planning and Zoning Commission, continue this -- they weren't able to be here tonight, I want to give them the opportunity to weigh in. Simison: All right. I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the item is continued. We will see you back here. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. ORDINANCES [Action Item] 13. Ordinance No. 24-2049: An ordinance (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 — H-2023-0011) annexing the west half of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; rezoning 71.28 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Next item up is Item 13, which is Ordinance No. 24-2049. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 86 of 87 Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance related to Cole Valley Christian Schools, Pre-K-12, H-2023-0011, annexing the west half of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; rezoning 71.28 acres of such real property from RUT to R-15 zoning district, directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps, as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard the ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Seeing none, do I have a motion? Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I move that we accept Ordinance No. 24-2049. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Motion and a second to approve Ordinance No. 24-2049. Is there any discussion? If not clerk will call the roll. Roll Call: Borton, absent; Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, absent; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or do I have a motion to adjourn? Strader: Mayor, I move that we adjourn. Simison: Motion to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10.36 P.M. Meridian City Council March 26,2024 Page 87 of 87 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 4-9-2024 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 4-9-2024 E IDIAN;--- /hl R AGENDA ITEM Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Council may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET Date: Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum: • DO NOT: o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum) Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day (Historic Fourth Consecutive Title) IDIAN WE, N IDAHQ The Office of the .?►Mayor PRO CALAMATIOX Whereas , being a Meridian High School wrestler is more than scoring points , escapes , takedowns , pins and achieving state titles . It is training to build leadership , character, confidence, teamwork and resilience — all traits needed to succeed on the mat, in the classroom and in the real world; and, Whereas, the hard work and dedication of the Meridian Warrior Wresting team and coaches resulted in winning the 2024 State Wrestling Championship ; and, Whereas, their determination racked up 14 placers and four individual state champs to post 273 . 5 points ; and, Whereas , the Meridian Warriors took their place in history becoming the first in Idaho 5A wrestling team to achieve a fourth straight championship ; and, Whereas, the leadership , training and discipline of their coaches Brad Muri , Jon Muri , Brad Perry, Dalton Young, Wade Palmer, Mike Briggs , Brian Twait, Matt Klinger, Rich Bailey, Riley Orozco , Cash Edwards , Zeke Smith, Lex Case , Jake Garrison, Brian Shakelford, Veronica Cafferty, Paden Moore , Irwin Ruiz , and Braden Dickinson helped team members Drake Jayne , Brigg Morrill , Adam Ostoja, Tobias Guillen, Jerimiah Gonazalez , Jackson Beck, Justus Briggs , Vincent Torres , Draken Miller, Matthew Papa, Ryan Amoureux , Andrae Ramierz , Gabe Bourner, Logan Shaver, Jason Mara, Fahad Hillesland, Hezekiah Suter, Camden Crespi , Fabrizio Argana, Bradley Bones , Hudson Rogers , Carson Gooley, Tagen Lowe , Abdula Abdulhameed, Makenzie Thorton, and Elise Twait to focus their talents , passion, and fortitude to become a dynasty, with each player making valuable contributions to their victory. Therefore, I Mayor Robert E . Simison, hereby proclaim March 26t" , 2024 as JW erulian High SchooCWrestlln Of State Champ ions Day in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in congratulating the Meridian High Warriors on their remarkable athletic achievement anWert i Meridian so proudly in the state tournament . Dated this 261h day of March, 2024 i on, Mayor Joe Bort y Council President Liz Strader, City Council Vice-President Doug Taylor, City Council John Overton, City Council Anne Little Roberts , City Council 1 Luke Cavener, City Council -�rw Pro A� 1 a alm lax, Va E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Proclamation - National Vietnam War Veterans Day V IDIAN�-- 'Phe Office of the Mayor PRO CI AMATION WHEREAS, National Vietnam War Veterans Day is observed every year on March 29th to thank and honor our nation's Vietnam veterans and their families for their sacrifice; and, WHEREAS, the Vietnam War was a time in our nation's history where service members of different backgrounds came together to complete a daunting mission; and, WHEREAS, we have a strong commitment to recognizing and acknowledging the accomplishments of all individuals in the diverse community we serve; and, WHEREAS, the City of Meridian wishes to highlight the service of our Armed Forces and support organizations during the war; pay tribute to wartime contributions at home by American citizens and Allies; and acknowledge the technology, science, and medical advances made during the war; and, WHEREAS, we respectfully say, "Thank you for your service" and "Welcome home" to our community's Vietnam veterans who served and let them know they will be remembered for generations to come. THEREFORE, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim March 29th, 2024 as JationaCTie tnam War Veterans Recognition Day in the City of Meridian and all upon the community to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities that cornTqemorate the anniversary of the Vietnam War. Dated this 26"' day of March, 2024 �ed��. L Robert 1301 ison, Mayor Joe Borton, City Council President Liz Strader, City Council Vice-President Luke Cavener, City Council John Overton, City Council Anne Little Roberts, City Council Doug Taylor, City Council ..fig L - E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution No. 24-2445: A Resolution Appointing Heather Giacomo to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 24-2445 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BORTON, CAVENER,LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON, STRADER, TAYLOR A RESOLUTION APPOINTING HEATHER GIACOMO TO SEAT 7 OF THE MERIDIAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Meridian City Code Section 2-1-1 establishes the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission, its members and terms of their appointments; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian deems it to be in the best interest of the citizens of the City of Meridian to approve the appointment of Heather Giacomo to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission as recommended by Mayor Simison and described herein; NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That, effective immediately, Heather Giacomo be appointed to Seat 7 of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission,which term shall expire October 31, 2024. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect as of March 26, 2024. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 26th day of March, 2024. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 26th day of March, 2024. APPROVED: ATTEST: Mayor Robert E. Simison Chris Johnson, City Clerk RESOLUTION APPOINTING GIACOMO TO SEAT 7 OF THE MERIDIAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Proposed Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Mayor Robert E. Simison City Council Members: E IDIAN.A—I� Joe Borton, President Liz Strader, Vice President D A H O Doug Taylor John Overton Anne Little Roberts _ Luke Cavener March 19, 2024 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Robert Simison and City Council FROM: Garrett White, Recreation Manager, MPR Dept. RE: Summer Activity Guide 2024 Fee Schedule Background Our department brings the activity guide fees to City Council three times a year prior to our activity guide being published. Attached are the Summer 2024 Activity Guide fees. You will see that some fees increased and some had no changes. The fees may increase or decrease every season due to the number of days in a month the program is offered or the number of instructional hours offered. Other increase are directly related to cost increases of officials, equipment, and other miscellaneous program costs. All fees are set to meet the departments cost recovery model. Objective To approve the proposed fees for the Summer Activity Guide. CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday,March 26, 2024, at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, regarding proposed fee increases as set forth below. Further information is available at the Parks and Recreation Department, at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at the public hearing. Written testimony is welcome; written materials should be submitted to the City Clerk. All testimony and materials presented shall become property of the City of Meridian. For auditory, visual, or language accommodations, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (208) 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public hearing. Proposed fee increases: 2024 Summer Activi Guide Class Fees: (Note:Sales tax will be collected in addition to fee) Semi-Private Swim Lessons $190.00 Private Swim Lessons $140.00 Individual Swim Pass $45.00 Family Swim Pass $160.00 Intro to Irish Dance $100.00 Art is Life Classes $25.00 - $65.00 Skyhawk Sports Classes/Camps $85.00 - $339.00 Motions Classes $35.00 - $70.00 Youth Pickleball Classes $25.00 - $60.00 Family Golf $300.00 Amazing Athletes $78.00 Little Pallet Art Classes $25.00 - $100.00 Martial Arts for All Ages, Beginning& Intermed. /Advanc. $45.00 Kendo: Japanese Fencing $70.00 Lego Camps $85.00 - $95.00 Introduction to the Sport of Fencing $120.00 Belly Dance $60.00 - $70.00 Disc Golf for Beginners $100.00 Bigfoot Cartooning &Anime Classes $18.00 Building Steam Lego Classes $136.00 Outdoor Adventure Camp $135.00 - $225.00 Tiny Tots Tennis Lessons $31.5 - $63.00 Junior Tennis Lessons $31.5 - $63.00 Camp Mer-IDA-Moo $75.00 - $125.00 Young Rembrandt Art Classes $65.00 - $128.00 Yoga $10.00 - $70.00 Jazzercise $69.00 - $150.00 Pickle-hall 101 $80.00 Line Dancing Classes $25.00 - $75.00 Social Dancing Classes $40.00 - $105.00 Digital Photography $75.00 The Photographers Eye $75.00 Adult Day Trips $10.00 - $100.00 Adult Flag Football $707.55 Summer/Fall Softball Team Fee $471.70 Holiday Classic Volleyball Tournament Team Fee $117.92 Cornhole Team Fee $23.50 DATED this March 5ch day of March, 2024. Chris Johnson, CITY CLERK PUBLISH on March 10, 2024 and March 17, 2024. Class/Camp Summer 2024 Fee Summer 2023 Fee % Increase Semi-Private Swim Lessons $190.00 $190.00 No Changes Private Swim Lessons $140.00 $140.00 No Changes Individual Swim Pass $45.00 $45.00 No Changes Family Swim Pass $160.00 $160.00 No Changes Intro to Irish Dance $100.00 new fee New Class this year Art is Life Classes $25.00-$65.00 new fee New Class this year Skyhawk Sports Classes/Camps $85.00-$339.00 $219.00-$249.00 48% Motions Classes $35.00-$70.00 $12.00-$50.00 40% Youth Pickleball Classes $25.00-$60.00 $50.00 20% Family Golf $100.00 New Class this year New Class this year Amazing Athletes $78.00 $75.00 4% Little Pallet Art Classes $25.00-$100.00 $20.00-$100.00 25% Martial Arts for All Ages, $45.00 Beginning&Intermed./Advanc. $40.00 12.50% Kendo:Japanese Fencing $70.00 $70.00 No Changes Lego Camps $85.00-$95.00 $70.00-$85.00 11% Introduction to the Sport of $120.00 Fencing $120.00 No Changes Belly Dance $60.00-$70.00 $50.00 40% Disc Golf for Beginners $100.00 $80.00 25% Bigfoot Cartooning&Anime $18.00 Classes $18.00 No Changes Building Steam Lego Classes $136.00 New Class this year New Class this year Outdoor Adventure Camp $135.00-$225.00 $135.00-$225.00 No Changes Tiny Tots Tennis Lessons $31.5-$63.00 $31.50-$63.00 No Changes Junior Tennis Lessons $31.5-$63.00 $31.5-$63.00 No Changes Camp Mer-IDA-Moo $75.00-$125.00 $75.00-$125.00 No Changes Young Rembrandt Art Classes $65.00-$128.00 $65.00-$125.00 No Changes Yoga $10.00-$70.00 $15.00-$70.00 No Changes Jazzercise $69.00-$150.00 $150 price is 3 month punch $69.00 pass Pickleball 101 $80.00 $80.00 No Changes Line Dancing Classes $25.00-$75.00 Price based on how many $24.00-$57.00 Sundays in the month Social Dancing Classes $40.00-$105.00 Price based on how many $20.00-$85.00 Tuesdays in the month Digital Photography $75.00 $75.00 No Changes The Photographers Eye $75.00 $75.00 No Changes Adult Day Trips $10.00-$100.00 $10.00-$100.00 No Changes Adult Flag Football $707.55 $613.21 12% Summer/Fall Softball Team Fee $471.70 $424.53 11% Holiday Classic Volleyball Tournament Team Fee $117.92 $94.34 25% Cornhole Team Fee $23.50 New Team Fee New Team Fee E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution No. 24-2443: A Resolution Adopting the Summer 2024 Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; Authorizing the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BORTON,CAVENER,LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON,STRADER,TAYLOR A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW FEES OF THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, following publication of notice in the Meridian Press on March 10, 2024 and March 17, 2024, according to the requirements of Idaho Code section 63-1311A, on March 19, 2024 the City Council of the City of Meridian held a hearing on the adoption of proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, following such hearing, the City Council, by formal motion, did approve said proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the 2024 Summer Fee Schedule of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the fees adopted for the 2024 Winter Activity Guide shall remain in effect as to those classes until such classes are concluded, at which point the fees set forth in Exhibit A hereto shall supersede any and all fees for the enumerated services previously adopted. Section 3. That the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department is hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of said fees. Section 4. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this day of Mar. 2024. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this day of Mar. 2024. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 1 EXHIBIT A 2024 Summer Activity Guide Class Fees: Note: Sales tax will be collected in addition to ee Semi-Private Swim Lessons $190.00 Private Swim Lessons $140.00 Individual Swim Pass $45.00 Family Swim Pass $160.00 Intro to Irish Dance $80.00 Art is Life Classes $25.00 - $65.00 Sk hawk Sports Classes/Cams $85.00 - $339.00 Motions Classes $35.00 - $60.00 Youth Pickleball Classes $25.00 - $60.00 Family Golf $100.00 Amazing Athletes $78.00 Little Pallet Art Classes $25.00 - $100.00 Martial Arts for All Ages, Beginning & Intermed. /Advanc. $45.00 Kendo: Japanese Fencing $70.00 Lego Cams $85.00 - $95.00 Introduction to the sport of Fencing $120.00 Belly Dance $60.00 - $70.00 Disc Golf for Beginners $100.00 Bi foot Cartooning &Anime Classes $18.00 Building Steam Lego Classes $136.00 Outdoor Adventure Cam $135.00 - $225.00 Tiny Tots Tennis Lessons $31.5 - $63.00 Junior Tennis Lessons $31.5 - $63.00 Camp Mer-IDA-Moo $75.00 - $125.00 Young Rembrandt Art Classes $65.00 - $128.00 Yoga $10.00 - $70.00 Jazzercise $69.00 - $150.00 Pickleball 101 $80.00 Line Dancing Classes $25.00 - $75 Social Dancing Classes $40.00 - $105.00 Digital Photography $75.00 The Photographers Eye $75.00 Adult Day Trips $10.00 - $100.00 Flag Football $707.55 Summer/Fall Softball Team Fee $471.70 Holiday Classic Volleyball Tournament Team Fee $117.92 Comhole Team Fee $23.50 ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 C� E IDIAN Planning and Zoning Department Presentation and Outline h2 City Council MeetingMarch 26, 2024 ZoningAerialFLUM ZoningAerialFLUM ZoningAerialFLUM R15-R8- Phasing Plan Open Space Exhibit SmithProject Site Road LLCRoeland Eagle The Keep W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0002 A. Request: Development Agreement Modification to request a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: March 26, 2024 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 7 PROJECT NAME: Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects 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 tali L Ulbl w Laltj� �r Cvc s SS'�b'-I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING March 26,2024 - ------ DATE: TO: Mayor&City Council -v FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner - 208-884-5533 A� SUBJECT: H-2024-0002 Cole Valley Christian School—MDA LOCATION: 7080 W. McMillan Rd., in the NE 1/4 of Section 29, Township 4N.,Range 1 W. _ (Parcel#S0429427800) Er - I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. 11. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 71.28-acre Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residenital(MDR)with a school designation Existing Land Use Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Private education institution for pre-K through 12th grades Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-15 (Medium-High Density Residential) Physical Features(waterways, None ■ hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 1/17/24 History(previous approvals) ROS#2713 (1993)and ROS#14284(2024) Pagel III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Amber Van Ocker,LKV Architects—2400 E. Riverwalk,Boise, ID 83706 B. Owner: Cole Valley Christian Schools 200 E. Carlton Ave., Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/10/24 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 3/l/24 Public hearing notice sign posted o 3/13/24 n site Nextdoor posting 3/4/24 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order associated with annexation(H-2023- 0011) of the subject property were approved by City Council on July 25,2023. The UDC(11-5B-3F) requires the Development Agreement(DA) associated with the annexation to be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the City within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. A modification to the DA may be initiated prior to the end of the six(6)month period to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed. The Applicant submitted the subject request for a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement prior to the end of the six(6)months as required. The reason for the delay in signing the agreement is that a provision of the annexation required the Applicant to obtain final approval of the property boundary adjustment(Project#202300414-PBA) from Ada County prior to City Council approval of the Annexation Ordinance. The property boundary adjustment was approved by Ada County on March 7,2024(ROS#14284) and the DA has been signed by the property owner and returned to the City. City Council approval of the subject modification for a time extension is needed in order for City Council to approve the associated DA(and addendum for a time extension) and the annexation ordinance. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement to extend the period of time in which the DA can be signed and returned to the City for six(6)months. Page 2 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Cole Valley Christian (H-2024-0002) by LKV Architects, located at 780 W. McMillan Rd. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW C�f[EFI DIAN AND DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for a Six(6)Month Time Extension for the Property Owner to Sign and Return the Development Agreement to the City for Cole Valley Christian School(H-2023- 0011),by LKV Architects. Case No(s). H-2024-0002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 26,2024 (Findings on March 26,2024) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26,2024, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26,2024, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26,2024,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65,Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified as Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted December 17,2019,Resolution No. 19-2179 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision,which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant,the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA H-2024-0002 - 1 - 7. That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26,2024, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § I I-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted,it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for 6-month time extension to sign and return the development agreement to the City is hereby approved in accord with the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26,2024, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Development Agreement Duration The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67-651 IA. The development agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request. A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the property owner(s)and returned to the city within six(6)months of the city council granting the modification. A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six(6)month approval period. E. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(d), if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-652 1(1)(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may,within twenty-eight (28)days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1-7-10, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52,title 67, Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. F. Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-6521(1)(d) and 67-8003, an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis. G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024 FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA H-2024-0002 -2- By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of , 2024. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOE BORTON VOTED COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT LIZ STRADER VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER DOUG TAYLOR VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER LUKE CAVENER VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN OVERTON VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER ANNE LITTLE ROBERTS VOTED MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayor Robert Simison Attest: Chris Johnson City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department,Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: Dated: City Clerk's Office FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA H-2024-0002 -3- EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT D A H O HEARING March 26,2024 IMF DATE: TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2024-0002 Cole Valley Christian School—MDA LOCATION: 7080 W.McMillan Rd.,in the NE 1/4 of :.: . Section 29,Township 4N.,Range 1 W. (Parcel#S0429427800) - r I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023-0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 71.28-acre Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residenital(MDR)with a school designation Existing Land Use Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s Private education institution for pre-K through 12th grades Current Zoning RUT in Ada County ' Proposed Zoning R-15 (Medium-High Density Residential) Physical Features(waterways, None I hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 1/17/24 History(previous approvals) ROS#2713 (1993)and ROS#14284(2024) Pagel III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Amber Van Ocker,LKV Architects—2400 E. Riverwalk,Boise, ID 83706 B. Owner: Cole Valley Christian Schools 200 E. Carlton Ave., Meridian,ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/10/24 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 3/1/24 Public hearing notice sign posted o 3/13/24 n site Nextdoor posting 3/4/24 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order associated with annexation(H-2023- 0011) of the subject property were approved by City Council on July 25,2023. The UDC(11-5B-3F) requires the Development Agreement(DA)associated with the annexation to be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the City within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. A modification to the DA may be initiated prior to the end of the six(6)month period to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed. The Applicant submitted the subject request for a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement prior to the end of the six(6)months as required. The reason for the delay in signing the agreement is that a provision of the annexation required the Applicant to obtain final approval of the property boundary adjustment(Project#202300414-PBA)from Ada County prior to City Council approval of the Annexation Ordinance. The property boundary adjustment was approved by Ada County on March 7,2024(ROS#14284)and the DA has been signed by the property owner and returned to the City. City Council approval of the subject modification for a time extension is needed in order for City Council to approve the associated DA(and addendum for a time extension)and the annexation ordinance. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement to extend the period of time in which the DA can be signed and returned to the City for six(6)months. Page 2 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Development Agreement and Development Agreement Modification (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 H-2023-0011/1-1-2024-0002) Between City of Meridian and Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. for Property Located at 7080 W. McMillan Rd. ADA COUNTY RECORDER Trent Tripple 2024-015929 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=51 CHE FOWLER 03/28/2024 01:25 PM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian 2. Cole Valley Christian Schools,Inc.,Owner/Developer THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this Agreement), is made and entered into this day of _,2024,by and between City of Meridian,a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, herea er called CITY, whose address is 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc., whose address is 200 E. Carlton Avenue, Meridian,ID, 83642,hereinafter called O ER/DEVELOPER. 1. RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS,Owner is the sale owner,in law and/or equity,of certain tract of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A",which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, herein after referred to as the Property; and 1.2 WHEREAS,Idaho Cade § 67-651 IA provides that cities may,by ordinance, require or permit as a condition of zoning that the Owner and/or Developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject Property; and 1.3 WHEREAS, City has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment of Section 11-5$-3 of the Unified Development Code("UDC"),which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and/or re-zoning of land; and 1.4 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer has submitted an application for annexation and zoning of 71.28 acres of land with a request for the R-15 (Medium High- Density Residential) zoning district on the property as shown in Exhibit"A" under the Unified Development Code, which generally describes how the Property will be developed and what improvements will be made; and 1.5 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer made representations at the public hearings before Planning and Zoning Commission and the Meridian City Council as to i how the Property will be developed and what improvements will be made;and 1.6 WHEREAS, the record of the proceedings for requested annexation and zoning held before Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council includes responses of government subdivisions providing services within the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction and includes further testimony and comment;and 1.7 WHEREAS, City Council has approved the aforementioned application for annexation and zoning of that certain tract of land described in Exhibit "A" with an R-8 (Medium-Density Residential)zoning district designation;and, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-COLE VALLEY CIRUSTIAN SCHOOL(H-2023-001 1) PAGE l OF 8 1 . 8 WHEREAS, on the 251b day of July, 2023 , the Meridian City Council approved certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order ("Findings") , which have been incorporated into this Agreement and attached as Exhibit ` B "; and 1 . 9 WHEREAS , the Findings require the Owner/Developer to enter into a Development Agreement before the City Council takes final action on final plat; and 1 . 10 WHEREAS, Owner/Developer deem it to be in its best interest to be able to enter into this Agreement and acknowledges that this Agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its urging and request; and 1 . 11 WHEREAS , City requires the Owner/Developer to enter into a development agreement for the purpose of ensuring that the Property is developed and the subsequent use of the Property is in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, herein being established as a result of evidence received by the City in the proceedings for zoning designation from government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction and from affected property owners and to ensure zoning designation is in accordance with the amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian on December 19 , 2019 , Resolution No . 19-2179 , and the UDC, Title 11 . NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows : 2 . INCORPORATION OF RECITALS : That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full . 3 . DEFINITIONS : For all purposes of this Agreement the following words , terms, and phrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided for, unless the clear context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise : 3 . l CITY : means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party to this Agreement, which is a municipal Corporation and government subdivision of the state of Idaho , organized and existing by virtue of law of the State of Idaho , whose address is 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 . 3 .2 OWNER/DEVELOPER: means and refers to Cole Valley Christian Schools , Inc. , whose address is 200 E . Carlton Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, 83642, hereinafter called OWNER/DEVELOPER, the party that owns and is developing said Property and shall include any subsequent owner(s)/developer(s) of the Property. 3 . 3 PROPERTY : means and refers to that certain parcel (s) of Property located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian as in Exhibit "A" describing a parcel to bound by this Development Agreement and attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length . DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLS VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-202MOI 1 ) PAGE 2 OF 8 4 . USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT : This Agreement shall vest the right to develop the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4 . 1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under the UDC . 4 . 2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5 . CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY : 5 . 1 . Owner/Developer shall develop the Property in accordance with the following special conditions . a . Future development shall be generally consistent with the site plan, landscape plan, phasing plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII of the Staff Report attached to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and the provisions contained herein . b . Future development of this site shall incorporate design elements consistent with the "modem rural" design theme outlined in the Fields Sub-Area Plan as discussed in Section V and proposed with this application . (Note: City Council approved the Applicant 's request to construct black coated chain-link fencing along the west, north and east property boundaries; the Applicant is not required to construct the split rail fence along McMillan Rd. if they choose not to) c . The McMillan Rd. improvements and the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave . and Ersatz Rd. to the northern boundary of the parcel shall be completed with the second phase of development at the width/street section required by the Ada County Highway District prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the high school building. d . All detached sidewalks, multi-use pathways and street buffers along public streets (i . e . , McMillan Rd . , Owyhee Storm Ave. and Ersatz Rd.) shall be constructed by the Applicant, unless already constructed by ITD , prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the high school building. (Note: A multi-use pathway is also required along the east side of Ersatz Road, which will be required with construction of the eastern portion of the street section by the developer of the adjacent property) e . Compliance with the City noise ordinance (MCC 6-3 -6) is required. f. If the 23 .4-acre portion of the site (5 -acre portion at southeast corner and 18 . 4 - acre portion at the north end) develops in the future with a use(s) other than an education institution and associated accessory uses, an amendment to the Development Agreement is required to include an updated development plan . g . Direct access via W . McMillan Rd. is prohibited. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-202M011 ) PAGE 3 OF 8 6 . COMPLIANCE PERIOD This Agreement must be fully executed within six (6) months after the date of the Findings for the annexation and zoning or it is null and void. 7 . DEFAULT/CONSENT TO DE-ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF ZONING DESIGNATION : 7 . 1 Acts of Default. In the event Owner/Developer, or Owner/Developer' s heirs, successors, assigns , or subsequent owners of the Property or any other person acquiring an interest in the Property, fail to faithfully comply with all of the terms and conditions included in this Agreement in connection with the Property, this Agreement may be terminated by the City upon compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance . 7 .2 Notice and Cure Period . In the event of Owner/Developer' s default of this agreement, Owner/Developer shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of written notice from City to initiate commencement of action to correct the breach and cure the default, which action must be prosecuted with diligence and completed within one hundred eighty ( 180) days ; provided, however, that in the case of any such default that cannot with diligence be cured within such one hundred eighty ( 180) day period, then the time allowed to cure such failure may be extended for such period as may be necessary to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity. 7 . 3 Remedies . In the event of default by Owner/Developer that is not cured after notice from City as described in Section 7 .2, City shall , upon satisfaction of the notice and hearing procedures set forth in Idaho Code section 67 -651 IA, have the right, but not a duty, to de-annex all or a portion of the Property, reverse the zoning designations described herein, and ternimate City services to the de-annexed Property, including water service and/or sewer service. Further, City shall have the right to file an action at law or in equity to enforce the provisions of this Agreement. Because the covenants, agreements, conditions , and obligations contained herein are unique to the Property and integral to City ' s decision to annex and/or re-zone the Property, City and Owner/Developer stipulate that specific performance is an appropriate, but not exclusive, remedy in the event of default . Owner/Developer reserves all rights to contest whether a default has occurred . 7 .4 Choice of Law and Venue. This Agreement and the rights of the parties hereto shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho , including all matters of construction, validity, performance, and enforcement. Any action brought by any party hereto shall be brought within Ada County, Idaho . 7 . 5 Delay . In the event the performance of any covenant to be performed hereunder by either Owner/Developer or City is delayed for causes that are beyond the reasonable control of the party responsible for such performance, which shall include, without limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or similar causes, the time for such performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay. 7 . 6 Waiver. A waiver by City of any default by Owner/Developer of any one or more of the covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to the default and defaults waived and shall neither bar any other rights or remedies of City nor apply to any subsequent default of any such or other covenants and conditions . DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLS VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-2023 -o011 ) PAGE 4 OF 8 8 . INSPECTION : Owner/Developer shall , immediately upon completion of any portion or the entirety of said development of the Property as required by this Agreement or by City ordinance or policy, notify the City Engineer and request the City Engineer ' s inspections and written approval of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all other ordinances of the City that apply to said Property. 9 . REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION : City shall record this Agreement, including all of the Exhibits , and submit proof of such recording to Owner/Developer, prior to the third reading of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the rezoning of the Property by the City Council . If for any reason after such recordation, the City Council fails to adopt the ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property contemplated hereby, the City shall execute and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Agreement . 10 . ZONING : City shall , following recordation of the duly approved Agreement, enact a valid and binding ordinance zoning the Property as specified herein . i lie SURETY OF PERFORMANCE : The City may also require surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check or negotiable bonds , as allowed under the UDC , to insure the installation of required improvements , which the Owner/Developer agree to provide, if required by the City. 12 . CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY : No Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed , and accepted by the City, or sufficient surety of performance is provided by Owner/Developer to the City in accordance with Paragraph 11 above. 13 . ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES : That Owner/Developer agree to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian unless otherwise provided by this Agreement . 14 . NOTICES : Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3 ) days after deposit in the United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid , return receipt requested, addressed as follows : CITY : with copy to : City Clerk City Attorney City of Meridian City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave . 33 E . Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Meridian, Idaho 83642 OWNER/DEVELOPER: Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. 200 E. Carlton Ave . Meridian, ID 83642 14 . 1 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section . DEVBLOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-2023 -0011 ) PAGE 5 OF 8 15 . ATTORNEY FEES : Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled , in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney ' s fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction . This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. 16 . TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE : The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform . IT BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS : This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties ' respective heirs, successors , assigns and personal representatives, including City' s corporate authorities and their successors in office . This Agreement shall be binding on the Owner/Developer, each subsequent owner and any other person acquiring an interest in the Property. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the Property, or portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed . City agrees, upon written request of Owner and/or Developer, to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if City, in its sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that Owner and/or Developer have fully performed their obligations under this Agreement. 18 . INVALID PROVISION : If any provision of this Agreement is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Agreement and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein . 19 . DUTY TO ACT REASONABLY : Unless otherwise expressly provided, each party shall act reasonably in giving any consent, approval, or taking any other action under this Agreement . 20 . REMOVED PROPERTY : The City is hereby authorized, in its sole discretion, to remove a portion of the Property ("Removed Property") from this Agreement at any time, provided that the City and the owner of the Removed Property concurrently enter into a modified development agreement governing the development and use of the Removed Property. The remaining portion of the Property, which has not been removed from this Agreement as described above, shall continue to be bound by the terms of this Agreement. 21 . COOPERATION OF THE PARTIES : In the event of any legal or equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any third party (including a governmental entity or official) challenging the validity of any provision in this Agreement, the parties agree to cooperate in defending such action or proceeding. 22 . FINAL AGREEMENT : This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements , agreements, condition and understandings between Owner/Developer and City relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements , conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between Owner/Developer and City, other than as are stated herein . Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to City, to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of City. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-2023 -0011 ) PAGE 6 OF 8 22 , 1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing rezoning of the subject Property herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the City has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 23 . EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT : This Agreement shall be effective on the date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the Property and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. [end of text; acknowledgements , signatures and Exhibits A and B follow] I i DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-2023 -0011 ) PAGE 7 OF 8 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. OWNER/DEVELOPER: Cole Valley Christian Schools,Inc. By: STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 2,1 day of 2024,before me,the undersigned,a otary Public in and for said State, personally appeared �-pM Ee ,known or identified to me to be the��of Cole Valley Christian Schools,Inc.and the person who signed above and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. r TABITHA BROOK EPLER T&K1v\ Nota0UbAkI state of Idaho Notary,Public Z—j Commission Number 20213095 My Commission Expires: My Commission Expires Jul 7, 2027 CITY OF MERIDIAN ATTEST: SEAL By: c Mayor obert E Simi on Chris John n, City STATE OF IDAHO ) :ss County of Ada ) On this261f]day of March , 2024, before me, a Notary Public,personally appeared Robert E. Simison and Chris Johnson,known or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk,respectively,of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City,and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. (SEAL) Notary Public for Idaho 8 My Commission Expires: -28-2C128 CHARLENE WAY COMMISSION No. 67390 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF IDAHO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT— OLE VALLEY HRISTIAN SCHOOL(H-2023-0011) PAGE 8 OF 8 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE � LAND Page 1 OF 1 GROUP February 1, 2024 Project No , : 121048 EXHIBIT "A" COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS McMILLAN ROAD PROPERTY PARCEL A DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the West Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County Idaho, being more particularly described as follows : Commencing at the Southeast Corner of Section 29 of said Township 4 North , Range 1 West; Thence North 89022' 00" West, a distance of 2642 . 71 feet on the South line of said Section 29 to the South Quarter Corner of said Section 29, said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING ; Thence North 000 51 ' 06" East, a distance of 2630 . 21 feet on the north-south mid-section line of said Section 29 to the Center Quarter Corner of said Section 29, Thence South 89 ° 22 ' 35 " East, a distance of 1325 . 02 feet on the east-west mid -section line of said Section 29 to the Center- East 1/ 16th Corner of said Section 29; Thence South 000 56' 00 " West, a distance of 2630 . 45 feet on the north -south 1/ 16th Section line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 29 to the East 1/16th Corner common to Sections 29 and 32; Thence North 89 ° 22 ' 00 " West, a distance of 454 . 52 feet on the South line of said Section 29; Thence North 00 ° 56 ' 00 " East, a distance of 487 . 34 feet; Thence North 89 ° 43 ' 44 " West, a distance of 774 . 21 feet, Thence South 00° 16' 16" West, a distance of 21 . 70 feet; Thence South 000 51 ' 07 " West, a distance of 460 . 74 feet to a point on the South line of said Section 29 , Thence North 890 22 ' 00" West, a distance of 93 .49 feet on said South line of Section 29 to the POINT OF BEGINNING . The above described parcel contains 71 . 28 acres more or less . PREPARED BY : The Land Group, Inc. T Nbs a 7880 2- 1 2024 `r %PT9Tf OF James R . Washburn , PLS WA 462 East Shore Drive , Suite 100 , Eagle , Idaho 83616 208 , 939 , 4041 thelandgroupinc . com a o � a Wz0ap g looms sommi CM _ ►;�l'� ca VJ € gig asn � 3 • w k m 85 g5 g5 e5 low c 4 YFus gff � �= ONCC it 5 .y g O 3rr �" yyy�yo Fg �so 0$ $ ' I Cl c6 W � 10 GPon at iig % - v9 € Q m � s Mw on 5icm 'g g Pr Z w 33� g < 3' o N � o O Q, NIS C C p O 'C n v '�- w �w d `s - 'o vI y — _ — — _ — _ _ aroa uarasa�rt tr - - - - - - Qi � 4LOC9L 3AMO.IIN 1 O cn z ^ IN kx IL O Down INS 00 cc cc O *� CA d 'INS C m .y d 3 + w GCL � = G U3 = N I � � N C O I > � !+ cc 9 a� n 'Q ' 03llVidhY1 03avu4n I in ^ [asofxl I — m toCct st I 5 Miss C C. offiEftmoss NI .0 :21111 .fl ml p a0 p � i 3r aec�M.00xms s � ES MW ion Iry d l A, 5 5 k I �i o d3 e 13 $IA I� I. I to I SAY /C OJS gual �� .SI091 9AHAO W_ T — — — — — ZI'SICI �liSpL�SE 35015-00l1 � � g'j 55 ` 13 N01SIV091S SUVLS3 **&%NS 03"V7dW1 � I G II IS � EXHIBIT B CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW E IDIAN*.�' AND DECISION & ORDER I D A H O In the Matter of the Request for Annexation and Zoning of 71 .28 -Acres of Land with an R45 (Medium High-Density Residential) Zoning District; and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Private Education Institution for Pre-kindergarten through 12th Grade on 48 .48-Acres of Land in the R45 Zoning District, by LKV Architects . Case No(s) . H=2023A011 For the City Council Hearing Date of: July 11 , 2023 (Findings on July 25, 2023 ) A . Findings of Fact 1 . Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , incorporated by reference) 2 . Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , incorporated by reference) 3 . Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , inco orated b reference � by reference) 4 . Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , incorporated by reference) B . Conclusions of Law 1 . The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975 ," codified at Chapter 65 , Title 67, Idaho Code (I. C. § 67-6503 ) . 2 . The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified as Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted December 17, 2019 , Resolution No . 19 -2179 and Maps . 3 . The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § I I m5A. 4 . Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5 . It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6 . That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City, Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL - AZ, CUP H-202MO11 - I - 7 . That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , incorporated by reference . The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application . C . Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council ' s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11 -5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that : 1 . The applicant ' s request for annexation & zoning is hereby approved with an R-8 zoning district, instead of the requested R- 15 zoning district, with the requirement of a Development Agreement ; and the request for a conditional use permit is hereby approved per the provisions in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 , attached as Exhibit A . D . Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted , shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time , the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval , satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval , and acquire building permits and commence constriction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground . For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two (2) year period . Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11 -513 -6 . G . 1 , the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one ( 1 ) two (2) year period . Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted . With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11 (UDC 11 -513 -6F) . Notice of Development Agreement Duration The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67 -6511A . The development agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request . A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the city within six (6) months of the city council granting the modification. A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six (6) month approval period . FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL - AZ, CUP H-202MO 11 . 2 - E. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67- 6521 ( 1 ) (d) , if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-6521 ( 1 )(a) , an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1 -740 , seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52 , title 67 , Idaho Code . This notice is provided as a courtesy ; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA . F . Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code 67 -6521 1 d and 67 - 8003 , an owner of private property that is the § § OO subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis . G . Attached : Staff Report for the hearing date of July 11 , 2023 I FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL - AZ, CUP H-2023 -0011 - 3 - By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 25th day of July 2023 . COUNCIL PRESIDENT BRAD HOAGLUN VOTED AYE COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT JOE BORTON VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER LUKE CAVENER VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN OVERTON VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER LIZ STRADER VOTED AYE MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayor Robe imison 7.25 -2023 Attest : :)A Chri o son 7 - City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. 00�lwkmB Y Dated : 7 -25 -2023 City Clerk ' s Office FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL - AZ, CUP H-2023 -0011 - 4 - E IDIAN%am- iDAHO STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING July 11 , 2023 LegendUL DATE: - [dI F#Iojec e Loc a =o r TO : Mayor & City Council — _- � ' � loss FROM : Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208 -884-5533 „. r SUBJECT : Cole Valley Christian School - AZ, i, — CUP H-2023-0011 _ LOCATION: 7080 W. McMillan Rd. , in the NE '/a of Section 29, Township 4N. , Range 1 W. (Parcel #SO429427800) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 71 .28 acres of land with an R- 15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district; and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a private education institution for pre- kindergarten through 12th grade on 48 .48 acres of land in the R45 zoning district. He SUMMARY OF REPORT A . Project Summary Description Details Acreage 71 .28-acres Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential (MDR) with a school designation Existing Land Use Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Private education institution for pre-K through 12' grades Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R- 15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Phasing Plan 2 phases Physical Features (waterways, None hazards flood lain hillside plain, ) Neighborhood meeting date 2/16/23 History (previous approvals) ROS #2713 ( 1993) . A property boundary adjustment has been tentatively approved by Ada County but has not yet received final approval. ova"1991RAMAM1 1 =,t ` 'f arm Ill �1 fi W1 IN iiit ,,, ti Ii lo ii �i; ' i lt''' _ f MM ILL lilt is 664 1 it oil — 1 ! M M ' " AlI IIt 11111 - e tJ'a` all �' .�- 33, r � ,r; 1 — Tvy III••^ , qv Itr ! a�i 3" n'f`pl _ �; �l i Z r Iaro �V _ i ' ' rl I.ti, .Y� its � , 'N!I T - ) y tt E ' d r 1 ! iM t�IfJ .; • 1 . SL �. i so, f �y1: 11 it VI so_ u It III t rl f IN J IIII tili t1 t11AI�i t1 Ilt.µ. tto = '/1iq= � ��=. i .. tl4it4 .i ii.�l/� it to lilt i tu— Cult 11 m tltsln - - • ' • - - M-7.:CI: *TTvjll n%iltl -tn�,t; 1 tll,ltt11t Frill I;Irill Most i �;�l �li rJ er - .ITT Or lie -11 ' wYr � ljl , fill A66 pp Ar AN All law PFF C. Representative: Same as Applicant IV, NOTICING Planning & Zoning City Council Notice Dates Notice Dates Newspaper Notification 5/3 /2023 06/25/2023 Radius notification mailed to 4/28/2023 properties within 300 feet 06/23/2023 Site Posting Date 5/ 18/2023 6/23/2023 Next Door posting 4/28/2023 06/23/2023 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS Land Use : This property is designated as Medium Density Residential (MDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) contained in the (Comprehensive Plan) . This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. There is also a school designation on this property, which indicates a school should be developed in this general area. The proposed use of the property as a private education institution is consistent with the school designation depicted on the FLUM. Although dwelling units are typically desired in the MDR designation, the UDC (Table 11 -2A-2) does allow school uses with approval of a conditional use permit. Transportation : The Master Street Map (MSM) depicts a north/south residential collector street along the west boundary of this site. The Applicant has negotiated a land swap with the property owner at the southwest corner of this site to obtain the property necessary to complete the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave . to the school property. A local street (Ersatz Place Road) is proposed along the east boundary of the site that extends off-site from McMillan Rd. to the north that will provide access to the properties fronting on future SH- 16 . A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was submitted to ITD and ACHD for review of this project. Design : This property is located within a four-square mile area governed by the Fields Sub Area Plan located at the northwest corner of the Area of City Impact boundary. This area is bounded by Ustick Rd. on the south, Can-Ada Rd. on the west, Chinden Blvd./US Highway 20/26 on the north, and McDermott Rd./SH- 16 on the east. The Fields area is primarily designated for future residential development, with a mixe&use community center at the southeast corner of Star and McMillan Roads, and multiple school and park sites . Interchange and regional mixed-use designations are incorporated along both Ustick Road and Chinden Boulevard, generally from the SH- 16 extension to Star Road. The southwest corner of the Subarea has been reserved for expanded industrial and non-residential mixed-use area within the southwest quadrant, and is aligned with the existing Intermountain Gas Facility, currently located on Can-Ada Road. In accord with the Fields Sub -Area Plan, the general character, design and identity of this area should have a cohesive theme that is "modern rural," which applies to housing, amenities, streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial . Because the proposed school does not front on W. McMillan Rd. and is not oriented toward N. Owyhee Storm Ave. and because it' s not residential or retail/commercial, Staff does not recommend the building is required to have a modern rural design theme . However, some of the other thematic design elements that contribute to the desired character of the area should be adhered to such as lighting, fencing (e.g. split rail), landscaping (e.g. tall fescues, dry creek materials, wildflowers, street trees, etc.) , public art, on-street bike lanes and/or off-street multi- use pathways, signage (e.g. metal roof on sign), etc. — see the Character Framework — Amenities (pg. 342) and Streetscape (pg. 343) in the Plan for more information. A high-quality of design is expected in this area. In response to the modern rural design theme, the Applicant proposes to develop some of the areas adjacent to building entrances with dry stream beds with a mix of rock types, boulders and plantings . In the portions of the site that will not be developed with Phase 1 , a "meadow seed" mix is proposed to be planted for wild flowers and grass to grow. Detached sidewalks, landscaping and street lights are proposed along all public streets , which will provide pedestrian connectivity to the school from adjacent existing and future neighborhoods in the area. A 10400t wide sidewalk/pathway is proposed along Owyhee Storm Ave. , which should provide a safe off-street route for school children to bicycle/walk to school; and a 5 -foot wide sidewalk is proposed along McMillan Rd. and Ersatz Place Rd. Building materials will consist of a combination of masonry, deep ribbed metal and smooth metal with large expansions of glazing. The ball fields will be fenced from general use by the public; however, those areas help preserve the open space and views from adjacent developments and properties. Fencing and signage designs have not been fully developed yet but the Applicant anticipates incorporating the "modern rural' design theme in those elements at the perimeter of the development. Details of such should be submitted prior to the City Council hearing. 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) : • "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." (3o03 . 0317) City water service is available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11 -3A-21 . City sewer service will not be available until the Can-Ada lift station project is complete at the end of fiscal year 2025. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities ." (3 .03 . 03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided with development of this site. • "Ensure development provides safe routes and access to schools , parks, and other community gathering places . " (2 .02. 01G) Detached sidewalks are proposed adjacent to all public streets, which should assist in providing safe access to the proposed school. The walkway along Owyhee Storm Ave. is proposed to be a 10 feet wide multi-use pathway, which will provide an off-street route for bicyclists. • "Ensure the location and design of schools are compatible with existing and planned neighborhoods and land uses . " (2 . 03 . 01D) The proposed school should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses in the vicinity. i VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Annexation & Zoning (AZ) . The Applicant proposes to annex 71 .28 acres of land with an R45 (Medium-High Density Residential) zoning district for the development of a private education institution for pre- kindergarten through 12" grade on approximately 48 .48 acres of the site. The remaining 23 .4- acres of the site is to be used for agricultural purposes until further development occurs in the future . As discussed above in Section V, the proposed use is desired and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for this area. There are no existing structures on this site; the property is currently being used for agricultural purposes . The site is within the Area of City Impact (AOCI) boundary at the periphery of the current City limits and is contiguous to City annexed land to the south. Because the R-8 zoning district is the most appropriate district for the MDR FLUM designation, Staff recommends an R-8 instead of R45 zone for the subject property. A private education institution is listed as an allowed use in the recommended R-8 (and requested R- 15) zoning district with approval of a conditional use permit, per UDC Table I14A -2, subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11 -4-344. A property boundary adjustment application has been tentatively approved by Ada County Development Services for the reconfiguration of this property as shown in the annexation legal description and exhibit map in Section VIII .A below. Final approval is required to be obtained prior to City Council approval of the annexation ordinance. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure this property develops as proposed and required, Staff recommends a DA with the provisions discussed herein and included in Section IX.A. If the 23 .4-acre portion of the site not proposed to develop at this time is proposed to develop with any use(s) other than an education institution and associated accessory uses in the future, Staff recommends an amendment to the Development Agreement is required to include an updated development plan. B. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) . A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is proposed, as required by UDC Table 11 -2A-2, for a private education institution in an R4/R- 15 zoning district. The education institution requires CUP approval because it exceeds 250,000 square feet (s . f.) within a residential district; includes lighted fields adjoining/within a residential district; will generate in excess of 1 , 500 vehicular trips per day; takes access from a collector street (i . e. Owyhee Storm Ave .) and there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site, per UDC I1 -4-3- 14E. Cole Valley currently has two existing campuses that will be relocated and consolidated into one 259,919 square foot building on the subject property. The proposed school will be for pre- kindergarten through 12th grade and the development area will include parking, access drives, open space for student play area and outside athletic venues on 48 .48 acres of land. The new facility will service approximately 1 , 825 students with the potential to add 12 additional classrooms with future building additions on the south, east and west wings, totaling 15 ,300 square feet, to serve an additional 300 students . Development will likely occur in two phases but may occur in one. If phased, Phase 1 will consist of all of the outside athletic venues except the tennis courts, a portion of the southeast parking lot, public restroom outbuilding, construction of Ersatz Rd. and the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave. i (the length and width to be determined by the City and ACHD) , and the adjustment and piping of the Creason Lateral. Phase 2 will consist of building construction, remaining site development of parking lots, access points, play structures, full road sections to the north property line and public utility connections . Although shown as part of the 2"d phase, the storage, maintenance and CTE building likely won't be constructed for a few years per the Applicant. Dimensional Standards : The proposed development is required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A- 7 for the proposed R- 15 zoning district (or UDC Table 11- 2A -6 for the R-8 district recommended by Staff) . Education facilities are allowed a maximum building height of 50 feet as set forth in UDC 11-2A-3E. 3 . Specific Use Standards : The proposed use is required to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 114-3- 14F, Education Institution, as follows : Staffs analysis is in italics. A. Accessory uses . Accessory uses including, but not limited to, daycare facilities, community events, community services, social services, curricular and extracurricular activities, meeting facilities for clubs and organizations, and school administration may be allowed. 1 . Community events shall include, but are not limited to, events organized by an association of persons for a social, literary, political, educational or recreational purpose. Community events shall not include retail or other services that are customarily carried on as a business . 2 . Curricular or extracurricular activities at an education institution shall include any sporting, musical, dramatic, artistic, fundraising or educational activities associated with any group, association, or classroom of said education facilities . Curricular or extracurricular activities shall not include retail or other services of businesses not directly associated with the education facility. 3 . When conducted within an existing structure and site modifications are not proposed and/or required allowed accessory uses do not require a certificate of zoning compliance. 4 . Uses not deemed as an accessory use by the Director shall require approval as a principal permitted or conditional use consistent with this title or as a temporary use consistent with title 3 , chapter 4 of this Code. B . Location criteria for elementary schools . Elementary schools should be located within the center of neighborhoods with access encouraged from local streets. Elementary school locations adjacent to public parks or open space are encouraged. At least thirty (30) percent of the perimeter of an elementary school site should be open to streets or open space areas . The site is not located within the center of a neighborhood but may be in the future as much of the property surrounding this area has yet to annex but has a residential FLUMdesignation; a local street (Ersatz Rd.) is proposed along the east boundary of the site. Over 30 % of the proposed school site is open to streets. C. Location criteria for middle schools and high schools . Middle and high schools may take access off a designated arterial or collector street. The proposed school takes access off a collector street (Owyhee Storm Ave). D . Exemption. An education institution with less than one hundred fifty ( 150) students or located within the TN-R district may be exempt from the requirements for open space, landscaping, parking and drop off areas . Not Applicable E. Conditional use requirement. A conditional use permit shall be required for any education institution in which any of the following circumstances exist: 1 . The education institution is in excess of two hundred fifty thousand (250 ,000) square feet within a residential district; The proposed school is 259, 919 square feet. 2 . The education institution includes lighted fields adjoining or within a residential district; The football field is proposed to be lighted within a residential district. 3 . The education institution will generate in excess of one thousand five hundred ( 1 ,500) vehicular trips per day; The proposed school will exceed 1, 500 vehicle trips per day at 4, 132 trips per day. 4 . The education institution takes access from a collector or an arterial street and there is not a safe, separate pedestrian and bikeway access between the neighborhood and the school site. The proposed school takes access from a collector street (Owyhee Storm Ave.); a 10 foot wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed on the school site adjacent to the street for safe pedestrian/bicycle access to the site. There are no abutting neighborhoods to the west, north or east at this time as the adjacent land is yet to redevelop; an arterial street separates this site from the development to the south (i. e. Gander Creek subdivision) . F. Portable classrooms (temporary and permanent) . The site plan for all education institutions shall include the location of any future portable classrooms (temporary and/or permanent) . Four (4) portable future classrooms are proposed on the west side of the site just north of the elementary wing totaling 8, 400 sf. (2, 100 sf. each) . 1 . Temporary portables . A temporary portable classroom shall be an accessory use valid for a maximum period of four (4) years from the date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. a . Temporary portable classrooms that meet the standards as set forth in subsection (F) (4) of this section shall require a certificate of zoning compliance approval but shall not be subject to design review. b . Temporary portable classrooms that do not meet the standards as set forth in subsection (F)(4) of this section shall require a conditional use permit but shall not be subject to design review. 2 . Permanent portables . Prior to the termination of the four-year permit, the applicant may request to convert a temporary portable classroom to a permanent portable classroom. a. Permanent portable classrooms that meet the standards as set forth in subsection (F)(4) of this section shall require a certificate of zoning compliance and design review approval . b . Permanent portable classrooms that do not meet the standards as set forth in subsection (F)(4) of this section shall require a conditional use permit and design review approval. 3 . Permit termination. Upon termination of the four-year permit, the temporary portable classroom approval shall be null and void and the applicant shall remove the structure immediately. 4. Standards. a. The portable classroom shall not be located in the front yard of the principal school structure. b . The portable classroom shall not be located in any required yard. c. The placement of the portable classroom shall not reduce the number of required off street parking spaces . d. The portable structures shall comply with the building code in accord with title 10 of this Code . e. Exterior colors of the portable classrooms shall be compatible with the color of the primary school building. f. The roofing material on the portable classrooms shall be of a finish that emits a minimal amount of glare. g. Where the portable classroom is located within two hundred (200) feet of a street and is visible from such a street, the portable classroom shall be screened from view of the street with a minimum of one ( 1 ) evergreen tree per fifteen ( 15) feet of linear structure. The tree shall be a minimum of six (6) feet in height. G. Additional standards for education institution, private. The applicant shall provide written documentation that the facility meets the minimum site area guidelines as established by the Idaho State Department of Education. The Applicant shall comply with this i standard. H. Additional standards for vocational or trade schools. The applicant shall provide written documentation that the school will have a major curriculum relating to technological industrial research and processes . Not applicable. I. Parking space requirement. In all commercial and residential districts, education institutions shall provide one ( 1 ) parking space for every four hundred (400) square feet of gross floor area. The proposed parking complies with this standard. See below for more detailed analysis on parking. Road Improvements : The Applicant proposes to extend Owyhee Storm Ave . , a collector street, and Ersatz Rd., a local street, from the south boundary at McMillan Rd. to the north boundary of the subject property with development. The extension of these streets is proposed in two (2) phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VIII.B . To ensure the timely extension of II. Owyhee Storm Ave. and Ersatz Rd. for future development in the area, Staff recommends these streets (and associated detached sidewalks/multi-use pathways) are constructed to the northern boundary of the subject property with the first phase of development. The Applicant states ITD has acquired the property necessary to complete the extension of Ersatz but not to a local street section with sidewalks, etc. The street section will start at the eastern ROW that ITD has acquired and the street section will extend the necessary dimension onto the subject property. The multi-use pathway required along the east side of Ersatz will be constructed with future development of the adjacent land. Access : Two (2) driveway accesses are proposed via Owyhee Storm Ave. , a future collector street, along the west boundary of the site and two (2) driveway accesses are proposed via Ersatz Place Rd. , a future local street, along the east boundary of the site, no access is proposed via W. McMillan Rd. The southern driveway via Ersatz will provide access to the eastern parking lot and drop -off areas that are primarily dedicated to the high school and middle school portion of the building and campus . The northern driveway will provide access to the smaller secondary parking lot that will include a bus drop-off area, a future career technical building and the emergency vehicle access lane that extends west to Owyhee Storm Ave. The southern driveway via Owyhee Storm will provide access to the western parking lot and drop-off areas that are primarily dedicated to the pre-school and elementary portions of the building and campus . Parking : Off-street parking is required to be provided as set forth in UDC 11 -4-344. 1 (i . e. one space per 400 square feet of gross floor area) . Based on 273 ,344 square feet (s .f.) of gross floor area (259,919 s .f. school building + 13 ,425 s .f. storage, maintenance & CTE building), a minimum of 683 parking spaces are required that comply with the standards listed in UDC Table 11 -3C-5. If future classroom additions occur as anticipated, an additional 38 parking spaces will be required based on 15 ,300 square feet of gross floor area. If temporary portable classrooms are added as anticipated, an additional 21 parking spaces will be required based on 8 ,400 s . f. of gross floor area. The site plan depicts a total of 843 parking spaces at full build-out, which exceeds the minimum standards by 101 spaces . The Applicant proposes to only construct the minimum amount of parking (i .e. 650 spaces) required with the initial building construction. Bicycle parking is required to be provided as set forth in UDC 11 -3C-6G. Based on 843 vehicle spaces, a minimum of 34 bicycle parking spaces are required that meet the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C; a total of 48 spaces are proposed, exceeding the minimum standards. Sidewalks/Pathways : A 1046ot wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway is proposed within the street buffer along Owyhee Storm Ave . in accord with the Pathways Master Plan; and 5 -foot wide detached sidewalks are proposed along W. McMillan Rd. and Ersatz Rd. Note: A multi-use pathway is also required along the east side of Ersatz Rd. , which will be required with construction of the eastern portion of the street section by the developer of the adjacent property. Five-foot wide detached sidewalks are typically required within street buffers along arterial streets. However, because ACHD is changing policy to require detached 10400t wide multiple-use pathways (MUP) along arterial streets (i.e. McMillan Rd.) in lieu of on-street bike lanes, and because school children will be using this sidewalk to bike and walk to school, Staff recommends a 10400t wide sidewalk/MUP is required along McMillan as a provision of the development agreement. The multi-use pathway is required to be placed in a 14400t wide public use easement if it' s outside of the right-of--way. The easement should be submitted to the Planning division with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the first phase of development. To ensure pedestrian safety, Staff recommends the sidewalk/multi-use pathways are constructed along all streets with the first phase of development. Landscaping : A landscape plan was submitted as shown in Section VIII. C. A minimum 25 -foot wide street buffer is required along W. McMillan Rd. , an arterial street and a minimum 20 -foot wide street buffer is required along Owyhee Storm Ave . , a collector street, landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC I1 -3B- 7C. Buffers are required to be planted with a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. The landscape plan should be revised in accord with the aforementioned standards. Where the buffer is encumbered by an easement, the buffer area is required to include a minimum 5- foot wide area for planting shrubs and trees outside of the easement; the plans should be revised accordingly to accommodate the required p lantin gs. Parking lot landscaping is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11 -3B-8C. Utilities ( UDC 11 -3A-21) : 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 . All utilities, except for City sewer, are available to the site or in close proximity. Sewer service to this site will be provided from the Can-Ada Lift Station, which has not yet been built. Construction is planned to be completed towards the end of Fiscal Year 2025. The City plans to install a trunk sewer from the lift station (to be located near McMillan Road/Can-Ada Road) one mile to the east near the intersection of McMillan Road/Star Road as a part of the Can-Ada Lift Station Project. The school will need to extend sewer down McMillan Rd. and Owyhee Storm Ave. to the school campus in accord with the Sewer Master Plan. The City is amenable to allowing a temporary lift station for the sports field concession and restroom buildings only, which shall be taken off-line as part of the construction of the school. Waterways : The West Tap Sublateral runs along the southern boundary of this site adjacent to McMillan Rd. and the Creason Lateral bisects this site within a 30-foot wide easement. The UDC (11-3A- requires all waterways that lie on the property being developed to be piped or otherwise covered unless being improved as a water amenity of linear open space. The easement for the Creason Lateral shall be depicted on the site and landscape plans. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A45) : Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to the development as set forth in UDC 11 -3A- 15 . On-site pressurized irrigation is proposed utilizing existing water rights from the Creason Lateral and a secondary irrigation well and pumping system will be installed to supplement irrigation needs during the "shoulder season" watering times . Storm Drainage (UDC 11 -3A -18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City' s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances . Hours of Operation : The primary hours of operation for the campus will be from 7 . 00 am to 3 : 00 pm Monday through Friday. Extended hours of operation will be based on athletic events and various activities throughout the school year. Compliance with the City noise ordinance (MCC 6-3_ is required. Building Elevations : Building elevations were submitted as shown in Section VELD for the proposed 2-story school building. Building materials consist of a combination of masonry in smooth-face and split-face in two colors, deep ribbed metal and smooth metal with large expansions of glazing, which should be low maintenance. Raised parapets are proposed for modulation and screening of rooftop mechanical equipment. Proposed building heights are as follows : auditorium/gymnasium — 45 ' 8"; classroom wings — 35 ' 0". Certificate of Zoning Compliance/Design Review : A Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) and Design Review application is required to be submitted to the Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit application(s) . The application materials should be updated as necessary to comply with the conditions contained in Section IX . Compliance with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual is required. As discussed above in Section V, a "modern rural" design theme should be integrated into the project as desired in the Fields Sub- Area Plan, VII, DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation & zoning with an R-8 instead of R. 15 zoning district, and conditional use permit with the provisions included in Section IX per the Findings in Section X. B . The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on May 18 June 1 and 15 , 2023 At the public hearing, the Commission moved to continue the subject AZ and CUP i requests to June Pt in order to review the ACHD report The ACHD report wasn' t received by the 1St so the Commission continued the project to the June 15 `' hearing date. 1 . SummM of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Amber Van Ocker, LKV Architects (Applicant' s Representative) ; Sonia Dalejden Kittleson & Assoc • Wayne Thowless LKV Architects IL. In opposition: None c. Commenting_ Patrick Nichols d. Written testimony Amber Van Ocker, Applicant' s Representative e. Staff presenting, application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application : Bill Parsons 2 . Key issue s) of public testimony: A.. The Applicant requests to not be required to construct Owyhee Storm & Ersatz (& the associated sidewalks/pathways and street buffers) to the northern property boundary, just to the northern boundary of the school campus proposed to develop at this time; and the street buffer & pathway along McMillan to be constructed with future development of that area. b . Concerns with how traffic generated from the proposed school will impact already congested traffic and intersections in the vicinity. 3 . Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission : a. The timing for construction of Owyhee Storm & Ersatz to the northern property boundary and pedestrian walkwUs and street buffers along public streets ; b . Concerns pertaining to traffic and existing congestion in this area and impacts from the proposed development. 4 . Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. At Staff s request include a clarification to DA provision #A. l . ld in Section IX that all street buffers adjacent to public streets (i.e. McMillan Owyhee Storm & Ersatz) also be constructed by the Applicant unless already constructed by ITD prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancyfor the high school building. b . Commission required the McMillan Rd improvements and the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave and Ersatz to the northern parcel boundary to be completed either by the Applicant or ITD as applicable prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the high school building in the second phase of development (see Section IX.A. 1 a 1 c) . 5 . Outstanding issue(s) for City Council : a. The Applicant should provide more details on how perimeter fencing signage, public art etc planned for the site incorporates the "modern rural" design theme in accord with the Fields Sub-area Plan. C . The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on July 11 , 2023 . At the public hearing, the Council moved to approve the subject AZ and CUP requests . 1 . Summary of the Citv Council public hearing: a. In favor Amber Van Ocker LKV Architects (Applicant ' s Representative) b . In opposition• None c Commenting: None 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. Applicant requested Council not require the extension of Owyhee Storm & Ersatz to the northern property boundary at this time just the northern boundary of the school site proposed to develop at this time. 3 . Key issue(s) of discussion by City Council : a. The appropriateness of black coated chain4inlc fencing in the Fields Sub-Area and necessity of fencing along McMillan Rd b . The Applicant' s request to defer construction of Owyhee Storm & Ersatz along w ith the associated sidewalks/pathways and street buffers on the future development area at the northern boundav of the site until future development occurs . 4 . City Council change(s) to Commission recommendation: a. Council approved the project with the allowance of black coated chain-link fencing along the west north and east boundaries of the site (the Applicant is not required to construct the split rail fence along McMillan Rd. if they choose not to.) . I VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation & Zoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map LEGAL DESCRIPTION �'= T H E Page 1 OF 1 or►or /�i +. 10 LAND GROUP March 2, 2023 Project No . : 121048 EXHIBIT "A" COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the West Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the South One Quarter Corner of Section 29 of said Township 4 North, Range 1 West, (from which point the Southeast Corner of said Section 29 bears South 89' 22' 00" East, 2642.71 feet distant), said South One Quarter Corner being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence North 00° 51' 06" East, a distance of 2630 . 21 feet on the north-south mid-section line of said Section 29 to the Center One Quarter Corner of said Section 29 ; Thence South 890 22' 35 " East, a distance of 1325 .02 feet on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 29 to the Center- East 1/16th Corner of said Section 29; Thence South 00° 56' 00" West, a distance of 2630 .45 feet to a point on the southerly Section line of said Section 29 ; Thence North 89° 22' 00" West, a distance of 454 . 52 feet on said southerly Section line; Thence North 00° S6' 00" East, a distance of 487 . 34 feet; Thence North 890 43 ' 44" West, a distance of 774 .21 feet; Thence South 00° 16' 16" West, a distance of 21 .70 feet; Thence South 006 51' 07" West, a distance of 460.74 feet to a point on the southerly Section line of said Section 29; Thence North 89 ° 22' 00" West, a distance of 93.49 feet on said southerly Section line to the POINT OF BEGINNING . The above described parcel contains 71.28 acres more or less. PREPARED BY: �yp,1, LAIV'D The Land Group, Inc. / gti� ��� T F0 G�y� w 7880 2 3 . 2-2023 0 ✓oo T�Tf or AD��� James R. Washburn �RC&4q WA� C 1/4 SEC . 29 CP&F #2021160791 S89022'35"E 1325,02' i - ( 7080 W MCMILLAN ROAD o COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL o n APN : SO429427800 to 71 .28 ACRESco 0 0 L O co g LP cI ( o 2 � I I S0001616"W 21 .70' N89'43'44'W 774.21 ' I — — N00*56'00"E 487.34' 7080 W MCMILLAN ROAD A S00°51 '07"W 460a74' APN : SO429438725 93.49'tt 8.61 ACRES _ 773,26' 454.52' 1321 .44'— -S.29 S.28 1V AfeafILLAN - 1 - - S89°22'00"E 2642Y .71 ' — ROAD J I I S.32 5.33 S 1 /4 SEC . 414 CP&F #2016120635 LA d SE COR SEC. 29 CP&F #2020020779 , o. 7880 : p 3 -2 2023 e of �T OF �Q E R. WA 0 500' 1000' A �mmE " B" i Horizontal Scale: l ' = 500' Ptojed No,: 121048 r :t March 2. 2023 g r ~ THE Annexation Description alb LAND Cole Valley Christian School Fe - GROUP 7080 W. McMillan Road hot' �� LL = o B . Proposed Site Plan with Phasing Plan (dated , 34 /23 6 0 23 - Revised td j' ` 9 C1 � ' All ; iMIN -6I.x ' i a i lit - - - -_ ' a EL. litl � . .� ,�v i, ! � —per CO � a I` v ' ° IMP m CID CID � n � 9W000O ,, O Gli CO � CD66Co o ii�JJ 00 . : a -- WWWfiDOD Q1Wmincom aD O� W �D C1`7 - ors :'s\ it I x at t �r3jei is 1 , it = t : ? a a_ ` jl � y ;lieae +3;ti isa gill � rat PH H � 7 !; 3 ff to I I V ! ta1 I MoeDe�ie opmeulPLw hook � • i C. Landscape Plan (dated: 3/ 143 6 30 3 - Revised fg 1 ' PAN iA j i � ANN AN _ ® ANN � � I � r I � n I A 1 A 1 9 - ANN 4 - - j l ' AN. A. '1 E , I ' - Ir1tI 1[f f , IL — 11 -MY Il— � — —__ — _ - - Y NAN .. P A Alrin ', � i � � • a 'S5 ft� IFS l�l � ) � -- I - �o 1I. doF r ova N \ . ANN t� cn • , op �I Pi as ; - ooa>Do�o � ' °�III , yWWI moon I , � 3e — - - - :- , , f si 1 , ( ifs a S s E NN �I I 9 sij a � $ � �54 1 � 1 tl NO t e Cele Volley Chfisfim Schools I ' I I I 3 I f o i I I ! ��j l Site Iktelopmenl Plan 0 I t : � 14' I ' li I II ICI -� - - - - � '. , i = � i I IA. e � � { l �p ''•:4 I ± .>: ::: : : = . _tp X; 1 r -rA` 11 rr A I A 11 1� i1 < . 1j � r<r , If . ,: 1 o 1 Il IAirr ' I ( , - MIAMI A Ale A 4 of tj . 1 �4 I / � A A 1 1} '. t,� d I� ® . '.I T�__ , `` A. _ 1 S ` s III A. Ab ima =-PAFAAA - - - - - j [ { CO L JA A Ie . 1 . , pro I 1 1 ' III .Id . . . e . . . _ . . . . : . � 11 I^ 3� SFAA AM II� �S IA A FPO ; ; eeetataeeteetelaeat j � HIM , G`Mil . : ° • : 911 Ron � ; I if ,t t Ion PARAFFIN IJJJ_I I I I ll- I I I I �Ip, � I°ts,s ItLl�d��i� Ell i I I I le S oP�Cole Valley Christi Schools tt A 1 7 ` ! Site Deel tPlanan "° VA �! P MA— � I I I I i 00 CIS it at It i OV r _ 41 -=- 1 is ;� ,a . - � _— : L' • . -- - ' ` � - -, - 'i11 - - - LAF _ 1 > III rOm 9 was co lap (M I; - - ! _ FC ,le t - —. - McMILLAN100 t Er Opp [ ,q u P , U ,[ N 1[ ' •� � , [ [ `?�Slp' g C.'; EL311g � � tle � tl _ i l tt-[Et tEEttE-t [tttl t [ � It} �Sr� 1 1 1 . I :.I11 ; IEl.Lsli ONE pit I it z ColeVdley Christun ScLools I � i I I I II II 'n % _. r l r l I SiteDeivio tPhn i emu' sd 0 4 Y, AFT Now t+ ! D . Building Elevations 4 Y t t k 11N Et14'AtIUly th ERA11 Z Ir m b - - (/) 1b I LL U, I !IIi ibcN.11, ., .1. : L LOAN IM<t M .Nnr. EN+FKti!s Q Qa J ICi1 - _ iKiyy U 9 s Ib wTtI EI EYAMP,C4J - ujm4r'4CjNu ! rn]NscHox Emrko" I V Y j II�II I . COLE VALUY 'CH8 IAN Y - Ild w _ 2 -� NCIYCIIfF7! ¢I.Y� p/11ftN� � M F Y z • f M:iA11ijCYA7kYI ifKAK4 � F U CL H ra WO LU Wit LV C5 It LLI � b liTlH fl'S'FI:JV3 r Y r r, y �Qf�• i fZl L - FA.5T Ct6Y,L71LW G�fPN. r44tltli, I 9 �a LL � U 3 � 2� wa; nr:wmi�.cNu i U U i I w t• h t Y it y � 11 > _ 1 W � 1 FF`t SCN'Si1 ! E1Ef�kf4F2Y ETifXN'M.£ � f,it� �' HrsHS H�'1. ��ifFi�!.r_ a � 91 _ J _ Q V f P U 3 � AERIAL NFAXEf HE448040 I ENTHAH=E. IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS Prior to the City Council hearing, additional site development details (i.e. landscaping, fencing, signage, public art, etc.) shall be submitted to the Planning Division that demonstrate compliance with the "modern rural' design theme in the Fields Sub-Area Plan. Final approval of the property boundary adjustment application by Ada County Development Services shall be obtained prior to City Council approval of the Annexation Ordinance. Fr4oir to City Council approval of the Development Agreement, an amended phasing plait s be submitted that includes the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave. and Ersatz Plaee Road to the northern propert-y boundary and detaebed sidewalkshnulti use pathways along MeAfillan ., . Done A. PLANNING DIVISION 1 . Annexation & Zoning 1 . 1 A Development Agreement (DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently, a fee of $303 . 00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions : a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the site plan, landscape plan, phasing plan and conceptual building elevations included in Section VHl and the provisions contained herein. b. Future development of this site shall incorporate design elements consistent with the "modern rural" design theme outlined in the Fields Sub-Area Plan as discussed in Section V and proposed with this application. ote: City Council approved the Applicant 's request to construct black coated chain-link fencing along the west, north and east property boundaries: the Applicant is not required to construct the split rail fence along McMillan Rd. ifthev choose not to. ) c. The McMillan Road improvements and the extension of Owyhee Storm Ave. and Ersatz Rd. &MIbe e „ s+,., . +oa the 441 lengthfthe subjeet pfepeFty to the northern boundary of ------------- the parcel shall be completed with the fist second phase of development at the width/street section required by the Ada County Highway District, prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the high school building. d. All detached sidewalks,.-arid multi-use pathways and street buffers along public streets (i . e . McMillan Rd. , Owyhee Storm Ave . and Ersatz Rd.) shall be constructed b the Applicant, unless already constructed b Iy TD, wit +,, e l: ,...+ ,.,� o ao. ,e, ,.,,,, e„+prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the high school building. e. Compliance with the City noise ordinance (MCC 6-3- is required. f. If the 23 .4-acre portion of the site (5 -acre portion at southeast corner and 18 .4-acre portion at the north end) develops in the future with a use(s) other than an education institution, an amendment to the Development Agreement is required to include an updated development plan. g. Direct access via W. McMillan Rd. is prohibited. 2. Conditional Use Permit 2 . 1 Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 114-344 — Education Institution, is required. 2 . 2 Compliance with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11 -2A-6 for the R4 zoning district is required with the exception of building height. Education facilities are allowed a maximum building height of 50 feet as set forth in UDC 11-2A -3E. 3 . 2 . 3 The site/landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be revised as follows : a. Depict a minimum 25 -foot wide street buffer along W. McMillan Rd. and a minimum 20 - foot wide street buffer along Owyhee Storm Ave. , measured fiom back of curb . b . Depict landscaping within street buffers in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11 -3B- 7C. 3, which requires a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover among other specifications . Where the buffer is encumbered by an easement, the buffer area shall include a minimum S foot wide area for planting shrubs and trees outside of the easement as set forth in UDC 11 -3B- 7C. 1 b. c. Depict the 30400t wide easement for the Creason Lateral. d. Depict a 10400t wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway within the required street buffers along Owyhee Storm Ave. and W . McMillan Rd. 2 .4 All waterways on the subject property shall be piped or otherwise covered unless improved as a water amenity of linear open space as set forth in UDC 11 -3A-6. 2 . 5 A 14400t wide public use easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the 10400t wide multi-use pathway along Owyhee Storm Ave. if the pathway is outside of the right-of-way. 2. 6 The applicant shall provide written documentation that the facility meets the minimum site area guidelines as established by the Idaho State Department of Education per UDC I14-344G with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 2 . 7 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted for the proposed use that complies with all UDC conditions and the provisions contained herein. 2 . 8 The future temporary portable classrooms shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 114- 3-14F. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted for approval of the portable classrooms . These structures are not subject to design review. Temporary portable classrooms that do not meet the aforementioned standards shall require a conditional use permit but shall not be subject to design review. 2. 9 A Design Review application shall be submitted for the proposed structures that complies with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual . Design elements should be incorporated in the site consistent with the "modern rural" design theme outlined in the Fields Sub-Area Plan as discussed in Section V. B . 2 . 10 The conditional use permit is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11 -5B-6. A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11 -5B -6F. B . PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1 . Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1 . 1 At the applicant' s request the City will allow a temporary lift station for the sports field concession stand and restrooms subject to the following requirements : • The lift station is only for the sports fields concession & restrooms. No other flows can be added to it in the future. No connections from neighboring properties will be allowed. The only flow for the lift station must be from the school property. It must be taken offline as part of the construction of the school. It cannot be done separately at a later date. • The discharge line must discharge to a manhole that has an H2S liner. The manhole must be vented above the surround houses . One suggestion is to run a vent up a telephone pole or similar. The force main discharge line must connect perpendicular to the manhole and not run parallel in the ROW. A force main cannot run along the road. The lift station itself (which will most likely be a little grinder pump) will not require a QLPE. It will be private infrastructure and DEQ only reviews public infrastructure. It will be more of a plumbing code issue. However, the discharge configuration does need to be reviewed by the City. This includes the manhole and ventilation process . This could be submitted with the plans for the development to the east to which this will discharge. We would review and provide comments for that. 2. General Conditions of Approval 2 . 1 Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub -grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications . 2 .2 Per Meridian City Code (MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8 -6-5 . 2 . 3 The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants) . The easement widths shall be 20 -feet wide for a single utility, or 304eet wide for two . Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81 /2" x 11 " map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD . 2 .4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized n-rigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (UDC 11 -313 -6) . The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 2. 5 Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 2 . 6 All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11 -3A-6 . In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation . 2 . 7 Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources . The Developer' s Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so, how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 2 . 8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9 . 14 and 9 4 8 . Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211 . 2 . 9 All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures . 2 . 10 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2 . 11 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act, 2 . 12 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers . 2 . 13 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2 . 14 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material . 2 . 15 The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 34eet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1400t above. 2 . 16 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans . This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2 . 17 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards . These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2 . 18 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans . Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6 -5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www. meridiancity. oMIpublic works. aspx?id=272 . 2 . 19 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125% of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website . Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211 . 2 .20 The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20% of the total construction cost for all completed sewer, water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years . This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211 . C . FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink. meridianci( . org/WebLink/DocView. aspx?id=292608&dbid=0&repo =MeridianC D. PARK' S DEPARTMENT https://weblink. meridiancit�org/WebLink/Doc View. gWx ?id=292614&dbid=0&repo =MeridianC E. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT (NMID) https:llweblink. meridiancit . corkIWebLinkIDocView. aspx?id=294319&dbid= 0&repo =MeridianC F. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO (COMPASS) https://weblink. meridiancity. org/WebLink/DocView. aspx?id=294389&dbid= 0&repo =MeridianC i G. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https://weblink. meridianciV. org/WebLinklDocView. gWx?id=293650&dbid=0&repo =MeridianC i� H. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (ITD) TIS Acceptance : https://weblink. meridiancit . 00rg/WebLink/DocView. aspx?id=292597&dbid=0&repo =MeridianC i I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT (ACHD) TIS Acceptance : https:llweblink. meridiancit y�org/WebLinkIDocView. gWx?id=292599&dbid= 0&repo =MeridianC it Staff report: hitps://weblink. meridiancity. org/WebLink/DocView. aspx?id=300166&dbid=0&repo =MeridianC X. FINDINGS A. Annexation (UDC 11 -511-3E) 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; The City Council finds the Applicant 's request to annex the subject property with the recommended R4 zoning district for the development of a private education institution on the site is consistent with the MDR and school designations on the FLUM in the Comprehensive Plan . 2 . The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds the map amendment to the recommended R-8 zoning district and associated development is consistent with the regulations outlined for the district. 3 . The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed use should be compatible with adjacent existing and future residential uses in the vicinity. 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 The City Council finds City water service is available to be extended to this development; however, City sewer service will not be available until the Can-Ada lift station project has been completed toward the end of fiscal year 2025. The provision of a school in this area will assist in providing for the education needs of the community in this area of the City. 5 . The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. The City Council finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the city. B. Conditional Use (UDC 11-513-6) Findings : The commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following. 1 . That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The City Council finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all dimensional and development regulations of the recommended R-8 zoning district. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title . The City Council finds the proposed education institution will be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with applicable UDC standards with the conditions noted in Section VIII of this report. I 3 . That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood, with the existing and intended character of the vicinity and will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds the proposed use will not adversely affect other properties in the vicinity if it complies with the conditions in Section VIII of this report. 5 . That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal , water, and sewer. The City Council finds the proposed use will be served by essential public facilities and services as required once the City 's Can Ada lift station project is completed. 6 . That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The City Council finds the proposed use will not create additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7 . That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes , materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors . The City Council finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by the reasons noted above. 8 . That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. (Ord. 05 - 1170, 8-30 -2005 , eff. 945- 2005) The City Council finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9 . Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use : a. That the proposed nonconforming use does not encourage or set a precedent for additional nonconforming uses within the area; and, This finding is not applicable. b . That the proposed nonconfol ing use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties . This finding is not applicable. ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES : 1 . City of Meridian 2 . Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc., Owner/Developer THIS ADDENrn TM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("ADDENDUM") is made and entered into this day of . �VCr ' � , 2024) by and between City of Meridian , a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho ("CI1 i ), w„use address is 33 E . Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 and Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. ("OWNER/DEVELOPER"), whose address is 200 E. Carlton Avenue, Meridian , ID, ! 83642 . I RECITALS A . OWNER/DEVELOPER submitted an application for a Modification to the existing Development Agreement concerning Cole Valley Christian School (1-1-2023 -0011 ) ("Development Agreement"). The Meridian City Council approved said application with Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as in the attached Exhibit "A . " B . CITY and OWNER/DEVELOPER now desire to amend said Development Agreement, which terms have been approved by the Meridian City Council in accordance with Idaho Code Section 67 - 6511A . NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows : 1 . OWNER/DEVELOPER shall be bound by the terms of the Development Agreement except as amended as follows : That Section 6 of said Development Agreement shall be replaced in its entirety with the following : 6 . APPROVAL PERIOD : This Agreement must be fully executed within six (6) months after the date of the Findings ("Approval Period") or it shall be null and void. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City may, in its sole discretion, enlarge the Approval Period ("Enlarged Approval Period") in accord with the UDC , in which case this Agreement must be fully executed within the Enlarged Approval Period or it shall be null and void . MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL (H-20234011 ) (H-2024-0002) i i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this ADDENDUM and made it effective as hereinabove provided. OWNER/DEVELOPER: Cole Valley Christian Schools,Inc. za, By: STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Ada ) On thi day of 2024,before me,the undersi ed,a Nota Public in and for said State,personally appeared Y1 , known or identified to me to be the �� of Cole Valley Christian Schools,Inc.and the person who signed above and acknowledged to me that they the same. ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above ° Fotary BROOK EPLER c•State of Idaho `,�/4 ber20213095 Notary Publlc r1pires Jul 7,2027 My Commission Expires: i I ' CITY OF MERIDIAN ATTEST: By. :L c IFAL Mayor Robert E. imis 3-26-2024 Chris Johnson, jityCler "` -26-2024 I STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) 26th March On this day of ,2024,before me,a Notary Public,personally appeared Robert E.Simison and Chris Johnson,known or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk,respectively,of the City of Meridian,who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City,and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for Idaho g T" C ENE WAY My Commission Expires: `� _28-2028 COMMISSION No. 67390 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF IDAHO MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT—COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL(H-2023-0011) (H-2024-0002) CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW wl IDIAN'^' AND DECISION & ORDER 1 ,m, n H O In the Matter of the Request for a Six (6) Month Time Extension for the Property Owner to Sign and Return the Development Agreement to the City for Cole Valley Christian School (H-2023 - 0011), by LKV Architects. Case No(s) . H-2024-0002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 26, 2024 (Findings on March 26, 2024) A. Findings of Fact 1 . Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26 , 2024, incorporated by reference) 2 . Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024, incorporated by reference) 3 . Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26 , 2024, incorporated by reference) 4 . Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024, incorporated by reference) B . Conclusions of Law 1 . The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975 ," codified at Chapter 65 , Title 67, Idaho Code (I. C . § 67-6503) . 2 . The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified as . Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning snaps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted December 17, 2019, Resolution No. 19-2179 and Maps . 3 . The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11 -5A. 4 . Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5 . It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6 . That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA H-2024-0002 - 1 - 7 . That this approval is subject to the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024, incorporated by reference . The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council ' s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11 -5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1 . The applicant' s request for 6-month time extension to sign and return the development agreement to the City is hereby approved in accord with the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024, attached as Exhibit A. D . Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Development Agreement Duration The city and/or an applicant may request a development agreement or a modification to a development agreement consistent with Idaho Code section 67 -6511A . The development agreement may be initiated by the city or applicant as part of a request for annexation and/or rezone at any time prior to the adoption of findings for such request. A development agreement may be modified by the city or an affected party of the development agreement. Decision on the development agreement modification is made by the city council in accord with this chapter. When approved, said development agreement shall be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the city within six (6) months of the city council granting the modification . A modification to the development agreement may be initiated prior to signature of the agreement by all parties and/or may be requested to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed and returned to the city if filed prior to the end of the six (6) month approval period. E. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-652 1 ( 1 ) (d), if this final decision concerns a matter enumerated in Idaho Code § 67-6521 ( 1 )(a), an affected person aggrieved by this final decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after all remedies have been exhausted, including requesting reconsideration of this final decision as provided by Meridian City Code § 1 -740, seek judicial review of this final decision as provided by chapter 52, title 67 , Idaho Code. This notice is provided as a courtesy; the City of Meridian does not admit by this notice that this decision is subject to judicial review under LLUPA. F . Notice of Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis Pursuant to Idaho Code § § 67 -6521 ( 1 ) (d) and 674003 , an owner of private property that is the subject of a final decision may submit a written request with the Meridian City Clerk for a regulatory takings analysis . G. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 26, 2024 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA H-2024-0002 - 2 - By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 26th day of March 2024 . COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOE BORTON VOTED COUNCIL VICE PRESIDENT LIZ STRADER VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER DOUG TAYLOR VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER LUKE CAVENER VOTED AYE COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN OVERTON VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER ANNE LITTLE ROBERTS VOTED AYE MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayor Ifo Simis Un Attest: ag4dMA4'br SP.11. Chris Johnso City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Community Development Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. 3-26M202A By; Dated: City Clerk' s Office i I FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER FOR COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL MDA 11-2024-0002 - 3 - EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT fERIDIAN�, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1 D A H t) HEARING March 26, 2024 DATE : ' - ip a TO : ri Council&Mayor City y � ILL FROM : Sonya Allen, Associate Planner -- 1y. ; i . : rj 208 - 884 -5533 ..'; ; - SUBJECT : H-2024-0002 +1 , ' �� _ L . Cole Valley Christian School — MDALL � . �J '•. �j _ _ 1 LOCATION: 7080 W. McMillan Rd. , in the NE '/a of Section 29, Township 4N, , Range 1 W. (Parcel #SO429427800) • - �� f r . . r ' : Illy N At h � MM I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request for a 6 -month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement required with H-2023 -0011 for Cole Valley Christian School. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details IIIIN Acreage 71 . 28 -acre Future Land Use Designation Medium Density Residenital (MDR) with a school designation Existing Land Use Agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Private education institution for pre-K through 12th grades Current Zoning RUT in Ada County Proposed Zoning R- 15 (Medium-High Density Residential) Physical Features (waterways, None hazards, flood plain , hillside) Neighborhood meeting date 1 / 17/24 History (previous approvals) ROS #2713 ( 1993) and ROS # 14284 (2024) Pagel I III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Amber Van Ocker, LKV Architects — 2400 E . Riverwalk, Boise, ID 83706 B . Owner: Cole Valley Christian Schools — 200 E: Carlton Ave. , Meridian, ID 83642 C . Representative : Same as Applicant IV. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 3/ 10/24 Radius notification mailed to 3/ l /24 property owners within 300 feet Public hearing notice sign posted 3/ 13/24 on site Nextdoor posting 3/4/24 V. STAFF ANALYSIS The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order associated with annexation (11-2023 - 0011 ) of the subject property were approved by City Council on July 25 , 2023 . The UDC (11 -5B.3F) requires the Development Agreement (DA) associated with the annexation to be signed by the property owner(s) and returned to the City within six (6) months of the City Council granting the annexation. A modification to the DA may be initiated prior to the end of the six (6) month period to extend the time allowed for the agreement to be signed. The Applicant submitted the subject request for a 6-month time extension for the property owner to sign the development agreement prior to the end of the six (6) months as required. The reason for the delay in signing the agreement is that a provision of the annexation required the Applicant to obtain final approval of the property boundary adjustment (Project #202300414-PBA) from Ada County prior to City Council approval of the Annexation Ordinance. The property boundary adjustment was approved by Ada County on March 7 , 2024 (ROS # 14284) and the DA has been signed by the property owner and returned to the City. City Council approval of the subject modification for a time extension is needed in order for City Council to approve the associated DA (and addendum for a time extension) and the annexation ordinance. VI. DECISION A. Staff. Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement to extend the period of time in which the DA can be signed and returned to the City for six (6) months . Page 2 w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Kilgore (H-2023-0063) by Alexi Kilgore, located at 1105 N. Meridian Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0063 A. Request: Rezone 0.16 acres of land from the R-4 zoning district to the 0-T zoning district for the purpose of converting the existing home into a hair salon. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: March 26, 2024 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 10 PROJECT NAME: Kilgore (H-2023-0063) by Alexi Kilgore 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 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I D A H O HEARING March 26,2024 Legend r DATE: 01 Project Location ; - i��so�. vE z � TO: Mayor&City Council FROM: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner Z.w` _ . 208-884-5533 w CARLTON" k A)&j I SUBJECT: Kilgore RZ f H-2023-0063 If Z -. ESTATE AVE_ LOCATION: 1105 N Meridian Road HUnter•�pteral E'R`IN-E 1W I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Request to rezone 0.34 acres of land from the R-4 zoning district to the O-T zoning district for the purpose of converting the existing home into a hair salon. A. Project Summary Description Details I Page Acreage Rezone-0.34 of an acre Future Land Use Designation Old Town Existing Land Use(s) Single-family residential Proposed Land Use(s) Professional Service—Hair Salon Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1 lot _ Phasing Plan(#of phases) NA Physical Features(waterways, No unique physical features hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 11/09/2023 attendees: History(previous approvals) None Pagel B. Community Metrics Description Details Page Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Yes • Requires ACHD Commission No Action(yes/no) Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Access occurs from N.Meridian Road via an alleyway off o Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) W.Washington Street. Carlton Avenue(located to the south of this site),is an eastbound one-way street that exits to Meridian Road. Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross ' Access Existing Road Network Meridian Road is improved with 5-travel lanes,vertical curb, gutter,and 7-foot wide sidewalk abutting the site. Carlton Avenue,an eastbound one-way street,is improved with 33- feet of pavement,vertical curb,and no sidewalk abutting the site. The existing 16-foot wide one-way alley running north/south in between Carlton Avenue and Washington Street is unimproved. Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ There is an existing 7-foot wide sidewalk along Meridian Buffers Road and existing landscape buffer to remain. Proposed Road Improvements No road improvements are required. Fire Service No comments Police Service No comments Wastewater • Comments • No changes to public sewer infrastructure shown in records.Any changes need to be approved by public works. Water Distance to Water Services • No changes to public water infrastructure shown in records.Any changes need to be approved by public works. • Distance to Service—Water available at site • Pressure Zone—2 • Estimated ERU—See Application • Water Quality Concerns—None • Project Consistent with Master Plan—Yes Page 2 C. Project Area Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend M0 L"ond 01 Y Project Location pr xject 6oCatiown N 5T EA5H4LGXGH AVE1 ClvTU Ord x � t � W CARLLTT'ON E CARL-MA AYE_ W CAR H F AVE Old Town L 0 W C 4 i # � z ESTATE AVE � r V L X �.��t f E-P IN-E-A' EIII y EX PIP# Ej A1;E Zoning Map Planned Development Map 07 Legend - I -• 0 Legend P— 0 Project Location Project LoCntlon.-T E WASHINGTQN JIVE Z ter+ _ E WASHINGTON AYE R-15 *_ City LIM7 S C-C Plonned Pcrcels , -�� -c � LTON E CARLION AVE W CARLT�ON � E CARLTON AVE- — E 4 - AVE i W -LL] I I F1 E STATE AVE' E STATE AVr; w O i n IR-� • � rx� �toferafilun�eri �er�a EMI KE WME I E-P'IH:EAV'E_ 9 Page 3 II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Alexis Kilgore,Hair by Lexie Kilgore— 1105 N.Meridian Road,Meridian,ID 83634 B. Owner: Same as above III. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper Notification 1/30/2024 3/10/2024 Radius notification mailed to 3/l/2024 properties within 500 feet 1/26/2024 Sign Posting 2/2/2024 3/14/2024 Nextdoor posting 1/29/2024 3/4/2024 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(HTTPS://WWW.MERIDIANCITY.ORGICOMPPLAl�: Land Use: This property is designated Old Town(O-T) on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). This designation includes the historic downtown and the true community center. The boundary of the Old Town district predominantly follows Meridian's historic plat boundaries. In several areas, both sides of a street were incorporated into the boundary to encourage similar uses and complimentary design of the facing houses and buildings. Sample uses include offices,retail and lodging,theatres,restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. A variety of residential uses are also envisioned and could include reuse of existing buildings,new construction of multi-family residential over ground floor retail or office uses. Proposed Use: The Applicant proposes to develop the site with a personal service,Hair by Lexie Kilgore,which will feature four(4) stations. The proposed changes to the interior of the building will include updates to the bathroom, floors, and the addition of sinks. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES(https://www.meridiancity.or /ccoompplan): 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): • "Support a compatible mix of land uses Downtown that activate the area during day and night." (2.09.02G). Introducing a personal service, such as a hair salon, into the Downtown area presents an opportunity for increased foot traffic and commerce to occur within a desired location during the day and early evening. This addition contributes to the overall appeal and character of Downtown Meridian. The proposed operational hours are from Tuesday to Saturday, 10:00 am to 6:00 pm. This new commercial use should be a welcome addition to the other uses in the surrounding area. • "Support owners of historic buildings in their efforts to restore and/or preserve their properties. (5.02.01B). Permitting the establishment ofpersonal services in a historical downtown home has the potential to share knowledge and history regarding both Meridian and the specific house. This, in turn, is likely to boost the economic impact of more foot traffic, leading to the growth of other historical sites in the downtown area. Page 4 • Work with Ada County Highway District(ACHD)to identify gaps in the sidewalk system and pursue sidewalk construction for existing substandard streets.(6.01.01I) The intention is to initiate andpursue sidewalk construction with development projects on streets that currently fall below the established standards. The construction of a 5-foot wide sidewalk connection along W. Carlton Avenue by the Applicant is intended to enhance pedestrian infrastructure, ensuring safer and more accessible walkways in the community, especially for the children walking to the adjacent elementary school. Additionally,provides convenient pedestrian access from the nearby residential areas to the proposed business. V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE UD The proposed use,personal service for a hair salon is listed as a principally permitted use in the O-T (Old Town)zoning district per UDC Table 11-2C-2.Compliance with the standards listed in UDC I I- 2D-3 and 11-2D-4 is required. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. Rezone(RZ): The Applicant is requesting to rezone 0.34 acres of land from R-4 to O-T to operate a personal service for a hair salon on the subject property. A legal description and exhibit map for the rezone area is included in Section VIII.A. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. Personal services-The use of a site for the provision of individualized services generally related to personal needs. Personal service uses include,but are not limited to,beauty services such as salons,hair,nail and skin care, spa, and barbers; fitness training and instruction; locksmiths; and repairs such as footwear and leather goods, and watches,are listed as a principal permitted use in the O-T (Old Town)zoning district per UDC Table 11-2C-2. The proposed 1,193-square-foot hair salon will be located in the downtown area within the Meridian Urban Renewal District. The building was built in 1948 and is slated for further improvements to meet city code requirements and enhance the customer experience. The rear porch will be expanded to include an ADA ramp, and the Applicant will be required to pave the alley adjacent to the property. Additionally, 5 parking stalls are proposed to be paved adjacent to the alley. The proposed hours of operation would be from Tuesday to Saturday, 10:00 am to 6:00 pm. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with a rezone pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. Due to the size of the development,Staff believes a DA should not be required. Dimensional Standards(UDC11-2): The existing home meets all dimensional standards. Access(UDC 11-3A-3): Access is provided via an alleyway to the north from W. Washington Street. The public street to the south of this property,W. Carlton Avenue,operates as a one-way only leading eastward towards N. Meridian Road. Parking(UDC 11-3C): The existing home has unpaved parking off of the alleyway,with space for up to 5 parking stalls. There is currently no off-street parking on this site. The Applicant is required to pave both the alley and the 5 proposed parking stalls with the development of the site upon submittal of a future Certificate of Zoning Compliance Application. Wheel restraints should be added to prevent overhanging beyond the designated parking stall dimension in accordance with UDC 11-3C- Page 5 5.B(3). Additionally,ACHD recommends paving the entire width of the alley from the edge of pavement from Carlton Avenue to the site's northern property line and providing 20 feet of back- up area from any parking The alley should be signed with "No Parking"signs. Old-Town is classified as a Traditional Neighborhood zoning district and no off-street parking is required for a lawfully existing structure unless an addition occurs (UDC 11-3C-6B). No additions are proposed with this project except for expanding the rear entry area. The Applicant is providing 5 parking stalls off the alley which meets the required number of off-street parking spaces (2 spaces required)per UDC 11-3C-6B.3for the Traditional Neighborhood district. A minimum of one (1)bicycle parking space is required to be provided based on one(1) space for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. The site plan does not include bicycle racks. The Applicant should revise the plans and include one(1) bicycle rack and submit a detail of the bicycle rack with the CZC submittal. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-1 : There is an existing 7-foot wide attached sidewalk on N. Meridian Road along the existing property frontage. Staff does not recommend any additional changes to the frontage improvements. The Applicant is proposing installation of a 4-foot wide sidewalk along the southern boundary of the site, extending from the parking stalls to the main entrance. All sidewalks around buildings and serving public street shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in width in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 17. Both ACHD and Staff recommend that the Applicant construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk abutting the site along W. Carlton Avenue connecting to the sidewalk along N. Meridian Road. Additionally,Staff recommends that the Applicant remove the 4-foot sidewalk proposed on the south side of the property boundary and add a 5-foot sidewalk in front of the entire parking area. Staff strongly encourages the Applicant to include a parkway along W. Carlton Avenue with trees,bushes,lawn, or other vegetative cover in accordance with UDC H- 3B-7.C. 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 sale displays, vending machines, or temporary structures. Staff recommends that the Applicant connect the proposed sidewalk at the main entrance of the building to the required sidewalk to be installed along W. Carlton Avenue. This may require the removal of a section of the fencing on the south side of the property(refer to redline on site plan below). I I F c�N 1 ..A Page 6 Landscaping(UDC 11- : The Applicant is not proposing any additional landscaping to be added to the site with this project. For additions less than twenty-five (25)percent of the existing structure or developed area,no additional landscaping shall be required except for buffers to adjacent residential uses in accordance with UDC 11-3B-2D(1). As mention above,Staffstrongly encourages the Applicant to include a parkway along W. Carlton Avenue with trees, bushes, lawn, or other vegetative cover in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7.C. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6,11-3A-7)• The Applicant intends to remove the existing fencing on the west side of the property adjacent to the stalls. As mentioned above, a portion of the fencing on the south side of the property should be removed to accommodate for the pedestrian walkway to the main entrance of the building. The existing fencing surrounding a small patio in the front yard does comply with UDC code requirements for fencing, as the maximum height for a front yard fence is 3-feet for closed vision fences or 4-feet for open vision fences.No additional fencing is proposed. Staff recommends that the Applicant remove the existing fencing surrounding the front yard patio with fencing that complies with the UDC Code(refer to picture below). Outdoor Lighting(UDC 11-3A-11): All outdoor lighting is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-11C. Building Elevations: Conceptual building elevations and perspectives were submitted for the existing structure as shown in Section IX.D. The building consists of existing siding, facia trim, asphalt roof shingles and new wood deck with railing and ADA ramp. As stated above in this report, the only new additions to the structure is the rear entry. The proposed elevations are not approved with this application and will be reviewed with the Design Review application for consistency with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual.Full compliance with the ASM is not required based on the limited scope of work associated with this project. Certificate of Zoning Compliance(UDC 11-5B-1): A Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC)is required to be submitted for the proposed use and site changes prior to submittal of a building permit application to ensure compliance with UDC standards and staff comments listed in Section IX. Page 7 VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone from R-4 to O-T per the Comments in Section IX and the Findings in Section X of this report. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on February 15, 2023. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Rezone request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Reed Kilgore b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. Key issues)of discussion by Commission. a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s) for City Council: a. None Page 8 VIIL EXHIBITS A. Rezoning Legal Description and Exhibit Map HMH engineering Parcel Description Re-Zone Legal Description Residential to Old Town A portion of Lot 1,Block 1 of Mday`s Second Addition according to the official plot thereof filed in Plats at Page 594,Ada County Records,sltvnie in rho northeast quarter of sewco 12,Township 3 North, Range 1 West Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada Cpun ty,Idaho,and more particularly described as foffows: BEGINNING at the southeast co rner of Aliday'5 Second.4dditiptr according to the officiof plat thereof fifedin Plats at?age 594,Ada County Records,from which then a rtheast corner of Section 12 bears North Oo°0o'oo"East,1984,8o feet t. Thence along the southerly line of said Addition,North 89°50'fl0"West,158.00 Net to the center line of an Alley in Block 1 of Way's Second Addition according to the official plat thereof filed in Plats at Page 594,Ada County Records; Thence along5aid center line,North 90'04'00"East,94,00feet to a polot of the prolongation of the northerly line of Lot 1,Block 1 of said Addition, Thence along said In rolo ngat ionr South 89.50`00"East,158-00 Feet to a point of the prolongation of the northerly line of Lot 1,Block 1 of Nidoy5 Second Addition according to the offiriaf plat thereof fifed in Pfots at Poge 594,Arlo County Records,and the easterly line of said Addition,and the northeast quarter of Section 12; Thence along the said line,South 0T00'00"East,94.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 14,852 square feet or 0.341 acres,more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION. O i.F Prepared by: l Travis L.Krupp,131-5 . Regional Survey Manager Of 1LX:rk r 680 S.Progress Ave.,Suite 929*Meridian,Idaho 83542•Tel:208-342-7957+Web:hmh-Ilc.com t:quol Opportunity Employer Page 9 1 6 1 7 a 30 50 ! I Scale in Feet +Lot 2, Black 1. Parcel No, Oq RG661001� rn cr) c 1$' � 89'50'00"E Lot 1,f Block 1 Parcel No. Ir, W E o 1 f" 4 tam , W. Carleton Ave. SE Car. Nid4y'S 5eccnd Add r' Paint of Beginning 2247 REFERENCES; OF Sub-division: N:do/e Second Addition This Eid�l_blt was prepared from rnformot3an of mcord only, na field eu was conducted, EXHIBIT "A" RE-ZONE SITE PLAN SITUATE IN THE NE YA OF SECTION 12. 6KS.propssAyme. B Ue2 TOWNSHIP NORTH. RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN. Meridian,ID$1642 CITY of MERIDIAN_ ADA COUNTY, IDAHO_ (208 342-7957 Page 10 B. Site Plan r.r�x_� rr.v aY_Y yd ird •�%' .ID'd ¢ o�iNc _ LlNN•LNN FEHLE 1= x Ei1f1411�IG�E- i H-V, - aw E%I'1iNG E%ISPNG WOOD FEHCf NaEE I � W CARLTON AVE (D PROPOSES STE PLAN M O5 N Meridian Rd) Page 11 C. Elevations PROPOSED e e e uL9ioee�YwTiOry �1 FRONT ELEVATION m 8 8 ❑ 8HE � 8 Y R.9 EEC ATiON j REM ELEVATION Page 12 Pictures of r Home +1f t • Aj I`- + - � fir•, Tom. 1 y� n nA e r .� . - - I + r I f ,1 Page 13 1 q �F. �r r CGa0 le,"', t IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS A. PLANNING Staff Comments: 1. The maximum number of allowable customers at the facility at one time at any given time must not exceed the maximum occupant load specified in the Fire Code. 2. Prior to building permit submittal,the Applicant shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review approval to establish the use and approval for the exterior modifications to the building. 3. The site and landscape plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall depict the following: a. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk abutting the site along W. Carlton Avenue connecting to the existing sidewalk along N. Meridian Road and construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk in front of the parking stalls. b. Connect the proposed sidewalk to the main entrance of the building(rear)to the required sidewalk to be installed along W. Carlton Avenue. Additionally,remove a section of the fencing on the south side of the property to provide access to the main entrance. c. Pave the entire width of the alley from the edge of pavement from Carlton Avenue to the site's northern property line;provide 20-feet of back-up space from any parking stall. d. Install wheel restraints in front of the 5 parking stalls in accordance with UDC 11-3C-5.B(3). e. Install"No Parking"signs along the alley. f. Remove the existing fencing surrounding the front yard patio with fencing that complies with UDC Code 11-3A-7. g. Remove the existing fencing situated on the west side of the property in front of the proposed parking stalls. h. Include a bicycle rack and a detail of the bicycle rack with the CZC submittal. i. Install"No Parking" signs along the alley. 4. Direct lot access from N. Meridian Road is prohibited. B. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT https:11weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=331488&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&c r=1 C. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT https:11web1ink.meridianciV.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=330209&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiV D. IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF ENVRONTMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=330210&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX E. ACHD https://weblink.meridianciV.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=331687&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiV Page 15 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: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment to rezone the property from the R-4 zoning district to the O-T zoning district is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the regulations outlined in the requested Old Town designation. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,and welfare; Stafffinds 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 Stafffinds 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. Subject site is already annexed so staff finds this finding nonapplicable. Page 16 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: March 26, 2024 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 11 PROJECT NAME: Farmstone Crossing Subdivision (H-2023-0045) by Bailey Engineering Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name K,4 2 Al, OdVj' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING March 26,2024 Legend DATE: aProject Location TO: Mayor&City Council 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 • 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 33.89 acres of land from RUT to the M-E(Mixed Employment)zoning district. • Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots and 1 common lot on 27.47-acres of land in the M-E zoning district for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. NOTE: This project has undergone multiple continuances to allow more time for the plans to be modified. The staff report and conditions of approval have been updated accordingly to reflect the most recent changes. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT a. Project Summary Description Details Page Acreage 33.89 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) 5 buildable lots and 1 common lot Phasing Plan(#of phases) 2 phases(plat) Number of Residential Units(type NA of units) Pagel Description Details Page Physical Features(waterways, None hazards,flood plain,hillside) Neighborhood meeting date;#of 7/06/2023 attendees: 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 fora five-lane principal arterial is"E"(1,780 vph). 'Acceptable level of service for a two-lane minor arterial is"E"(575 vph). Stub Cross access with BVA's development to the east Street/Interconnectivity/Cross Access Existing Road Network Black Cat Road&Franklin Road Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ None Buffers Proposed Road Improvements Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): • Franklin Road is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from McDermott Road to Black Cat Road with the design year in 2026 and the construction date has not been determined. • 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 5-lanes 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 Page 2 Description Details P . additional truck company will be required,This will require additional time delays as a second truck company may not be available in the City. • Water Supply Water supply for this proposed development required 4750 gallons per minute for two hours. • Other Resources Wastewater 00— • 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 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 VIILB Page 3 FRANKL-IN - ' - ' ' FRANKL-IN ��mno:J .... l_AJI.IU LVAUM i r Q ■ a Y . U • D - � v v �j�•n � ®s�•� Qp �'ra I ��" �/�'�� iii■iii ii�� ,�-.�„ � f �:.--OVERLAND -��� ONfRL-AND ,,y E' 111, 1111� �. 84,$ % 84 �� !!J . . ,��1Q,I,,.�im I��IIf, �� \■�f� \�/��� , ���`1�I���,.A�,I'�II�, ���j�\■��� \�►��I �C���*f'��� I��11��, �i��� �C���T�'��ir'ni �i■i iii �I � O ERL-AND, =■�, ��� O�/�AN,D� -� �� . i. • 1 C. Representative: Shawn Brownlee,Trilogy Development —9839 W. Cable Car Street, Suite 101, Boise,ID 83709 III.NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 10/17/2023 3/10/2024 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 500 feet 10/14/2023 3/1/2024 Applicant posted public hearing 10/20/2023 3/12/2024 notice on site Nextdoor posting 10/16/2023 3/l/2024 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. This ME-designated area is intended to develop with a mix of uses,across six(6) structures totaling 378,360 s.f.,which may include office, light industrial,along with research and development and/or distribution and light manufacturing. Buildings will range in size from 21,280 up to 185,760 square feet. The project is adjacent to Mixed Employment designated land on the east, light industrial to the west, I-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 of this area to M-E will result in the creation of primary 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) Multi-use pathway segments are proposed within this development for interconnectivity between the commercial and employment portions of the development and neighboring Page 8 developments within the area. • "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 through 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 a mix of uses which is 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. meet 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 SO 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 is proposing the installation of a historical monument for the existing silos located in the plaza near the site's entrance. The proposal involves utilizing materials from the Silo in the construction of the monument. Additionally, the Applicant plans to accompany the monument with a plaque featuring pictures of the original silo along with historical details for the public. This initiative aligns with the goals of preservation and seamlessly integrates public art into the site. • "Coordinate with the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission to recommend use, restoration, and preservation of historical structures and sites throughout Meridian." (5.02.02A) • "Stimulate private and public investment in the restoration and preservation of historic buildings, outdoor spaces, and natural historical features."(5.02.02D) Page 9 • "Support the efforts of the Historic Preservation Commission to foster preservation and conservation."(5.02.02E) • "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. The Applicant intends to proceed with one of the following options, aiming to install a historical monument for the existing silos located in the plaza area near the site's entrance. Option (1): involves careful disassembling and storage of the structure, with the intention to find an interested agency that may preserve the silo on another site. An agency would need to be identified before disassembly and prior to the commencement of the road. Alternatively, if no interested agency is identified prior to the commencement of the road construction, Option (2): entails utilizing some materials from the silo in the construction of the monument in the plaza (Lot 3, Block 1). • "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 UD 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 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 approximately 378, 360 s.£, encompassing various potential uses like office, light industrial operations,and research and development components such as distribution and light manufacturing. 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. Page 10 The proposed zoning and uses are generally consistent with the associated FLUM designations as discussed above in Section IV. B. Preliminary Plat(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 6 building lots and 1 common lot on 27.59-acres of land in the M-E zoning districts for Farmstone Crossing Subdivision. The subdivision is proposed to develop in two(2)phases as shown on the phasing plan in Section VII.C. 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. 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. Staff recommends that the Applicant preserve some elements of the historic buildings.As mentioned above, the Applicant presented their proposed plan for the existing silos to the Historic Preservation Commission on January 25, 2024 with the following: Option (1): involves careful disassembling and storage of the structure, with the intention to find an interested agency that may preserve the silo on another site. An agency would need to be identified before disassembly and prior to the commencement of the road. Alternatively, if no interested agency is identified prior to the commencement of the road construction, option (2): entails utilizing some materials from the silo in the construction of the monument(refer to Applicants narrative below). The meeting concluded with the Historic Preservation Commission expressing a preference for recommending to the Planning and Zoning Commission that both existing silos be disassembled and reassembled at a yet-to-be-determined future location. It was emphasized that the specifics of the relocation be clarified prior to disassembly, and the new site would need to be determined within a reasonable period of time. As an alternative proposal, the Commission advocates for the creation of a scale replica of the facilities on the current site. The Historic Preservation Commission wishes to review the details of the proposed monument with the initial Certificate of Zoning Compliance submittal for the site. Additionally, the Historic Preservation Commission wishes to retain the ability to provide comments on the final proposed monument presented by the Applicant. 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. Page 11 e-ACAlley Engirleering,lnc. CIVILEN51NEERINQPLANNIPN i, -AOD Thrppghopt the cot]rse of designing this project,we have worked with numerous agencies and explored options For preserving the Silo.Here are the Findings: ■ The silo is located in the an idd It of a r quircd ACHD right-of-way, thcrcforz it cannot stay in its' currcnt location. We reached out to ACHD to sec if the road could be shifted,due to the existing construction of the road on the west-the road cannot be moved(see A CFID commew). • A structural analysis was complete, and the structure is not safe(see Structural fewer), • The silo was evaluated by a moving company-they determined that it cannot be mowed without the structure fall ing apart. ✓ aW o+< orrr pnwsa!is to proceed with one of the following options and build a monument on site: l. Disassemble and stare the structure for an agency that may be interested in preserving the silo on another site. An;agency would need to be identified prior to disassembly and prior to construction of the road_ 2. In the event an interested agency cannot be found prior to construction of the road,we will use some of the materials from the Silo in the construction of the monument. The monumcnt will be placed in the Plaza of this development.In addition,we will instal I a plaque:to accompany the monument which wi 11 include pictures of the original Silo along with historical details for the public. We bclicvc this is an ideal way to memorialize the history of the Double C'rrain Silos and provide the community with a beautiful monumcnt6 We have rnct with the Historic Preservation Commission as a part of their monthly meeting and the commission is an agreement with the proposal.The commissiorn rcclurstcd to review the renderings of the monuunent once those have been prepared-the developer has agreed to do so_ rom.a The prel iminary plat has been thoughtfully designed to be consistent with the U DC. TMISAP and Pathways Master Plan_This new light industrial and office flex space development will provide employment opportunities for the area_Additionally,the plan has also been adapted to add a sma[let user providing greater synergy with the planned residential densities. l l 19 F_State StrccL�Stu.2t0 Faglc,Idaho 83616 208-93"13 Page 12 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-31 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. 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 accordance 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- 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,the Applicant shall coordinate 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 two 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 The Applicant has chosen to eliminate the curb cut aligned with the proposed subdivision to the north and has instead opted for the one closest to the intersection of Black Cat Road. Typically,Staff recommends that curb cuts align directly across roadways; however, Staff supports the offset change,given that the entrance effectively highlights the features of the proposed plaza,provided it adheres to ACHD's requirements. Additionally,the Applicant has proposed establishing a shared access on the east side of this site in collaboration with the property owner to the east, intended for future shared access. 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 1-84; and another segment runs along the west side of the site adjacent to S. Black Cat Road to the plaza on the north. The proposed pathway is intended to cross the drive aisle between Buildings 1 &2 Page 13 (refer to figure below). Staff recommends removing the loading docks from the rear of Buildings 1 & 2 to mitigate potential conflicts between pedestrians using the pathway and delivery trucks accessing that area. 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). f x•x H'°IN' v,�T roe nx !a3I Ilil «<a snEE,�EmM [� II'I I 1y{A6� IL I ,1 Li =, PLAN SHEET INDE% IL I _. n IT _ y — J —1 oo wxr,scum �ww � wP I � Ill _ - - IT I ..... _ - .._ =L ¢ a 1' Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. The landscape plan appears to comply with this standard. 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. The applicant is proposing to construct 10-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to the applicable roadways based on the design approved with the Vanguard Village project to the east. 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 sale displays,vending machines, or temporary structures in accordance with UDC 11-3A-19. The Applicant has provided a pedestrian circulation plan in Section VILE. The internal pedestrian walkways shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through the use ofpavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks;striping is not an approved material. The plans appears to comply with this standard. 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 Page 14 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). The proposed buffer dimensions appear to meet the requirements of the UDC code; however,there is a lack of a combination of planters(shrubs and rock mulch)within the buffer along Vanguard Way. The Applicant has provided fifty-two(52)trees and only thirty-four(34) are required along Vanguard Way. Staff recommends that the Applicant enhance the street buffer by reducing the number of trees and incorporating additional planters. The landscape buffer along Black Cat Road adjacent to the open drainage swale,lacks vegetation in front of the 10-foot pathway,not meeting the requirements of the UDC. The Applicant proposes a plaza area between Building#1 and Building#2,featuring benches,a pergola,landscaping,and a potential historical monument of the existing silo on the site. The Applicant should revise the landscape plan to reflect landscaping within the required buffers along Vanguard Way and Black Cat Road adjacent to the drainage swale in front of the 10 foot pathway 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). FIGURE 1 I ,o T1 T'If • x,s• Page 15 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. The landscape plan appears to comply with this standard. 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. Parking lot: Provide a five-foot wide minimum landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading, or other paved vehicular use areas, including driveways,vehicle sales areas,truck parking areas,bus parking areas, and vehicle storage areas, subject to the following exceptions: (1)This requirement may be reduced or waived at the determination of the Director where there is a shared driveway and/or recorded cross parking agreement and easement with an adjacent property. (2) S his requirement may be reduced or waived at the determination of the Director for truck maneuvering areas in industrial,mixed-employment and high-density employment districts To improve the integration of this property with the neighboring M-E zoned property to the east, Staff encourages the Applicant to consider removing the entire landscape buffer along the eastern side and coordinate the alignment of parking with the adjacent property owner. This would facilitate shared access to the east and improve integration with the eastern property. 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-157: 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-21): Utilities are required to be provided to the subdivision as required in UDC 11-3A-21. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6): 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 5-foot wrought iron fence along the west property line adjacent to the pathway and the ACHD drainage swale. The proposed fencing complies with the UDC code. 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 378,360 square feet of proposed floor space, a minimum of 757 off-street spaces are required; a total of 764 off-street parking spaces are proposed(7 additional parking spaces). Based on 764 parking spaces proposed, a minimum of 31 bicycle spaces are required to be provided; none are proposed. Bicycle parking facilities should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3C-5G Bike racks should be provided as close as possible to each building entrance totaling 31 spaces or in a designated area within Page 16 the plaza. Staff is recommending the removal of the loading docks at the rear of Building #1 and Building#2,which will create additional parking. Staff recommends that Applicant submit revised plans incorporating the aforementioned changes with the CZC Application. 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. The proposed conceptual elevations are not approved. 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. 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. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on February 15,2024.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Annexation and Preliminary Plat requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: David Bailey,Bailey Engineering b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: Blaine Johnston, President of the Meridian Historic Preservation Commission d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Stacy Hersh,Associate Planner f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony The Applicant's consideration and proposal for the monument sign is appreciated; however, it would be nice to see the historic silos preserved somehow. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. a. Retaining the Historic Silos on another property(i.e.Northeast Corner of Ten Mile& Franklin or in the middle of a roundabout). b. Questions to the Historic Preservation Commission regarding funding to move the silos to another suitable location owned by the City. c. The proposed timing for the extension of Vanguard Way and the disassembly of the dual silos to relocate them out of the right-of-way. d. Concerns with the silo being placed somewhere else in the Treasure Valley and losing its distinguished heritage as being part of Meridian. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. Commission would like to recommend City Council retain the dual silos as a historical monument somewhere within our city,preventing them from being given or sold to Page 17 another part of the Treasure Valley or discarded,and the Developer build a monument on site to commemorate the silos. Page 18 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 19 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 20 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 21 I Point of 1 f4 L1 Beginning 589'14'431 127285' Cw 1 f15 5.16 5.15 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 5a9'14'43"E 50.00' iZ ,x� I L2 N89'12'59"W 150.09' OF 1 ► L3 N45'5O'37"E 30.09' MCi41 L4 NOO'SQ'37"E 60.D4' 5.16 5-15 L5 N48'41'47'W 79-14' 5eole: 1`� OO' &21 5.22 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 22 C. Preliminary Plat&Phasing Plan PRELIIII.NARY PLAT FOR g NI I �+ FARNtiTI]W.f.A()F:'INf.SIIAI]ISTCI(1N 3 tll �sfi T:'.CIIECTW w r., ,,,Eo nvuw we _ 6UILR I I I llll',i L aw F� f T a7,9c 3 Jf I 27,310 - -�i I. - = _- --. - _ _ 7- - � PLaly SHEET IFioEx I Ill wPo w rz n F Y �c l L3., _ PHASE 2 _ IL w _ y f o Page 23 D. Landscape Plan Rendering e` 31.810 0 z tuen df m '"S neeoe�<,e m BUILDING 6 ses.7aosl � �- FARMSTONE GROSSING SUBDIVISION "° ' wu,° PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN, IDE°°> o.�. Page 24 E. Pedestrian Circulation Plan PREL➢INARY PLAT FOR ' �I FARMSTONF.('R(1FCINf.RIIAI]ISTCI(1N W 1. � f' �.z 71, 'ram •_ I � f � FL4ZA PLAN LHEET I\UEX ram^ L 'FVILU i. IL - 53 20U:sf . ME, _ PHASE 2 L c� €. ; tir s J g iui a i.... =m:es.. - �_.__. .. ... - .. ..... w wPl Page 25 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 26 + � a 1 �■� 1 t•■�1� LOG• F _ � ■�lN�1l�Ir likkl �P OGO •' ui �•�� �'��� t=. �_ ace. Page 28 ae urbia I • ' . . i Page 29 II. 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. Prior to the Council hearing,the Applicant shall provide elevations for Building#1 and Building#2 incorporating a more traditional office design to complement the plaza area. Additionally,the Applicant shall remove the loading docks from the rear of the buildings in favor of more parking. b. All future development, site design and building design shall comply with the Design Elements matrix on pg. 3-49 in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and the standards in the Architectural Standards Manual, as applicable. c. Prior to submittal of a certificate of zoning application the applicant should coordinate with the historic preservation on either of the following options: (1)Disassemble and store the structure,with the intention of finding an interested agency to preserve the silo on another site prior to the commencement of the collector road extension OR(2)construct a monument of the silos in the plaza utilizing some of the materials from the dissembled silos. d. The collector street(Vanguard Way) shall be constructed prior to development commencing on the property. The applicant may deed the right-of-way to ACHD prior to the submittal of the first phase of a final plat. e. 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). f. 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). The proposed monument of the historic silo will satisfy this requirement. g. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of any Certificate of Zoning Compliance application(s)and/or building permit application. 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. 2.2 The plat shall be revised prior to submitting the first phase of a final plat as follows: Page 30 a. 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. 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,unless another alternative is approved(see pg. 3-20, 3-22, 3-23). 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 or business owners' association, as applicable,as set forth in UDC 11-313-7C.2. g. The Applicant shall coordinate 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. h. Coordinate with the property owner to the east for the shared curb cut and explore the possibility of removing the landscape buffer on the eastern side of the site to align parking with the adjacent property owner,if desired. 2.3 The landscape plan shall be revised prior to submitting the first phase of a final plat as follows: a. Depict landscaping within required street buffers along Black Cat Road adjacent to the drainage swale in front of the 10-foot pathway and Vanguard Way in accord with the recently amended standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C and 11-3B-8C; 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 b. 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). c. The location of mitigation trees shall be depicted on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application. 2.4 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). 2.5 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. 2.6 Upon completion of the landscape installation, a written Certificate of Completion shall be submitted to the Planning Division verifying all landscape improvements are in substantial compliance with the approved landscape plan as set forth in UDC 11-3B-14. Page 31 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. B. PUBLIC WORKS https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=308331&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr--1 C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308338&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ky D. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.oLglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=308539&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty E. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=308789&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC hty F. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=308414&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ity G. MERIDIAN PARK'S DEPARTMENT https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=308329&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC i &cr=1 H. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=309887&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv I. IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=308539&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv J. NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT(NMID) https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=310445&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC ia K. COMPASS https:llweblink.meridianciU.ore/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=310273&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC iv L. MERIDIAN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=310712&dbid=0&r0o=MeridianC Ry Page 32 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 if the plans are revised. 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, office,flex space, 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 if the plans are revised. 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 if the plans are revised. B. Preliminary Plat Findings(11-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 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 if the plans are revised. (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) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Page 33 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 aware of the significant natural, scenic or historic features that exist on this site that require preserving. Page 34 C i E IDIAN.;--- Agenda Item Applicant Presentation FARMSTONE CROSSING Preliminary Plat Request and Annexation, Zoning PROPERTY East of Black Cat Rd84-North of I29 ACRES84-I DETAILS FLUM Mixed EmploymentPROPERTY DESIGNATION:E-ME-ME-MRESHIGH -MEDE-L ZONING E-M Mixed Employment SILO LOCATION would fail apartThe Silo cannot be moved as it STRUCTURE SILO way for Vanguard St-of-The Silo is located in the right LOCATION 21 road to the West of ACHD approved City TMSIPACHD’s MSM and location from The collector SILOVANGUARDBLACK CAT RD DISASSEMBLE has reviewed this plan and the commission is supportive of this plan.The Historic Preservation Commission SILO PLAN design to the Historic Preservation Commission for development. We will present the monument We will construct a monument the Plaza of this MONUMENTwill disassemble the structure for the agencyto preserve the silo (prior to construction), we If an interested agency is identified DELICA*For illustration purposes only. Subject to change PRELIMINARY PLAT PRELIMINARY Use Pathway-Regional Mixed 1 BLACK CAT RDVANGUARD 12-R6-R Central Plaza 1 Buildings 6PLAT PLAZA the this plaza.in the center of be constructed monument will gathering plaza. Central PATHWAYS site. designed throughout the pathways have been Several interconnected BLACK CAT RDVANGUARD 12-R6-R MEETS OBJECTIVE 3.03.01A ALIGNMENTCOMP PLAN commercial near employment areasEncourage the development of supportive MEETS OBJECTIVE 3.06.02C and along key transportation corridors.vision in special areas, areas with specific plans,Continue to develop and implement the desired RENDERINGS DELICA DELICA DELICA CONDITION Fulfillment CentersCommerce -Boutique E•Artists, Designers WorkspacesArt Studios & Creative •Tech, Biotech, PharmaceuticalsR&D Facilities •of businesses:and are appealing to a variety up doors. Demand flex spaces has increased -with rollSpaces” “Flex We would like to remove this condition and retain these Building 1 and 2.docks at the rear of removal of the loading Staff is recommending the CHANGE CONDITIONS the Staff Report.conditions of approval from We agree to all other APPROVALOF THANK YOU Crossing .FarmstonePlat Approval of We are requesting Annexation, Zoning and Preliminary W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Reveille Ridge Subdivision (H-2023-0050) by Bailey Engineering, generally located on the west side of S. Eagle Rd., approximately 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2023-0050 A. Request: Annexation of 59.97 acres of land with an R-8 (34.69 acres) and R-15 (25.28 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 247 building lots and 37 common lots on 59.77 acres of land in the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: March 26.. 2024 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 12 PROJECT NAME: Reveille Ridge Subdivision (H-2023-0050) by Bailey Engineering Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) I.If yes, please provide HOA name I q 2 3 AN) Jt Ile* 4 5 6 �0 r/ 6111ad 7 8 9 10 11 . 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIAN�-- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT p HEARING March 26,2024 Legend DATE: ff Proc= Loco?or TO: Mayor&City Council ei FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner " 5 208-884-5533 ----- SUBJECT: Reveille Ridge Subdivision—AZ,PP , H-2023-0050 LOCATION: 7355 S. Eagle Rd.,in the east'/2 of -- Section 5,T.2N.,R.IE. (Parcels: 51405417400, 51405142100, S1405427800& 51405131500) I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Annexation of 59.97 acres of land with R-8 (34.69 acres) and R-15 (25.28 acres)zoning districts; and Preliminary Plat consisting of 246 building lots and 38 common lots on 59.77 acres of land in the R-8 and R- 15 zoning districts for the Reveille Ridge Subdivision. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Project Summary Description Details Acreage 59.77 acres Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential(LDR)(31+/-acres)&Medium Density Residential (MDR)(28+/-acres) Existing Land Use Rural residential/agricultural Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family detached/attached&townhome dwellings Current Zoning Rural Urban Transition(RUT)in Ada County Proposed Zoning R-8(Medium Density Residential)&R-15 (Medium-high Density Residential) Lots(#and type;bldg/common) 246 building/38 common Phasing plan(#of phases) 4 Number of Residential Units(type 170 single-family detached, 14 single-family attached,62 townhome units of units) Density(gross&net) 4.13 units/acre overall(gross)(2.96 units/acre in LDR;5.3 units/acre in MDR) Open Space(acres,total[%]/ 11.78 acres(or 19.71%) buffer/qualified) Pagel Amenities Pathways,picnic areas,fitness stations. Physical Features(waterways, The Williams Northwest gas pipeline runs through this site within a 75'wide hazards,flood plain,hillside) easement. The Farr Lateral runs along the northern boundary on the east portion of the site. Neighborhood meeting date 6/15/23 History(previous approvals) None B. Community Metrics Description Details Ada County Highway District • Staff report(yes/no) Not yet • Requires ACHD No Commission Action es/no • TIS(yes/no) Yes • Level of Service(LOS) Eagle Road south of Lake Hazel Road is operating at a LOS of better than "D"according to the TIS. • Existing Conditions There is one driveway serving the existing home via S.Eagle Rd.,a 2-lane roadway • CIP/IFYWP No improvements planned directly abutting the site.Lake Hazel Rd. is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Rd.in 2024 and to 5-lanes from Eagle to Cloverdale Rd.in 2025.The intersection of Lake Hazel&Eagle Rd. is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes on the north leg,4-lanes on the south,4-lanes on the east, and 3-lanes on the west leg to be reconstructed in 2024. Access(Arterial/Collectors/State One(1)access is proposed via S.Eagle Rd.,a residential arterial street.A Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) north/south and an east/west collector street are proposed. Several stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties for future extension and interconnectivit . Proposed Road Improvements No funded improvements and no planned improvements. Fire Service • Distance to Fire Station 1.0 mile from Station 7 • Fire Response Time Project falls in an area where the FD doesn't have total response times for an effective firefighting force that meet NFPA 1710 standards or current City adopted standards. • Resource Reliability Unknown for Station 7 as it just opened; 77%for Station 4,which doesn't meet the 80%goal • Risk Identification 2(current resources would not be adequate to supply service to this project) • Accessibility Meets all requirements • Special/resource needs Will require an aerial device; can meet this need • Water Supply 1,000 gallons/minute for one hour • Other Resources Police Service No comments received West Ada School District No comments received Wastewater • Distance to Sewer Services Page 2 • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project Sewer ERU's See application • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent with WW Yes Master Plan/Facility Plan • Impacts/Concerns Flow is committed. See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water • Distance to Services Water available at site. • Pressure Zone 5 • 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 in Section IX.B of this report. C. Project Maps Future Land Use Map Aerial Map Legend 0 Legend � P 3eaiLuca ton �- Prcjec- Lxa=or Id NE lei bw IOU Iw• 'm Y Y 1 -'1 me IU g��flai r _ Ili Low Density 1' Residenfial ! ��W ' _6 Page 3 Zoning Map Planned Development Map Legend 0 Legend Pro" t Locator. 4 Pro" t Luca ff 1� 1� - CityLdnih� — Manned Pore's � R_ RUT - i i R-4 '9 R-1. 5 � II RUT -R= -RR RUT M1 ---- -y}k= III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: Judy Schmidt,Bailey Engineering— 1119 E. State St.,#210,Eagle, ID 83616 B. Owners: Endurance Holdings,LLC— 1977 E. Overland Rd.,Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Shawn Brownlee,Trilogy Development—9839 W. Cable Car St., Ste. 101,Boise,ID 83709 IV. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Newspaper notification published in newspaper 1/30/2024 3/10/2024 Radius notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 1/26/2024 3/1/2024 Public hearing notice sign posted 1/24/2024 3/12/2024 on site Nextdoor posting 1/30/2024 3/4/2024 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS FUTURE LAND USE: Approximately 31-acres of the eastern portion of this property is designated Low Density Residential(LDR)and approximately 28-acres of the western portion is designated Medium Density Page 4 Residential(MDR) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)contained in the Comprehensive Plan (see map above in Section II.C). The LDR allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. These areas often transition between existing rural residential and urban properties. Developments need to respect agricultural heritage and resources,recognize view sheds and open spaces, and maintain or improve the overall atmosphere of the area. The use of open spaces,parks,trails, and other appropriate means should enhance the character of the area. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. 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. TRANSPORTATION: ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM)depicts an east/west collector street across this property from S. Eagle Rd. to the west property boundary and a north/south collector street along the west boundary of the site. This property is within the area governed by the South Meridian Transportation Plan. No improvements are planned directly abutting the site in the CIP or IFYWP. Lake Hazel Rd. is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes from Locust Grove to Eagle Rd. in 2024 and to 5-lanes from Eagle to Cloverdale Rd. in 2025. The intersection of Lake Hazel&Eagle Rd. is scheduled in the IFYWP to be widened to 5-lanes on the north leg,4-lanes on the south,4-lanes on the east, and 3-lanes on the west leg to be reconstructed in 2024. PROPOSED USE: The subject property is proposed to develop with a mix of single-family residential detached and attached dwellings and townhome dwellings at a gross overall density of 4.13 units per acre (2.96 units/acre in LDR and 5.30 units/acre in MDR)consistent with the density desired in the Comprehensive Plan for this area. Goals,Objectives, &Action Items: Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this application and apply to the proposed use of this property(staff analysis in italics): • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) The proposed single-family attached and detached dwellings and townhome dwellings will provide a mix of housing types to meet the needs,preferences and financial capabilities of present and future residents in the City as desired. • "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. • "Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices."(3.07.01A) The proposed site design with smaller lot sizes abutting similar size lots to the north planned in Vertex Subdivision and to the west adjacent to Discovery Park, a 75-acre City park, and MDR designated property to the west and south; and larger lots abutting similar size lots to the north in The Keep Subdivision and to LDR designated property to the east will provide a good transition in density and lot sizes to existing and future development. Page 5 • "Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land." (3.07.00) The proposed residential uses and site layout should minimize conflicts and maximize use of land. • "Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development."(3.03.03A) The proposed development will connect to City water and sewer systems with development of the subdivision;services are required to be provided to and though this development in accord with current City plans. • "Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity."(2.02.01D) A 10'wide multi-use pathway is proposed through the site from the south to the north boundary within the Williams Pipeline easement and a 5'wide pathway is proposed along the Farr Lateral on the northeast portion of the site, which should be widened to 10'in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. Other micro paths and internal pathways are proposed for pedestrian connectivity within the development. • "Require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments,including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities."(3.03.03G) Urban sewer and water infrastructure and curb, gutter and sidewalks are required to be provided with development of the subdivision. • "Eliminate existing private treatment and septic systems on properties annexed into the City and instead connect users to the City wastewater system; discourage the prolonged use of private treatment septic systems for enclave properties." With redevelopment of the site, the septic system for the existing home should be abandoned. • "Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as cross- access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads,and promoting local and collector street connectivity."(6.01.02B) There is currently one(1) access driveway via S. Eagle Rd.for this property, which will be replaced by a collector street that will extend to the west boundary of the site for future extension.Another north/south collector street is proposed along the west boundary of the site for future extension to the north and south. These collector streets should increase connectivity in this area and distribute traffic from the arterial street. Stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties to the north fronting on S. Eagle Rd., which should reduce access points to the arterial street in the future. VI. STAFF ANALYSIS A. ANNEXATION(AZ) The Applicant proposes to annex 59.97 acres of land with R-8 (34.69-acres) and R-15 (25.28-acres) zoning districts and develop the site with a mix of single-family attached and detached and townhome dwellings at densities consistent with the underlying LDR and MDR FLUM designations as discussed above in Section V. A legal description and exhibit map for the overall annexation area is included in Section VIII.A along with individual legal descriptions and exhibit maps for individual zones. This property is within the City's Area of City Impact boundary. Page 6 A preliminary plat and conceptual building elevations were submitted showing how the property is proposed to be subdivided and developed with 246 building lots and associated common area and public streets(see Section VIII). Single-family attached and detached and townhouse dwellings are listed as a principal permitted use in both the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts per UDC Table 11-2A-2. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. To ensure the subject property develops as proposed, Staff recommends a DA is required with the provisions discussed herein and included in Section IX.A. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP): The proposed preliminary plat consists of 246 building lots and 38 common lots on 59.77 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and R-15 zoning districts as shown on the preliminary plat in Section VIII.B. A mix of front-and alley-loaded single-family detached(170), single-family attached(14) and townhomes (62) are proposed. Building lots range in size from 2,600 square feet(s.f.) (or 0.6-acre)to 14,798 s.f. (or 0.34- acre). Phasing Plan: The subdivision is proposed to develop in four(4)phases per the phasing plan in Section VIII.B. The first phase is located along the southern boundary of the site and includes construction of all of the collector streets within the site. The second phase is the northeast portion of the development. The third phase is centrally located and contains the pond and most of the common open space for the development, including the linear open space in the Williams Pipeline easement. The fourth phase is the northwest portion of the development. Staff recommends the phasing plan is revised to switch Phases 2 and 3 so the open space is provided in an earlier phase for the enjoyment of residents. The phasing plan has been revised as recommended. Existing Structures/Site Improvements: There is an existing home and several other structures on the property that are not being retained that are required to be removed prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer's signature.There is also an existing driveway via S. Eagle Rd. that will be replaced with a public street. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and future development is subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district and Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district, as applicable. Zero (0) setbacks should be depicted on the plat where single- family attached and townhome structures are proposed to span across lot lines where no easements will exist.Note: Street setbacks are measured from back of sidewalk,which will affect building placement on lots along collector streets. Subdivision Design&Improvement Standards: The proposed subdivision is required to comply with the design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3,including those for streets and alleys. Product Type: A mix of single-family attached and detached and townhome dwellings are proposed to develop on the site as shown on the exhibit map in Section VIII. Access: Public streets and alleys and a common driveway are proposed for access within the development. Two (2)collector streets are proposed in accord with ACHD's Master Street Map as noted above in Section V. Homes fronting on the collector streets do not have access from the collector streets. Public stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties to the northeast,north,west and south for future interconnectivity and to reduce future access points on S. Eagle Rd., in accord with UDC 11-3A-3A.3. A common driveway is proposed on Lot 51,Block 16 for access to Lots 52-54,Block 16; compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D for such is required. A perpetual ingress/egress is required as a note on a recorded final plat or a separate recorded easement. The easement or plat note shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and Page 7 equipment.A common driveway exhibit that demonstrates compliance with the R-15 dimensional standards is included in Section VIII.F; future development of these lots should be consistent with this exhibit.Fencing is required along Lot 51,Block 16 to distinguish common from private areas as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7A.7a.A 5-foot wide landscape buffer planted with shrubs,lawn or other vegetative groundcover should be provided along the southwest side of the common driveway on Lot 51,Block 16 in accord with UDC 11-6C-3D.5. Pathways: All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. A 10' wide multi-use pathway is required within the Williams Pipeline easement and along the south side of the Farr Lateral in a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. Other pathways are proposed throughout the site for internal pedestrian connectivity. The 10-foot wide multi-use pathway within the Williams Pipeline easement should be extended through Lot 1, Block 14 for future extension to the south. The 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral in Lot 16,Block 2 should also be extended to the northwest to connect to the multi-use pathway in Vertex Subdivision to the north.In order to provide connectivity between the multi- use pathways within the site, Staff recommends a 10-foot wide sidewalk is provided along Taps to between the Williams pipeline pathway and the Farr Lateral pathway. Sidewalks/Parkways(11-3A-17): For public safety, Staff recommends 10-foot wide detached sidewalks are provided along all collector and arterial streets within and adjacent to the site; parkways should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. The plat and landscape plan, should be revised accordingly. Landscaping: A minimum 25-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Eagle Rd., an arterial street, measured from ultimate back of curb location; and 20-foot wide street buffers are required along E. Vantage Pointe and St L, collector streets,per UDC Tables 11-2A-6 and 11-2A-7. The buffer along E. Vantage Pointe on Blocks 12 and 15 needs to be fully landscaped,including the area on the back side of the sidewalk.Landscaping is required within the street buffers and parkways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.3; the landscape plan should be revised to include a mix of landscaping materials and a calculations table that demonstrates compliance with the standards.All street buffers should be in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement maintained by the property owner or homeowner's association; street buffers should be depicted on the plat accordingly and labeled as such. Landscaping,including trees and shrubs,should be depicted on the landscape plan within the 5' wide landscape strip on each side of all pathways as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C.Note:Alternative compliance may be requested for the trees along the pathway in the Williams pipeline easement as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. There are several existing trees on the site—where possible,existing trees should be retained. Mitigation is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C.5; calculations demonstrating compliance with the aforementioned standards should be depicted on the landscape plan. Common Open Space& Site Amenities(UDC 11-3G-3): A minimum of 15% (or 8.97-acres)common open space is required to be provided in the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts per UDC Table I1-3G-3. Open space areas are required to comply with the quality standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2. The qualifications for open space are outlined in UDC 11-3G-3B. An open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VIII.D that depicts common open space totaling 14.79-acres(or 24.74%); qualified open space consists of 11.77-acres(or 19.69%), exceeding the minimum standard. Qualified areas consist of open grassy areas of at least 5,000 square feet in area, linear open space, a pond with site amenities (i.e.picnic areas), and active and passive open spaces. Page 8 Based on 59.77-acres of development area, a minimum of 12 site amenity points is required to be provided. For projects such as this that are over 40-acres in size,multiple amenities are required from each of the categories listed in UDC Table 11-3G-4. The Applicant proposes amenities in accord with the minimum standards from each of the required categories, as follows: T e Description Points Quality of Life Picnic Areas 3 6 Pedestrian Amenities Multiuse Pathways .5 miles 2 Quality of Life Fitness Course 6 stations 2 Recreation Activity Tot Lot 1 Mutti-modal Bike Repair Station 1 Total 12 The proposed amenities should comply with the associated standards listed in UDC 11-3G-4C, D, E and F. Open Water Pond: An open water pond exists on the site that is proposed to remain on Lot 1, Block 16. The pond is required to have recirculated water and be maintained such that it does not become a mosquito breeding ground as set forth in UDC 11-3G-3B.6. Parking: Off-street parking is required to be provided for each home based on the total number of bedrooms per unit as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. Two(2) off-street parking areas with a total of 16 parking spaces are proposed on Lots 20 and 80,Block 16. Williams Pipeline: The Williams Northwest Gas Pipeline crosses this site within a 75-foot wide easement contained in common lots as depicted on the preliminary plat. Any development and/or improvements within the easement should comply with the Williams Developer's Handbook. Waterways: The Farr Lateral exists along the eastern portion of the northern boundary of the site within a 55-foot wide easement(25-feet on the north side and 30-feet on the south side of the lateral's centerline). All irrigation ditches and laterals crossing this site that aren't being improved as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1A-1 are required to be piped or otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. The Applicant requests a waiver from Council to leave the Farr Lateral open and not pipe it as allowed in UDC 11-3A-6B.3a. To preserve public safety,the Applicant proposes to construct a 6' tall wrought iron fence along the northern boundary of Lot 16,Block 2 outside of the Boise Project Board of Control's easement in accord with UDC 11-3A-6C and the Pathways Master Plan. Fencing: All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C and I1-3A-7, as applicable. The landscape plan depicts a mix of 6' tall vinyl privacy fencing and 5' tall wrought iron fencing. Because there is a common lot with a pathway planned in Vertex Subdivision along the northern boundary of the site,Staff recommends the fencing in this location is changed to 5'tall wrought iron fencing to match that on the north side of the pathway and that proposed on this site to the east along the Farr Lateral in accord with UDC 11-3A-7A.7b. Utilities(UDC 11-3A-21): 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. A pressure reducing station is proposed on Lot 1,Block 19. Pressurized Irrigation System (UDC 11-3A-I5): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. Page 9 Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18):An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. A Geotechnical Evaluation was submitted with this application. Building Elevations: Several conceptual building elevations of 1-and 2-story single-family detached, attached and townhome dwellings were submitted as shown in Section VIII.E. Building materials consist of a variety of horizontal and vertical siding and stucco with stone/brick veneer accents. Because homes on lots that face collector(E.Vantage Pointe& St L) and arterial(S.Eagle Rd.) will be highly visible,Staff recommends the rear and/or sides of structures facing these streets 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. Design review is required for all single-family attached and townhome structures; design review is not required for single-family detached structures. VII. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a Development Agreement, and preliminary plat per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on February 15t''. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: David Bailey, Bailey Engineering(Applicant's Representative) b. In opposition: Dave White,Jeff Luckey,Brian Miller,Jarron Langston, CraigSmith, mith, Carrie Miller,Matthew Pond c. Commenting None d. Written testimony: Kelli Black,Bailey Engineering(Applicant's Representative)—in agreement with staff report; and several letters of opposition from the public(see public record). e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Ke. ids)of public testimony a. Opinion the proposed density is too high for this development with existing infrastructure constraints; b. Concern pertaining to safety of roads in the immediate area; c. Request for a better transition in lot sizes to adjacent properties. 3. Ke, ids)of discussion by Commission: a. Would like to see a better transition in lot sizes to adjacent existing properties,especiallX to The Keep to the north. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandin issue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. The Applicant requests City Council approval of a waiver to UDC 11-3A-6B.3a to leave the Farr Lateral open and not pipe it as allowed in UDC 11-3A-6B.3a. To preserve public safety,the Applicant proposes to construct a 6' tall wrought iron fence along the Page 10 northern boundary of Lot 16,Block 2 outside of the Boise Project Board of Control's easement adjacent to the pathwa. b. The Commission requested the City Council review the transition of the proposed R-8 zoned lots to the existing R-2 lots in The Keep subdivision along the Farr Lateral and decide if the proposed transition is in the best interest of the City. Page 11 VIII. EXHIBITS A. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit Map Description for Annexation September 8, 2023 A parcel of land located in the South 112 of the Northeast 114, and the North 112 of the Southeast 114 of Section 5.Township 2 Norlh, Range 1 East, Boise Me6dian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the iA corner common to Sections 4 ana b, 7.2N.,R.1E., B,M-,from which the Section corner common to Sections 4, 5, 8 and 9, T.2.N., R.1.E, 6-M_,hears South 00'12'47"Wast. 2653.27;thence on the east boundary line of said Section 5, South 00912'47"West, 458.11 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 0012'47"West, 2 50.04 feet; thenca IQa+ring said oast boundary lino,North 74°b8'26"West.800.00 feet; thence North 73°2926"Vest,560.00 feet; thence North 89°18'26"West.500,80 feet: thence South 89°48'34"West, 841.23 feet to the north-south centerline of said Section 5; thence on said north-south centerline, North 00°00'59"East, 332.88 feet to the Center 114 corner of said Section 5: thence continuing on said north-south oentedine. North 00°01'18" East,820.62 feet: thence leaving said north-south centerline. South 78°30'03"East, 191.66 feet; thence North 43"00'19"East, 108.41 feet; thence North 68°36'36"East, 694.84 feet; thence South 46"02'S2"East, �70.M feet: thence South '5921" East,64.51 feet; thence North 00°2NOV West, 30.48 feet to the Southwest corner of Keep Subdivision as filled in Book 119 of Plats at Pages 18374 through 18379,records of Ada County, Idaho; P,� L'1'y0 thence on the south boundary line of said Keep Ns Subdivision the following eight(8)courses and distances; 11779 South 64"48'10"East,6b ��,24 feet; n , r South 79"33'09"East,55.80 feet; - 'f m o, Page 1 of 2 Page 12 North 82"37'W' East, 39.20 feet; North 71 W'4 " East, 41.47 feet; North 8U°45'02" East, 58.56 feet; North 88"5&42" East, 252,30 feet-, North 8503916" East, 60.03 feet; North 671183'39" East, 125.97 feet to the nofthwest corner of Derry Subdivision as filed in Book 108 of Plats at Pages 15160 and 15181, records of Ada County, Waho; thence South 00°13'22"West, 1157.89 feet to the southwest comer of said Derry Subdivision thence on the south boundary line of sad Derry Subdivision and the easterly prolongation of, South 74"06'45" East, 762.45 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING Containing 59.969 acres, more or less- End of Description- pL LA X D F p Page 2 of 2 Page 13 � R9 & Subvi-�n £ — L | . e L L1 G � 0a m Li w ® � t § Derry \ t5g31139 Acre \ _ . � r \ � Q a ell 1A u S.5 . 4 p Paint of 7 � \ 0 ® � �(. z �amp &B4 'W B4122 H89-1E26■ mm . a , � Line T Ee Line Table % m | e Bouring erg■ LFe B_i uinga | / u SK, q' a04 N& '7 39 ' § L-2 E3E27 1 .6' Q 1'27%yE w.47 /0D U 0'19% 10B«' uo N50-1,5`2 5B.e' #, ; 9 ,% ` 211 NBB'5a 7 30 L5 m=2 2' 3o 4B 2 38'1 E Mm' ° V) US 24'48'1eE 6 24 u3 A 3' % ,.■ ' / 2 3 og"E 8o 1 , � z IN 3 . r . a 799g q | / » E _b2Rd5 '4 0 ,� oko + ---tees # 01002m 400 Boo MJp m=C..»mm ___E-_ , ,,._ IDAHO Eh tOra¥ng or \&e SURVEY eee Winne Annexation Shoe _mr�_ Reveille Ridge Sult>dlivislun 1 GROUP, L[C A procal @ land k,tedHthe 5112ea, 4 the q2of owv. Out. �he SE a -of @, S. TIN- P-1C , Adu C-wnty. a# 9/s/2QZZ Page 14 Description for R-8 Zone September 8, 2023 A parcel of land located in the South 112 of the Northeast 114, and the North 112 of the southeast 114 of section 5, TOwnShip 2 North, Range 1 East, Noise Mendian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the 114 corner common to Sections 4 and 5, T.2N.. R.1E„ B_M., from which the Section corner common to Sections 4, 5, 8 and g, T.2.N., R.1.E, B.M„ begs South 00912'47"West, 2653.27; thence on the east boundary line of said Section 5, South 0012'47'West, 458_11 feet to the POINT DE BEGINNING: thence continuing, South 00"12'41" West, 2 50.04 feet; thence leaving said east boundary line, North 74°08'26"West: 660.06 feet; thence North 73°29'26" West. 408.38 feet; thence North 47°47'31" West, 770.77 feet; thence North 42°12'29" East, 255_26 feet; thence 1 60_79 feet on the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 300.00 feet, a cantr21 angle of 32"25'39", and a long chord which bears North 64°00'20" West, 167.53 feet; thence North 47°47'31" West, 51 .02 feet; thence 46.08 feet on the are of a curve to the right having a radius of 100.00 feet, a central angle of 26°24'07", and a long chord which bears North 34°35'27"West. 45.67 feet; thence North 21°23'24"1 cst, 28.22 fact: thence South 68°3638"West, 1 _53 feet; thence 8.02 feet on the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 100.00 feet, a central angle of 04°35'37", and a long chord which bears South 66"18'47"West. 8.02 feet; thence North 47°47'31" West, 150.16 feet; thence North 43°08'1!�" East, �1.57 feet: NL LA C�`° �G thence North 68'36'36" East, 694-84 feet; thence South 46°02'32" East, 375.56 feet; 11779 thence South 64860'21"East, 64.51 feet; of V��� ' McCP ` Page 1 of 2 Page 15 thence North 00°23'06"West, 30.48 feet to the Southwest corner of Keep Subdivision as filled in Book 119 of Plats at Pages 18374 through 18379, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence on the south boundary line of said Keel Subdivision the following eigfit (8) courses and distances; South 64°48'14" East, 66_24 feet; South 79°3S09" East, 55.80 fleet; North 82°37'38" East, 39.29 feet, North 71°27'43" East, 41.47 feet; North 80°45'02" East, 58.58 feet; North 8895B'42" East, 252.30 feet; North 8503816" East, 60,03 feet; North 67003'39" East, 125.97 feet to the northwest comer of Derry BuMvision as filled in Book 108 of Plats at Pages 15160 and 15161, records of Ada County, Idaho; thence South 00'13'22"West, 1157.89 feet to the southwest corner of said [ferry Subdivision thence on the south boundary lire of said perry Subdivision and the easterly prolongation of, South 74"08'45" East, 762.45 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 34.691 acres, more or less. End of Description_ SCE Ng,� ` 1 779 O F 4� McCN Page 2 of 2 Page 16 1 ' Keep Subdivision L4 a�6a ��. L 8Lg L11 �4 I I L2 L12 C,� � L5 Lti L13 F' L10 C3 568'36'36"W 166.53' ,} C N42'12'28"E D G`f IN 255.26' f34.691 N I Acres I a � C1f4 �# 1/4 # g.5 .s-4 Point of I� 574)aa. Beginning ,n l N73���6'gir 800 00KL LA ' I [V �' N5 Line Table Line Table I N Una ne 8eoring {.ength Line Beorrng Lenytti � L1 Sa072'47'w 254-1)4' Lb 57933'49"E 55.✓34' ri i.o CS 9} t L2 N21'23'24`W 28.22' Lg N82'37'38"E 39.29' 0I 0� / C L3 N4747'31"W i AO- L10 H71'27'43"E 41.47` L4 N43'00'19"E 21.57' L11 NBO'45'02'E 58.56' L5 564'59'21"E 64-51' L12 NB8.58'42% 252-30' Scale: 1"=400' L6 N70.23'06"W 30.48' L73 H8538'16"E 60.03' i D 100 200 400 $p. 0 564'48",O"E 56.24 L14 N67ro3'39`E 125.97' Curve Table Curve LenO, Radius Delta Chard Bearing Chord Length C1 159.79' 30100' 32`25'39" N64'00'24'W 167.53' E- Columbia Rd. 5,5 'S.4 C2 46-08' 100.00' 2$'24'k}7" N34'35'27"W 45-67' _——S.B S.9 C3 5.02' 100.00' 435'37" S65-18'47'W 8,02' P:y—4. r(73M Eq',Rd)77-22F dwE%--8 F—E 9 SAOW3 R4553 qY �� �0 ExhibTk drawing for Job "a s954 yr ENEw.Los7. —8 Zone 22-228-112 SURVEY 941SE.O.A+I45}7N Sheet Na. {70HI"&xsz9 Reveille Ridge Subdivision 1 GROUP, LLC A pracd of land located in the S1 2 of the HE1 4 & tho N1 72 Df pxq, poke the SE1/4 of Section 5, TIN„ R,tE., B.A. Ada Coupty, Idaho, 9/4/202Z Page 17 Description for R-1 a Zone September 8, 2023 A parcel of land located in the South 112 of the Northeast 114, and the North 1/2 of the Southeast 114 of Section 5, Township 2 North, Range 1 East, Saise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows; Comrnen6ng at the 114 comer common to Sections 4 and 5_ T.2N., R.1E., B.M." from which the Section corner Common to Sections 4, 5, 8 and 9, T.2.N-, R_1-E, B.M., gears South 00'12'47"West, 2653.27: thence on the east boundary line of said Section 5, South 00'12'47"West, 708.15 feet;thence leaving said east boundary lire, North 74"08'26"West, 800.00 feet; thence North 73"29'26"West, 408.38 feet to the POINT OF 8EGINNING: then cc North 781120'W West, 151.82 feet thence North 89'18'26"West, 660.00 feet; thence South 89d48' 4"West, 841,23 feet to the north-south centerline of said Section 5; thence on said north-south centerline, North 00*00'59" East, 332.88 feet to the Center 114 corner of said Section 5; thence continuing on esid north-south centerline, North 00"01'18" East, 820,62 foot; thence leaving said north-�south centerline, South 78'30'03"East, 191-66 feet; thence North 43°00"19"East, 86.84 feet; thence South 47"47"61" Bast, 150-16 feet; the noe 8.02 feet on the arc of a curve to the right haVIng a radius of 100-00 feet, a central angle of 04'35'37", and a long chord which bears North 66'18'47" East, 8.02 feet; thence North 68°36'36" East. 168,5� feet: thence South 21°23'24" East, 28.22 feet; thence 46.08 feet on the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 100.00 feet, a central angle of 0 �V 14NO 26°24'07', and a long ohord which.. bears South \GF-NS 34'35'27'' East, 45.57 feet; 11779 thence South 47°4731" East, 512-02 feet; 4�' o f ° Page 1 of 2: Page 18 thence 169.79 feet on the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 300.00 feet. a central angle of 32025'39", and a long chord which bears South 64'00'20" East, 167.53 feet: thence South 42012'29"West, 255.28 feet, thence South 4704T31" East. 770.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 25.275 acres. more or less. End of Descnption- pL LANO 11779 ' MCCN Page 2 of 2 Page 19 I I Keep Sub divisian I I I L2 `3 ( 1-6 C'p G1 0 T- I ro Derry. p Subdmtswn ±25.27 Acres S42'12'29"w I 255.28' C1/4 � 1 f4 ILn Q z 5dQ.Q0' I+ S69'Q'34'W 1341,23' N89'?S'26"w �� 4 Beginning# # 7 9 B} I .0.3, E" $ Qa00, N V, y0 I �aNa Line Table - I � v u Line Deming Length I m 11779 4- L1 N73-29'26"Ih' 151.62' cw r- o a 0 G30 �� � �X, L2 578'30'03'E 191.66' La�� �•(n 01� WON `1 L3 N43'00'1g`E 86,64" + o m L4 S4747'31'E 150.16' L5 N68'36'36"E 166-53' �x $Cole: 1"=400' 1-6 $21'23'24"E 2$,22' 0 100 200 400 Boo Curve Table 1 I Curve Length Radius Delto Chord Bwriny Chord Length C1 13.02' 1flo,00' 4'35`37' N661E{47'E 9.02' E- C41urnbla Rd- 13 `S,4 C2 46,46' 1fl4,Q6' 2624'Q7" 53435'27'E 45.67' --- ---S.8 S-9 C3 i69-19' 300.00' 32 25'39' S64W'20'E 167-53' v�4nd. s{7l55 fops Hq 33.27d�m,pWt•i5 twx f�a.G i/9[5071 aw i sp Exhibit drawing for N8. I DAHO 9a 9 a-ET —I J Dr 22-228-02 90ISE IpA22^ a Sh4■t 144,E {mom"- Reveille Ridge Subdivision 1 GROUP LLD A Prato of land 1walee In ehe S1 2 OF tha 14E1 4 & the N7 W Dwg, Date thr 5E7/4 of Section 5, T2N., R.T.. 6 M„ Ada County, Idaho 9/8/2023 Page 20 B. Preliminary Plat(dated: 1/10/24)&Revised Phasing Plan(dated: 2/21/24) PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR REVEILLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION D: EE E 0 8fE dECT I I I ® I PLAN SHEET INDEX 77-71 ® ® ® ® ® O SHEET DESCRIPTION BL 3 \_ PP-1 COVER SHEET.INDEX,VIGNf,Y IMP, NOTES IIL� PP-2 -PRELIMINARY PLAT WEST WYOIIT I IN �� PP-3 -PRELIMINARY—EAST LAYOUT ®© ® ®� PP-a -PaacEL cuavE TADLES f` Bt of B A PP-S -EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY PP-] -ENGINEERING PIANr&STREET SEGTIOrv' 4 rt PP-8 -PRELIMINARY SEWER PROFlLES PP-9 -PRELIMINARY'SEWER PROFlLES ® ® ® ® ® m ®®®o© © I _ a —�`- z D — — a —-—-—-— I wl II' - \ O ` m W� ma D W J 10 Ld Page 21 PR6LRQ.YAPY PLAT F06 3i 1RHYSQIE E[UGC SIiHOMSIm Y✓, 1 A _ 4 M F. -.�r I w F1zu _ Q p Y 'II a S C i \ 6 Y - I a - 0 fi 0 It _ PREUMINARY PLAT FOR REVEILLE RIDGE EIIEDIVISION a+ BLOCK 2 NBLO K r5 .®. ... .... e�. .o. _— • _.. " W BL b I _ nv .mmY.0 �ry = ___ m•�l(fiE_G[L�—. ..m cl� & 0 OCK�7 o Z Q LaC71- 22, rA e ff \ o © A� 0 Z r® _. m o a s s j Z o > Ld PP-3 Page 22 PRASE MAP FOR � ! REVEILLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION «.��s, �. oeawl. eow if b „t r --- r �. � r, -------------------------- ge 0 Z Ld W 0 PM Page 23 C. Landscape Plan(dated: 12/12/2023) 1 4 t. rk ® m m t 1 ®� r O ® m wa2ys. •m w .r 13 IENSENBQTB REVEILLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION Ov FEBRUARY 12,2024 PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN, ID Iwo« Page 24 IV �� 7'- C� -!¢.,�.���/rJ�*�`� •R�,N�� _______MATCHLINE L21-•. ______________i �{ UY Ci Mix .-L:". ill_ h .�« �J� •OIU - 7 \ ` o I � N - � n o ] W PLANT PALETTE a NOTE5 ' M�L:rriv�,m"F=iw � p • �� '.©:' .... .w.r.«......r.r..� ....,..,i... a � W _ L Y Z W rI•u. "' ill o.� �- rr-n "li Vim. > J aQ 1� L1 �c v s+ w � t w I MAT_GML E LE J "TCHUNE Li------ , - > F U 0 J n m W O ] 5 PLA L NT PAETTE Z n _ W j a � > ri z u r m o M....�.. a Page 25 PLANT PALETTE ! �� •�"..��,.,�. a �I mix a zIz &'GLE CALL d U Z NOTES > G o• w a N a L MATCHLME LS __:Y ° > I MATClLME L4 — w U � J } Z J U 7 W J JENSE MLa W w p �as p F 1 Iq 11� � c a�� PLANT PALETTE e �°c ®R[I E L6 a. O mee L 051 IQ o TA-` t- 4 ti m Z NOTES g J w a � w rc rew � W p JENSE BELTS - d w ll ll � C L/t Page 26 ohs PLANT FIAL.F77E IN —I- MIR 'TAY"l VINYL PRIVACY FENDE G TREE PLANTING/STAKING eku. ill V,1! N07Ee z SHRUB RL—Tl NO IRON FENCE Z LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS Yl M, I I I v) _LL V) L w DEVELOPMENT DATA Lj L Li x W < -j >- @) PLANTER CUT BED EO&EImo aye no rza..ev -J 0 0 W L 711-1 JEI E ELTS El' T I 4—E Page 27 D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(dated: 12/10/2023) OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT FOR REVEILLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION 8€ CD --- -- ®� f LY jL 0 ®®® � E n 2z — - ® X p Z a 0 o 7 w a w o 0 � p�OS Page 28 E. Conceptual Building 1 detached: i l 01 .:.rrT On Page 29 i , i - �I I �T 1 f - 4 � r F �• l k Page 30 Front-load II . ti f -411 74 Page 31 • � t ' t ti r Alley-loaded townhomes: 0 VF _ e Fr Page 32 F. Common Driveway Exhibit 4� O� 2 r r P ; 0, qOl %r Vl � 1 r! 3,200 iP ti '! _ ♦ f 2,500 sf 3,200QQ sf r 1.602 sf �� !r . • 55�Q, .` 3.200 sf o 1 ti 2. REVEILLE RIDGE PRELIMINARY SHARED—ACCESS EXHIBIT LOT 51 BLOCK 16 FOR LOTS 52 53 & 54 BLOCK 16 alley Engineering, Inc. 20 0 10 20 40 CIVIL ENGINEERING I PLANNING I CADD 1119 E.STATE STREET,SUITE 210 TEL 208-93MO13 SCALE IN FEET EAGLE,ID 83616 www.6aileyengineers.com 1'=20' Page 33 G. Product Type Exhibit Map PRODUCT EXHIBIT MAP FOR REVEILLE RIDGE SUBDIVISION eow � o R-8 ZONE " 34.691 AC 124— STIR GROSS DENSITYo,.,,,� 124/34.691-3.57 I 6 II III, d Z U 0 Z E Lf 0 W li \ N a w 0 R-15 ZONE X 25.278 AC — — 1 ❑ > 62— TOWNHOME — — — ;+�„ __ H w 46— STIR 14— DUETS GROSS DENSITY J 122/25.278-4,83 mm.� .�mm,a,_,m•,., —1-- --- ---��—I: 0 O W wo 011 Page 34 IX. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s)at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the date of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision&Order for the annexation request. A final plat application will not be accepted until the property is annexed(i.e. the ordinance and development agreement are recorded). The DA shall,at minimum, incorporate the following provisions IF City Council determines annexation is in the best interest of the City: a. Future development of this site shall generally comply with the development plans submitted with this application, included in Section VIII, and the provisions contained herein. b. A 10-foot wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway shall be provided within the required street buffers along all collector and arterial streets within and adjacent to the site(i.e. S. Eagle Rd.,E. Vantage Pointe and St L). c. The rear and/or sides of homes on lots that face collector(E.Vantage Pointe& St L)and arterial (S. Eagle Rd.) streets 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. 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide street buffer in a dedicated buffer easement on lots adjacent to E. Vantage Pointe and St L,collector streets,labeled accordingly. b. Depict the future curb location as anticipated by ACHD along S. Eagle Rd.; and a minimum 25- foot wide street buffer,measured from the ultimate curb location. c. Depict 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/multi-use pathways within the required street buffers along all collector and arterial streets within and adjacent to the site(i.e. S. Eagle Rd.,E. Vantage Pointe and St L). d. Depict zero(0)setbacks on lot lines where townhomes are proposed to span across where no easements will exist. e. Graphically depict and label the 30-foot wide easement for the Farr Lateral,measured from the centerline of the lateral, located on Lot 17,Block 2. £ Perpetual ingress/egress shall be required either by a recorded easement or as a note on a recorded final plat. The easement or plat note shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment as set forth in UDC 11-6C- 3D.8. g. Depict 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/pathways along all collector and arterial streets within and adjacent to the site(i.e. S. Eagle Rd., E.Vantage Pointe and St L). Parkways shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E. h. Graphically depict the 75-foot wide easement for the Williams Pipeline. Page 35 i. Depict a 10-foot wide sidewalk along one side of Taps to between the Williams pipeline pathway and the Farr Lateral pathway. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide street buffer in a dedicated buffer easement on lots adjacent to E. Vantage Pointe and St L,collector streets,labeled accordingly. b. Depict the future curb location as anticipated by ACHD along S. Eagle Rd.; depict a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer,measured from the ultimate curb location. c. Depict landscaping with a mix of materials within the street buffers along S. Eagle Rd.,E. Vantage Pointe and St L,in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C3; include calculations that demonstrate compliance. d. Include mitigation information for all existing trees being removed from the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC 5. e. Depict 10-foot wide detached sidewalks/multi-use pathways within the required street buffers along all collector and arterial streets within and adjacent to the site(i.e. S. Eagle Rd.,E. Vantage Pointe and St L). f. Depict landscaping with a mix of materials along each side of all pathways, in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.Note:Alternative compliance may be requested for the trees along the pathway in the Williams pipeline easement as set forth in UDC 11-5B-5. g. Change the fencing type along the northern boundary on the western portion of the site adjacent to the common open space with a pathway in Vertex Subdivision to 5-foot tall wrought iron fencing in accord with UDC 11-3A-7A.7b. h. Extend the 10-foot wide multi-use pathway to the south through Lot 1,Block 14 for future extension to the south. i. Extend the 10-foot wide multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral in Lot 16,Block 2 (in the vicinity of Lot 6, Block 2)to the northwest to connect to the multi-use pathway in Vertex Subdivision to the north. j. Include a detail for the picnic areas on Lot 1,Block 16 that includes tables,benches,landscaping and a structure for shade to demonstrate compliance with UDC 11-3G-4C.5. k. Depict a 10-foot wide sidewalk along one side of Taps to between the Williams pipeline pathway and the Farr Lateral pathway. 1. Depict fencing along Lot 51,Block 16 to distinguish common from private areas as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7A.7a. m. Depict a 5-foot wide landscape buffer planted with shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover along the southwest side of the common driveway on Lot 51,Block 16 in accord with UDC II- 6C-3D.5. n. Depict details for the picnic area,tot lot,bike repair station and fitness course amenities that demonstrate compliance with the standards for such listed in UDC 11-3G-4C D, E and F. 4. All irrigation ditches,laterals, sloughs or canals, including the Farr Lateral, crossing this site shall be piped or otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless waived by City Council. The Applicant requests approval of a waiver from Council to leave the lateral open. 5. All existing structures shall be removed from the site prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature. Page 36 6. Comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3. 7. Submit a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway within the Williams Pipeline easement and along the Farr Lateral,as required by the Park's Dept. in Section IX.G below. 8. Comply with the Williams Developer's Handbook for any development and/or improvements within the Williams pipeline easement. 9. The open water pond on Lot 1, Block 16 shall have recirculated water and be maintained such that it does not become a mosquito breeding ground as set forth in UDC H-3G-3B.6. 10. Future development of Lots 52-54,Block 16 shall be consistent with the common driveway exhibit included in Section VIII.F and the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 11. Modify the phasing plan to switeh Phases '' ^^a 3. Future development shall comply with the modified phasing plan in Section VII.B. 12. An administrative design review application shall be submitted for the single-family attached and townhome structures to ensure compliance with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 13. Future development shall substantially comply with the product type exhibit in Section VIII.G. 14. Approval of a preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two(2)years of the approval of the preliminary plat. Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period,the director may authorize a single extension of time to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat not to exceed two (2)years.Additional time extensions up to two(2)years as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted.With all extensions,the director or City Council may require the preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of this title. B. PUBLIC WORKS https://weblink.meridiancioy.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=330721&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity C. FIRE DEPARTMENT https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=330723&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity D. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY(DEQ) https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=331450&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr =1 E. ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES(ACDS) https://weblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=331625&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX F. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT(ITD) https://weblink.meridiancit .00rg/WeUink/Doc View.aspx?id=3 3 18 78&db id=0&rep o=Meridia n City G. PARK'S DEPARTMENT https://weblink.m eridian city.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=333344&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City Page 37 H. BOISE PROJECT BOARD OF CONTROL https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=333138&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City I. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT(ACHD) https://weblink.meridianciN.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=337083&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiU J. COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHWEST IDAHO(COMPASS) https://weblink.meridianciN.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=334422&dbid=0&repo=Meridian City&cr =1 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: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the Applicant's request to annex the subject property with R-8 and R-1 S zoning and develop with a mix ofsingle family attached, single-family detached and townhome dwellings on the site at the densities proposed is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan per the analysis in Section V. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment to the R-8 and R-1 S zoning districts and development with a mix of housing types generally complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare as the proposed residential uses should be compatible with adjacent existing and future single-family residential homes/uses in the area. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds City services are available to be provided to this development. Comments were not received from WASD on this application. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the city. Page 38 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) The Commission finds the proposed plat is in conformance with the UDC and generally conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. (Ord. 05-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. Page 39 C i E IDIAN.;--- Agenda Item Applicant Presentation REVEILLE RIDGE Annexation, Zoning and Preliminary Plat Request PROPERTY EAGLE RDLAKE HAZEL RD West of Eagle RdSouth of Lake Hazel Rd59.77 ACRES DETAILS FLUM LOWLOWMEDIUMCIVICMEDIUMMEDIUM Medium & Low Density PROPERTY DESIGNATION: ZONING 15-R8-RRUT2-R8-R 15-8 & R-R PROPOSED ZONING: PRELIMINARY Duets 14 per acreUnits 4.12 Townhomes 62(detached)Single family 170PLAT PRODUCT MIX DuetsTownhomes(Detached)Single family AMENITIES 2341 stationBike repair 4 Tot Lot(6)Fitness Stations w/ shelters (3)Picnic tables 321 SPACEOPEN 19.7% AMENITIES 5 pathwaysSeveral multiuse 5 FARR FARR LATERAL safety. We are proposing 6’ iron fencing for to leave the Farr Lateral open. 6B -3A-Requesting a waiver UDC 11WAIVER REQUEST PHASING 60 build lots51 build lots64 build lots 23414321 71 build lots TRAFFIC 20252024 lanes-Cloverdale Rd. is scheduled to be Lake Hazel Rd. from Eagle to LAKE HAZEL WIDENINGon the west leglanes -lanes on the east, and 3-lanes on the south, 4-leg, 4lanes on the north -Eagle Rd. is scheduled to be The intersection of Lake Hazel & INTERSECTION 2024 lanes-Eagle Rd. is scheduled to be Lake Hazel Rd. from Locust Grove to LAKE HAZEL WIDENING IMPROVEMENTS MEETS OBJECTIVE 2.01.02.D ALIGNMENTCOMP PLAN through connected pathwaysPromote neighborhood connectivity MEETS OBJECTIVE 2.02.01.D typesEncourage a variety of housing PROJECT FULL BUILD OUT 20312031 PHASE 4 2029 PHASE 3 2027 PHASE 2 2025 PHASE 1 TIMELINE ELEVATIONS DELICA DELICA DELICA DELICA DELICA CONDITIONS Report.of approval from the Staff We agree to all the conditions APPROVALOF ACHD wide collectorfoot -as Vantage Road Construct •feet-Road 330Offset Command •EXHIBIT THANK YOU Plat Approval of Reveille Ridge .We are requesting Annexation, Zoning and Preliminary C�,fER IDIAN:--- IDAHO Public Presentations WHAT WAS DESIGNATED/PROMISED:WHAT WAS DESIGNATED/PROMISED: OVERVIEW AREAOF THE OVERVIEW AREAOF THE REVEILLE SUB. enhance the character of the areaand other appropriate means should use of open spaces, parks, trails, The improve the overall atmosphere of the area. view sheds and open spaces, and maintain or agricultural heritage and resources, recognize properties. Developments need to respect between existing rural residential and urban . These areas often transition less per acreat gross densities of three dwelling units or family homes on large and estate lots -singleThis designation allows for the development of 6876 S. atmosphere of the area. improve the overall open spaces, and maintain or recognize view sheds and heritage and resources, need to respect agricultural properties. Developments residential and urban between existing rural These areas often transition . dwelling units or less per acrelots at gross densities of three large and estate homes on family -development of singleThis designation allows for the PEMBERLEY PL. THE PROPERTY ITSELF:Camping-Smores-Fishing Pole-THE PROPERTY ITSELF: BESIDES LOSING A GEM OF MERIDIAN…NATURE…RIGHT HERE IN BESIDES LOSING A GEM OF MERIDIAN…NATURE…RIGHT HERE IN -We Add To The Problems Before Need Solutions We -West Ada. Hiring Freeze Throughout Districts Are Causing A Soft Tight Finances For School -Overcrowded. High School Halls. Already Shoulder To Shoulder In w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 24-2049: An ordinance (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K-12 — H-2023-0011) annexing the west half of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; rezoning 71.28 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. ADA COUNTY RECORDER Trent Tripple 2024-015618 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 HEATHER LUTHER 03/27/2024 01:20 PM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 24-2049 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BORTON, CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON, STRADER, TAYLOR AN ORDINANCE (COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PRE-K-12 — H-2023- 0011) ANNEXING THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A"; REZONING 71.28 ACRES OF SUCH REAL PROPERTY FROM RUT(RURAL URBAN TRANSITION)TO R-15(MEDIUM HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT; DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO ALTER ALL APPLICABLE USE AND AREA MAPS AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS AND ALL OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY TREASURER, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER,AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION,AS REQUIRED BY LAW; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS,the City of Meridian received a written request from property owner Cole Valley Christian Schools, Inc. to annex and rezone the land described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the map attached hereto as Exhibit `B" ("Subject Property"), which exhibits are incorporated herein by reference; WHEREAS,the Subject Property is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho; WHEREAS,the City of Meridian is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-222(2)to annex the Subject Property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby annexes the Subject Property. SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby rezones 71.28 acres of the Subject Property from RUT(Rural Urban Transition)to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Zoning District. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PRE-K-12 H-2023-0011 Page I SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance and its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publication, in accordance with law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO,this 26th day of March , 2024. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 26th day of March , 2024. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK 3-26-2024 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 26th day of March ,2024,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared Robert E.Simison and Chris Johnson known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,of the City of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) Notary Public Commission Expiration: 3-28-2028 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PRE-K-12 H-2023-0011 Page 2 CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY : William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public . IAM Z nx7 ��j William L. M . Nary, Cit Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO . 24-2049 An ordinance (Cole Valley Christian Schools Pre-K42 — 11-2023 -0011 ) annexing the west half of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range I West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A"; rezoning 71 . 28 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R- 15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance ; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances ; and providing an effective date. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .] ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS PR&K42 H-2023 -0011 Page 4 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE Page 1 OF 1 LAND GROUP February 1, 2024 Project No.: 121048 EXHIBIT"A" COLE VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS McMILLAN ROAD PROPERTY PARCEL A DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the West Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 29,Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast Corner of Section 29 of said Township 4 North, Range 1 West; Thence North 89°22'00" West, a distance of 2642.71 feet on the South line of said Section 29 to the South Quarter Corner of said Section 29,said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence North 00*51'06" East, a distance of 2630.21 feet on the north-south mid-section line of said Section 29 to the Center Quarter Corner of said Section 29; Thence South 89' 22'35" East, a distance of 1325.02 feet on the east-west mid-section line of said Section 29 to the Center-East 1/16th Corner of said Section 29; Thence South 00' 56' 00"West,a distance of 2630.45 feet on the north-south 1/16th Section line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 29 to the East 1/16th Corner common to Sections 29 and 32; Thence North 89° 22'00"West, a distance of 454.52 feet on the South line of said Section 29; Thence North 00°56'00" East, a distance of 487.34 feet; Thence North 89'43'44"West, a distance of 774.21 feet; Thence South 00' 16' 16"West, a distance of 21.70 feet; Thence South 00° 51'07"West, a distance of 460.74 feet to a point on the South line of said Section 29; Thence North 89° 22'00"West, a distance of 93.49 feet on said South line of Section 29 to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 71.28 acres more or less. PREPARED BY: L The Land Group, Inc. r NHS a '7880 � 2-1-2024 sT �o James R.Washburn, PLS �� Tf OF SR.WA 462 East Shore Drive, Suite 100, Eagle, Idaho 83616 208.939.4041 thelandgroupinc.com 0 Cn c7 D r m oN it N O O C� "D n T D ! Z o 1 O n ( m r z T ( r- O N m I p 1 C) I CD1 � � N e CO m 7J UNPLATTED C." O I SUNSHINE ESTATES SUBDIVISION o co n C m ti `w crQ o CIDN CD< i(2630.29') o NOO°51'06"E 2630.21' 0 1315.12 i s _ _... ._. .._ ._ ._ _1315.09' N. OWHYEE � 460.15' 1278.12' � '�� -- -- -- STORM AVE 37.00' cc cc C7 m T C7 W SOO°51'07"W 460.74' C° v� tSr p W DND cn m z " I`W oz I m oNz � cn rn C) co w -+ w IV 00Do O N D 77 i n m `o DO z = DO ozo r o Cn X co o C - w o 00 rQ mCD z i -+ w agC? wz � � p z > Q0 rn � o2Qm � T' w m co ND � N -� � M CD �I O o0 N.) m w mmG > 1m� C ci w m l cs, Cn w z W r o rnX cn Cn co Cil p C7 m X c o C N � D CD r D m p J D -0 � � m 1 C) ro 11^ m N ivcn = CA) co CJ co C) Cn � n N.) N Ul U7 � 4, D r r- o rn v-) T myzzA n S00056'00"W 487.34' o = o rc � pCD o z z w n I ® co 0 C) QO = n C.)'I = j i CT co N C)o r C7) C)'t =r CL CL w N O IN Ano p DD W N I Nmmco WwnQ° v I y Z _ 1972.81' .� S00°56'00"W 2630.45' o - _ - _ Co CD CD yC' N �� I (2630.50') CA x UNPLATTED i UNPLATTED m o �' �■ O m 0 00m I C� N 0 td N z m b � N N = NnM `o I Q CD o_ C�D■. 00 Cn Oj (o " Inn O !T C� z N X CCn C CL CU �/I rw Poo N N CA QD Ion pop 0 .. ®■ a7 � CLImo m \ s � O T C.n N m //�Y/�■ Cl) C7 0 N N01°00'41"E 2630.70' v' `= co Co ,_•� _ N p cn CA CL m w N. McDERMQTT ROAD con CD cr)N Ci ,w C:) Cf)m co �■ y PEP CD CD CD IV CD /� CO O cn O r D ✓;7 a�� O W '� y rm m D --4 S O co•I r / p — Dm CD� N1 CD C) czU' o m c � mCD am U2 BCD � cn � mo' m C -% --< o o CD CD 7O C m z c Q n rn 0 �■ z ■ ■ Q z CD 2-1 Z S` Cn O Q CCn T rnG • Do '-1 D D g D CDn Q zn Q * =O cn 1 =� O Qw, � I ■ ■ Cz7 = = m0 r% 0 Z 0 E N 0) m 1 D W !�F m T m --a - Q -I o n■F z z -i � cn cn = rn � D CDC I Q. r- cn -o -i m � � Q m m C7 O Do -1 Q m = Efo cn y z � rno � Cn D = � z =■ C7 = > o N 1 d� PR Lyssf� � Dw = co o � C Woo zo CL o (� O • ii i �y N CO c) zrn„ � CD zz zz = - �np Mm I 'y O cc'-' � � Q co rOm Cn = Q D fJ N DO z jbY,S�Q� mv Om -nmm N) � m Q 7C rn C7 D OT ■ ■ m 0 0 z D 0 do _- � m -v (.0 C')C') � -n � x rn D -v W cn T m m „ � m � D Dno qoO O m (� co = -�_-i 7 chi z chi z z 51 z z T D SJ O C7 O T ® -Z `/ Q Z m � D C? Q D CO r 1p z4 D O -ice -Di = D m Q T r � Z .Np N � C D » rn z v N�11C OI cn D m M rn z 2 m Do -4 Z DU m m z c�i� O C m n CD p Oc p m /I7�� ro o m M D W o e� pz D D Cb = = C n m r Y m W D 70 7o p c,,) = D r -I o -n Cl) NNo m m � m O CO ■ ■ r m "�' t='n cyn O o LDAD O cn X CD C-) z p r- = = c O m z m z T -1 D r -� m o O C7 -< Cn C? C7 C) cn -n7o OT C m C C m D = C) C-) m D -�-� C-)m mm mO mp O C) �' m C M p DO 70 cn ro �■ 1 co m Ir �`/� m Cr—j D n n m 0o CDsv G� m C� -=1 �7 0 0 ` ao CD z C) 0 = - cn w � pcn c zm o w -4 - L, p = mw �. cp m m OO f C:) Cf � � � z cn m CDtz rn C� = co 1 O m m co 0 0 1 CD cv .D O 'n