Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-15 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, May 15, 2025 at 6:00 PM MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Brian Garrett Commissioner Jessica Perreault Commissioner Sam Rust Commissioner Matthew Sandoval Commissioner Matthew Stoll Commissioner Jared Smith Chairperson Maria Lorcher ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved Motion to approve made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Rust. Voting Yea: Commissioner Garrett, Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Rust, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher Voting Abstaining: Commissioner Stoll 1. Approve Minutes of the April 17, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for In-N-Out Burger (H-2024-00058) by In-N- Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. 3. Final Order for Sadie Creek Drive-through(TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068) by DevCo, LLC, located near the NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Rd. Recommend Approval to City Council Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0068 A. Request: Rezone of 11.18 acres of land from the R-4 and C-C zones to the R- 8 zone; 35.82 acres from the L-O, C-C and C-G zones to the R-15 zone; and a portion of the C-C zone (approximately 10 acres) to the C-G zone which in total is 21.37 acres. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 270 residential lots, 44 commercial lots, 4 office lots, 31 common lots, 2 common drive lots and 1 park lot on 69.18 acres of land in the R-8, R-15, L-O and C-G zoning districts. C. Request: Development Agreement Modification (Inst. No. 2019-055407) to create two (2) new development agreements to develop the Adero Mixed-Use Subdivision. Motion to recommend approval made by Chairperson Lorcher, Seconded by Commissioner Smith. Voting Yea: Commissioner Garrett, Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Rust, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher ADJOURNMENT 7:51 P.M. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To view upcoming Public Hearing Notices, visit https://apps.meridiancity.org/phnotices --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting May 15, 2025. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of May 15, 2025, was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by Chairman Maria Lorcher. Members Present: Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Jared Smith, Commissioner Brian Garrett, Commissioner Matthew Sandoval Commissioner Sam Rust, Commissioner Jessica Perreault and Commissioner Matthew Stoll. Others Present: Kurt Starman, Alexandrea Breshears, Tina Lomeli, Barbara Conly, Bill Parsons, Linda Ritter and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE _X Brian Garrett X Matthew Stoll _X Matthew Sandoval X Jessica Perreault _X Sam Rust X Jared Smith X Maria Lorcher - Chairman Lorcher: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission for May 15th, 2025. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom. We also have staff from the city attorney's and the city's clerk's office, as well as the city's planning department. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here. You may observe the meeting, however, your ability to be seen and talk will be muted -- be seen on screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public testimony portion. If you have a process question during the meeting please e-mail cityclerk(a_meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. If you simply want to watch the -- the meeting we encourage you to watch this streaming on the city's YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity. org/live. With that let's begin with roll call. Thank you. We would like to welcome our new chairperson Matt Stoll to the dais tonight. So, welcome. Stoll: Thank you. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Lorcher: The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. There are no changes to tonight's agenda. Could I get a motion to adopt -- adopt tonight's agenda, please? Smith: So moved. Rust: Second. F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 2 of 33 Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the April 17, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for In-N-Out Burger (H-2024- 00058) by In-N-Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. 3. Final Order for Sadie Creek Drive-through (TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. Lorcher: The next item is the Consent Agenda. For tonight's Consent Agenda Commissioner Stoll is new to our commission and since you were not present for these items your choice is to abstain; correct? Stoll: I am -- Council, I am going to abstain. Lorcher: Okay. So, for tonight's votes Commissioner Stoll will not vote on the Consent Agenda. That includes the -- the meeting minutes of April 17th, Facts -- Findings and Facts and Conclusions of Law for In and Out Burger and the final order for Sadie Creek Drive-Through, which was a request for a two year extension on the conditional use permit. Could I get a motion -- could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Smith: So moved. Rust: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Lorcher: At this time I would briefly like to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and our Unified Development Code. After staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond to staff's comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant is finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 3 of 33 called only once during public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who signed up on our website in advance to testify. You may come to the microphones in Chambers or you will be unmuted on Zoom. Please state your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on screen and our clerk will help you run the presentation. If you have established that you are speaking behalf -- on the behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where others from your group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes. After all those who have signed up in advance who have spoken we will invite any others who wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may come forward in Chambers or press -- on Zoom you press the raise hand button and if you are listening on a telephone you can press star nine. If you are listening on multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please be sure to mute those extra devices so we don't experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are finished if the Commission does not have any questions for you you will return to your seat in Chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak. And, please, remember we will not call on you a second time. After testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to respond to public testimony. When the applicant is finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public hearing and Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully make final decisions or recommendations to City Council. ACTION ITEMS 4. Public Hearing for Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068) by DevCo, LLC, located near the NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Rd. A. Request: Rezone of 11.18 acres of land from the R-4 and C-C zones to the R-8 zone; 35.82 acres from the L-O, C-C and C-G zones to the R-15 zone; and a portion of the C-C zone (approximately 10 acres) to the C-G zone which in total is 21.37 acres. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 270 residential lots, 44 commercial lots, 4 office lots, 31 common lots, 2 common drive lots and 1 park lot on 69.18 acres of land in the R-8, R-15, L-O and C-G zoning districts. C Request: Development Agreement Modification (Inst. No. 2019- 055407) to create two (2) new development agreements to develop the Adero Mixed-Use Subdivision. Lorcher: Tonight I would like to open the public hearing for Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood, Item No. H-2024-0068 near Ten Mile and McMillan, for a rezone, a preliminary plat and a request for a development agreement modification. We will begin with the staff report. Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 4 of 33 Ritter: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Linda Ritter. So, tonight before you, as the Chair said, is an application for a rezone, preliminary plat and development agreement modification. This site consists of 69.8 acres of land. It's currently zoned C-G, L-O and C-C and it's located near the northwest corner of North Ten Mile and McMillan Road. So, the Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood consists of, again, 69.18 acres of land that was annexed in 2005. The property will be developed as a mixed use development consisting of single family detached residential, office and commercial. So, this is the rezone for the C-G. So, it's approximately 21.37 acres. This is a rezone for the L-O. It's about two point some odd acres. This is a rezone for the R-8. It's about 35.82 acres. Sorry. I may be wrong on that one. Hold on. Yeah. And this is the rezone for the R-15. So, again, the modification of the development agreements, we want to take the current development agreement and make two new development agreements, one for the residential and one for the commercial use. But, again, even though they are requesting two development agreements this is one project. So, it's one property, one project, but two separate things being done, commercial and residential. This is the phasing plan for the application. So, the commercial portion is within phase five, because at this time the commercial portion -- they are unsure what will be built in this area. We have a concept of what it may look like and the applicant will show you several different scenarios of what it could look like, but we don't have a -- an absolute concept of what it will be. So, the development agreement has several conditions for that for when they come in, but they will have limitations on what can and can't happen there. So, we are trying to make it where they don't have to come back in and do a development agreement modification, but we have put some strict restrictions on it as far as how it is to be developed. So, this is phase one of the residential. The applicant will be providing -- showing you a modified phasing plan that takes out the amenities, which will be done in the second phase. Again, their landscape plan. We have several pathway connections. They have -- they exceed their open space qualifications. This is their pedestrian connection exhibit. As you can see there is good pedestrian connection -- pedestrian connectivity throughout the proposed development. These are the amenities they are proposing. So, they did submit elevations and any homes that are built along the collector road, if they are two stories they will need to adhere to modulation and different materials to break up the monotonous of the sides of the housing along that collector road. So, we are going to talk a little bit about the residential. So, they are proposing to develop 270 homes to be constructed in phases. To accommodate these -- the residential component two zoning districts are proposed, R-15 and R-8 and, again, they are providing a mix of lot sizes and housing options. As part of the project the applicant is also contributing an additional acreage to the existing park located on Lot 46, Block 5. This contribution will fulfill the requirement outlined in the existing development agreement to establish a 10.2 acre park, enhancing recreational opportunities for the surrounding community. This is the park I was talking about. So, this Bridgetower West neighborhood, it was originally preliminary platted under the development agreement that required the dedication of the park. However, the majority of that park was never formally dedicated to the Bridgetower West Homeowners Association and the prior approvals for the neighborhood have since expired. The Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood application addresses this issue by incorporating the remaining portion of the park that was never deeded to the HOA. This Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 5 of 33 application creates a clear path forward for the current property owner to record a final plat that establishes the properly sized park parcel, therefore, fulfilling the original development agreement and, then, when the parcel could be dedicated to the HOA. This park will not be associated to the property owners within the Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood and the office portion of this, which is the L-O -- so, that is the development of four lots -- it could be less -- at the corner of Ten Mile and West Malta Drive within the area designated for the limited office zoning. This location was strategically selected by the applicant as it sits between the proposed Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood and the existing Bridgetower West Subdivision. The applicant views this as an ideal site for office use, providing a natural transition between residential areas and supporting the overall goal of creating a balanced and integrated mixed-use environment. And, again, the commercial. So, they were -- they proposed to defer the development of the commercial portion of the property to the future phase, which is the last phase, as specific end users have not yet been identified. So, this bubble drawing is kind of a concept of what -- where the commercial is located and access points throughout the site. So, prior to proceeding with the commercial component the applicant will be required to submit some updated plans and demonstrate alignment with the mixed use principles outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. So, the commercial portion of the property -- so, what they are doing is they are working with -- they are -- requested a waiver for right-in, right-out turn onto Ten Mile. So, they have to work with the highway district. They will need to provide an updated transportation impact study, because a transportation impact study was not done on the commercial portion, so they will need to provide that to ACHD for them to evaluate and determine if that is warranted and if that -- the city decides that -- the Council decides to grant them the waiver based upon the fact that ACHD has accepted and approve their transportation impact study and deem that that right-in, right-out is warranted. Again this is the commercial access and pedestrian access plan that the applicant provided. So, this is coming in from -- this is Adero Park and this is the access point they want out to Ten Mile. So, they are asking for an access point off of the new collector road here and, then, there will be an access point that goes down to where that Walmart area is right there to get people through this area. So, this collector street -- it will be constructed as a 36 foot wide residential collector street with two travel lanes. It can either be -- have on-street bike lanes, vertical curb, gutter and a minimum of eight foot wide strip and five foot wide detached sidewalk or it can be constructed as a 26 foot wide residential collector, two travel lanes, curb-gutter, a minimum of eight foot wide landscape strip and ten foot wide multi-pathway on both sides. So, the applicant has chosen -- so far the drawings show that there are -- the ten foot multi-pathway on both sides. So, it will be constructed as a complete street. The applicant -- if the residential portion comes in first we are asking that the landscaping, the pathway, the travel lanes and the curbs and gutter be put in, but minus the pathway and the landscaping. As the commercial comes in we are asking for the same thing on their side, minus the pathway and the landscaping on the residential side. Again this is a concept of a layout that could potentially happen, but, again, there are no specific layouts that have been approved with this. These are concepts or images of things that could potentially go in the commercial. They are not intended for architectural references as noted here. These are potential things that could happen in the commercial area. Again, this is a Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 6 of 33 picture of the park. So, we are going to talk about the collector road again. The staff is asking at this time that this collector road be built, but the entirety of the collector road be built prior to any occupancy within the first phase of this development, because what we don't want to see is that when they start building homes out here that people have to go back out onto Ten Mile to get south to the businesses that are down here, because there is no connection. This road is the missing link to get people to the south. So, once the road is built that the applicant does have the option of building this connection on the commercial side and taking it down south. That is an option for the applicant. Or they can continue to build it down to connect to -- I think it's San Vito Way, which will allow that connection to the south, because if the applicant builds this portion and this portion right here is to be done by a third party, they have to build this section and I think the applicant is building this, so there is some kind of agreement between the applicant and the third party to build this section here, but, then, we will have this missing piece, because without this built these apartments cannot receive occupancy for their development. So, this is going to come sooner or later -- sooner rather than later I would assume, because they are working with the city to revise their plans to get into this development. So, we don't want to have that missing gap and, then, have people going up through the neighborhoods to get up and around and come down around to get down to the south. So, that is not what we want to happen. We don't want them going back out on Ten Mile and we don't want them cutting through the neighborhoods to get down and around to the businesses at the south -- on the south. So, staff has been working really hard with the applicant on this project. We have had some very good conversations and the applicant has been receptive of the things that we have talked about. There are still a few outstanding issues that we will be working on and we should hope to have those resolved before they go before City Council. So, we are proposing a couple of changes to some of the conditions that we have in this document and the first one is under the commercial portion of the development agreement we would like to kind of change some of the language and add that conceptual plans providing -- provided including and, then, are intended to serve as a general guide -- guidance for future required commercial applications. So, that was a recommendation from the applicant and the staff has no issues with that and, then, another one was 1-C where we are talking about the transportation impact study for the commercial lots and we added, as determined by ACHD in there, because it is a requirement from the highway district. 1-G. Staff is still working with the applicant regarding this condition. And, again, for now the condition stands as presented. 1-J. As far as the plaza it was kind of -- there were two different conditions. One said first phase and one said second. So, we just wanted to clarify that it's the phase that is adjacent to the plaza. And, then, again, on the commercial portion of the road we are excluding the pathway and the landscape on the residential side. And, then, 1-P, again, we are working with the applicant on this and hope to have it resolved, so the condition stands as presented and, then, we want to remove condition 1-V, because that is moving to the second phase. And with that I will stand for any questions that you may have. Lorcher: Would the applicant like to come forward? Flo Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 7 of 33 Clark: Hey, everybody. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise, representing the applicant. It's nice to see a familiar face. Welcome back. I guess back; right? Back to the halls. Something like that. Okay. So, we are here tonight to talk about the Adero project and let me see if I can get this on full screen. The mouse is not reacting to me. Lorcher: You may want to try the arrows. Clark: Not getting anything right now. Lorcher: Yeah. Tina, can we get it full screen -- or on the big ones it's full screen up there, so -- oh, no, not -- I guess not. Clark: Oh, I wonder if my monitor -- Lorcher: Oh, it's not on presentation mode. Clark: Yep. Lorcher: If my kids were here they would figure it out in a second. Clark: I can see it, I just can't control it. That looks better. Yep. I think we got her. Okay. Off we go. Okay. Thanks, everybody. So, just a couple kind of initial thoughts as we start this. This is not an annexation, just to kind of set the stage; right? This is a rezone of some property that's had this zoning for over 20 years. In that time there has been a Comprehensive Plan update, such that it's now -- has a different designation than it did back then. There would be -- now it's got a mixed use commercial designation on it. And so in proposing what we have, we have a commercial component and we have a residential component and as you know we are typically residential developers, so this is a good opportunity for us to be able to bring something to you in the mixed use area that actually has all of those things, so you can see it and take a look at it. And in addition to that I would just point out that I don't think I can emphasize enough just how important it is that this project brings in the mid-mile collector. That area -- it has some traffic struggles. That mid-mile collector is something that everybody's been waiting for to be able to take some of that pressure off of that Ten Mile and McMillan intersection. This provides that on Lock. So, it's very important for the -- for the area to be able to have that. So, as was mentioned this is between Chinden on the north, McMillan on the south, Ten Mile on the east, so you can kind of see the context here. I think this is important, because if you look at the four square mile area centered on Ten Mile Road, this is really one of the last pieces to develop in -- I know that Bill raises his eyebrows whenever I say the word in-fill, because the city has a very technical definition of what in-fill means, but the general sense of -- of the -- of the word this is an in-fill project. It's filling in. It's providing the connections that are needed as you go forward. And you -- as you can see there, you know, the areas that are -- that don't have the little green marks on them for -- for platted lots, those are primarily -- you can see Heroes Park just to our northeast. You got the school sites. There is -- there is one piece of MDR, medium density residential, F11 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 8 of 33 on the far southwest. But other than that that four square miles this really completes it. The Comprehensive Plan also speaks to that 15 minute city concept and this is -- this is one example of how that really works. So, as we are able to come in and complete these connections and get this development in, you can see that there are pathways that allow pedestrian connectivity to the grade schools, over to Heroes Park. They also allow you to get much more easily to the commercial opportunities that are within the immediate area. I mentioned before that there was a Comprehensive Plan designation, so -- a change. So, as you know the current designation is the old kind of C-C. We are taking a chunk of the property and really right sizing the commercial to that. I think it's approximately 24 acres with a property that's closer to Ten Mile that has the visibility and, then, in accordance with the new comp plan designation, increasing some of that residential to get it to, like we say, kind of the right size. So, the mixed use commercial designation speaks to up to 15 per -- 50 percent of the development area being residential. The mixed use zoning band is between six to 15 dwelling units per acre and we are on the very low end of that at seven. So, we -- we believe that this -- one of the benefits of this project is that it does kind of update everything for that area to make it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. We have the variety of zoning here to make this all work together. So, you can see on the far west we have the R-8 with the somewhat larger lots to kind of -- facing to the neighbors. The park on the south. And Linda did a nice job of explaining what's going to happen there. She's correct that this will be its own new parcel at 10.2 acres, which is what the develop -- the old development agreement called for. Creating that parcel will allow for it to be -- the rest for it to be conveyed. And, then, we have a little bit of-- we have some limited office on the north and, then, the commercial C-G area on the -- on the east and southeast. Again, the collector road is really important. This is about a half mile of the collector that will be completed and one of the things that it does is the -- the location of the collector road is largely driven by the two access points on either side; right? So, as we drive the collector road through the middle of it that provides a lot of the transition that's needed between the residential and the commercial. So, as Linda mentioned, we will have our collector through the middle. You got a hundred plus feet of right of way and, then, you also -- and within that you also have the two ten foot regional pathways. So, that creates this nice transition and buffer between the two. It also leads into the -- excuse me -- the plaza area that you can see that is at the entry to the commercial that will also be part of that transition. Again this -- this kind of backs up and kind of helps you see how these -- these mid-mile collectors are laid out and how they function. Again this -- the red is the mid-mile collector that we are going to be completing and that is what we anticipate and ACHD anticipates and anybody who understands a mid-mile collector would understand it's going to take some of that pressure off of the arterials by allowing people to get through the block, rather than having to go out onto the arterial itself. As I mentioned, the -- the arterial as it comes through will have the -- the regional pathways on either side and you can see the -- that -- that pedestrian connectivity grid. Linda showed you this -- this drawing before. But one thing that I want to emphasize, too, is that that will allow folks to walk from either the existing Bridgetower neighborhood or from these new neighborhoods along these regional pathways up to the -- there is an existing HAWK signal that will allow folks to get over to Heroes Park as well. So, it's a -- it's a nice connection. As we always do we went well above and beyond with the F12 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 9 of 33 amenity points. So, 27 when eight are required. I just would make another point there that we are the -- I mentioned before the park parcel on the far west, that is not proposed to be part of our HOA, that is going to the existing HOA. It's theirs. It will be their amenity, just how it always has been. We are developing our own amenities on our side and we are not proposing a cross-use type of arrangement. We will have -- we will have our own amenities. I mentioned before the plaza. So, we -- one of the conditions that Linda mentioned requires that construction with the first commercial phase that touches it and that will be part of that kind of drawing the -- the residents -- or, excuse me, the residential occupants into the -- into the commercial area and try to help promote that mixed use feel. We did supply a number of concept plans. You saw a few of these and -- but, really, what we are looking at is the commercial area developing when the users come in accordance with the bubble plan that we have here and the one element of that to emphasize is that before you have a -- a significant, you know, larger scale type user that comes in there, they are going to need that right-in, right-out that would be proposed where that -- where the arrow is pointing out onto Ten Mile and so as Linda mentioned that will require an updated traffic impact study based on that specific use that would, then, go through ACHD. So, they will -- that will still be under control. This isn't a carte blanche kind of a situation. That access has to be studied with ACHD, but we are requesting the waiver now to kind of set that up so that that can happen. We have worked really hard to, you know, work through any of the issues on this one. We have had a number of neighborhood meetings. We have had meetings with the Bridgetower HOA board. We had a bunch of meetings with staff that they enjoyed thoroughly, including one this afternoon that -- where we made some -- some good progress on those conditions of approval, as -- as Linda mentioned and I think the -- the way I would wrap this up and, then, obviously, be happy to answer questions, is I would say, one, we are in agreement with what Linda mentioned with regard to the modifications to the conditions. That includes some direction for us to continue to work with staff on those -- those two that she mentioned having to do with some of the timing questions. The only additional one that I would just mention -- and I think this is one you -- if I have got the numbering right -- is the condition that requires the completion of all of the collector road with the first phase and I just kind of want to give you a little bit of background for that. We -- we agree that that's an important element. It's a half mile of collector and so a half mile of collectors, three and a half million dollars. The way things -- and I kind of want to give everybody a little bit of background, because this is not something I understood until I got into this, but when you put in these -- this infrastructure, if you have a three and a half million dollar roadway you need to put a surety up for 120 percent of that -- of that roadway. So, that three and a half million, 700,000 surety, 4.2 million. Now, while that surety is up you still have to pay for putting in the road. So, the -- essentially what it's -- what you are talking about is nearly eight million dollars that's committed in order to make sure that that gets in. So, what we are working with with staff and what I would ask for direction from -- from your folks if you -- if we are fortunate enough to get a recommendation of approval, is to also work on that one with staff in order to get to timing that makes sense in light of the fact that during that first phase you are only going to have a few -- handful of folks and they will have a connection out to Ten Mile and, then, we just need to figure out the right number to limit us to make sure that that collector gets in just as quickly as 13 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 10 of 33 possible. So, with that I'm happy to answer questions or maybe I can come back on rebuttal if there is not. Lorcher: Okay. Commissioners, do we have any questions for the applicant at this time? Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: So, I know the commercial side of things is still early, very conceptual and things, but I did notice a lot of the elevations and a lot of the ideas. There is kind of a lot more big box kind of looking things and more parking area and I actually just looked into the -- the comp plan just to make sure that I was remembering it right, but I know that in mixed use part of the intention is maybe higher floor ratios and maybe less of a reliance on parking and I'm just curious if -- if that is the intention to go more of a big box route given that Walmart and Costco are also kind of in that corridor and what, if anything, might be limiting -- if that is the direction why that direction and maybe not something that's more in line with the comp plan. Clark: Commissioner Smith, so the -- the elevations were provided to just kind of give an idea of what might happen. Certainly not a crystal ball of who is going to be there. The point you made about the fact that you got Walmart just south of us and Costco just north of us probably drives that market to a certain degree, like, you know, probably looking for something in between on the mid mile of that block. A couple other points. One is that in order to attract a user for this site one of the things that you really need is a preliminary plat, so you can tell the user, hey, we have got a path forward. We can -- we can get you to an approval in a -- in a relatively quick amount of time. Another point I would make is that -- as I mentioned before, any significant user is going to need that right-in, right-out to be able to have some -- before they are going to have some -- some comfort there. So, there is that TIS element of it as well. But in addition to that I would just note that if you look at the conditions of approval we -- there are a number of limitations that have been included there with regard to how the commercial will develop. That's a lot of the arm wrestling that we have been doing with -- with Linda is to try to make sure that we understand that. But that's in addition to the requirements of code. So, the code, when it comes to the commercial areas, has screening requirements, has, you know, fronting up on Ten Mile type requirements, that sort of thing and so the -- a lot of that is going to be code driven in addition to condition driven. So, I guess the long and the short of that is that we are trying to create a palette for someone to be able to paint on, but we are certainly not presupposing any sort of big box or anything else there. It's going to -- we are just trying to give some folks some ideas. Smith: Thank you. Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault, did you have a question? 14 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 11 of 33 Perreault: I do. Thank you, Madam Chair. A couple questions. Good to see you, Hethe. Clark: Yeah. Perreault: So, we didn't talk a lot about the multi-family. I realize there will be an additional -- or, you know, future application that will come in with that, but I'm curious if you could take us through access in that multi-family area. Clark: And, Commissioner Perreault, when you say multi-family you are talking about the single family residential area or -- Perreault: What's that? Clark: I'm -- Perreault: I understood that there was going to be 16 acres of multi-family. Is that not the case? Okay. Clark: I don't know what -- Perreault: My apologies. Clark: Yeah. Perreault: And, then, as far as the -- the collector and traffic that will be heading north on Ten Mile from the collector, is there going to be a left turn lane there? Clark: On the collector itself-- let me check with Laren. Are we -- yes. I assumed there would be, but wanted to confirm, yes, there would be a left turn lane. Perreault: Okay. Thank you. Lorcher: Okay. I think we are good. Clark: Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody signed up to testify? Conly: Madam Chair, we have both web and paper sign-ups. May we start with the web sign-ups, please, as we see a Bainbridge HOA president is the first sign up. Lorcher: Okay. And did you say that's on Zoom? Conly: We believe he is present. F15] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 12 of 33 Lorcher: Oh, you are here. Conly: He signed up online. Lorcher: Okay. Good evening. Ramsey: Nice to see you again. Lorcher: -- see you again. If you could just state your name and address for the record that would be great. Ramsey: Wade Ramsey. I am a resident at 4013 West Lost Rapids and I'm the elected board president for Bainbridge. Lorcher: Are you speaking on behalf of the HOA or for yourself? Ramsey: HOA. Yeah. There are a few residents here as well, but yes. Lorcher: Okay. And the residents here have given him permission to speak? Yes? Ramsey: I only need three minutes. I'm fine with three minutes. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Ramsey: Bainbridge is the 573 homes that sits directly north of Adero Park; right? So, we are going to connect into Adero Park on North San Vito and, then, on the eastern side of that is Farley -- Fairborn. I'm sorry. Fairborn. We have -- I have two things I'd like to communicate. One, look, we prefer -- this is kind of the lesser of three options for us. Something's going to go into that field. We would prefer less density, R-8 throughout; right? But it's not apartments and it's not huge slabs of parking lot for businesses and those are both things that we would be hostile to; right? So, there is that. Single family homes. It's in our interest for those to be single family homes there with nice amenities, good traffic through. The collector road. I think that's going to be -- Gondola is what that is likely to be. Good landscaping, those sorts of things. And that's our preference. That's our vested interest in and this seems to be some of that. Second, more importantly I suppose, I wanted to say thank you. My community has now been here six times in the last few years on various issues that we felt strongly about and you have always treated us with respect, politeness, you have listened, you have given careful consideration to everything we have -- we have talked about and I appreciate that. This is a thankless job, so I wanted to make sure to say thank you for all of you. I appreciate that. Even if we disagree on some things, you guys have always been great. That partnership has been great and I appreciate that. Okay? Lorcher: Thank you. Ramsey: Thank you. Madam Clerk. F16] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 13 of 33 Conly: Robin Campbell. Campbell: My name is Robin Campbell. I live in Bridgetower West. 5561 North Joy Way. I bought one of the last lots to be developed in this HOA. So, I thought I was pretty set. Never in my wildest dreams did I think you guys would ever connect this to Ten Mile. This was sold to us as a vast region of open space. Pool. Courtyard. A smarter master design, comprised of pod neighborhoods to lessen traffic on residential cobblestone streets. It is not right that our builder has the ability to make these decisions affecting our HOA open space. By taking advantage of being -- of undeveloping one lot -- I'm learning this as I go. And I guess more recently they have changed it, so after 75 percent is developed they have to turn it over to the HOA. So, I guess that's why he is allowed to slice and dice our common space -- our green area and now turn it into a connector all the way to Ten Mile. It just seems really wrong. This will put an undue burden on the existing traffic system, because it already has. Trying to exit onto McMillan. Try to get your high schooler to Owyhee where we can barely exit to McMillan or Black Cat as it is. There are police officers in the North Oaks that sit there and patrol, because cars are trying to cut through their neighborhood to get to high school, to get to the businesses by Costco. It's already a huge vehicle burden and -- a traffic burden and I think that's why you guys denied the building on Chinden and Black Cat, because it was calculated there would be 80 cars per minute on Black Cat. The traffic report that I was given was from November 2023. It's completely changed since then. We have a new community on Daphne that's being built by Lennar Homes. We have Brody Square that is just now being completed. Those numbers are grossly different. The connector will go right past our HOA green space where our kids play basketball. They ride their bikes to the park. Where our little pool is. Where our one basketball court is and our ten acres of green space that has the pond that you -- is used for all the water. So, a lot of that's not usable because it's the pond that everybody's going to be using I guess for irrigation. But they ride their bikes to school along that path where you want to put the connector and it's unsafe. It's completely change our community and our lifestyle and what we thought we were buying when we moved into this community and this HOA. Lorcher: Thank you. Conly: Madam Chair, asking a brief clarification. Our next speakers have listed themselves on the same line, Will and Patricia Fritschle. The question is would they each like to speak or would one person like to take three minutes. Fritschle: Hi. I'm Patricia Fritschle and this is my husband Will. I really just wanted him to have it on record that he objects to this development and this proposal. Lorcher: I need your name and address and you will have to get closer to the mic. Fritschle: Patricia Fritschle. Lorcher: Okay. F17] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 14 of 33 Fritschle: 5824 North Botticelli. Lorcher: Okay. Fritschle: We are directly behind and one of these -- these homes would directly line back up to our -- Lorcher: Okay. Fritschle: We are not here saying don't develop. We bought knowing that this was going to be developed, but we also bought with the understanding that this was going to be an extension of what our subdivision was and what it looked like. So, we were here back in -- a few years ago for a different developer. Since then our developer has sold our area, which included our green space and I don't know how that is even possibly legal when -- you know, I understand you guys have all had a very different experience with these developers. Our experience have been very disrespectful, very rude treatment and bullying, in essence, is what we have experienced from them and that is what it is. But when we were here -- I want to say it was four years ago that concept was denied, which looked very similar to what this -- this is and that was denied due to density and stated to follow the concept -- the original concept. That original concept still has 150 to 170 homes and that is adequate. The density that has developed around and in that community with -- what's Prescott Development, Hubble Homes, how many homes is that? Daphne? Like there is still development. Currently on Zillow I believe there is 97 homes available for rent and I don't remember the number of apartments, but there is ample residents -- homes that are available that are up for grabs and this is only going to make a dense community, a high traffic area even worse and it doesn't suit the community that is asking this panel to reject this and stick with the original concept. We knew it was going to be developed. We just don't agree with this. Lorcher: Okay. Fritschle: And it affects our lives, because we live there. Lorcher: Right. Fritschle: And our San Vito -- is it San Vito? That we come in off -- by the pool? Huh? Gondola? It's already a speedway and it breaks my heart to watch these kids struggle -- they can't -- the south side can't even get over to enjoy the -- what is the left -- or what we currently have as a park, because of traffic. And the apartments that are to already be developed is supposed to add, what, 400 and something. The emergency response is -- what was, 6.4 -- 6.4 minutes to respond and that's supposed to be adequate? Somebody's life is on the line and 6.4 minutes is the response time? I know. I'm sorry. Lorcher: It doesn't work that way, but thank you. So, if you can conclude that would be great. 18 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 15 of 33 Fritschle: So, I just want to reiterate. We know that this is going to be developed. The original concept was what we were expecting and we -- we are just asking that you stay with that plan. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk. Conly: Tom Callison. Callison: I'm Tom Callison. I live at 3922 West Milano Street in the Bridgetower West development. Lorcher: Thank you. Callison: I have been there from day one and with only a few homes there and I have seen the good, bad and the ugly for all this period of time, but this is -- this is just adding the ugliness that we have had with this developer. The biggest issue -- I'm not against development and that I knew was going to happen sometime or the other, even though he owned that and that was supposedly to be part of our Bridgetower West development. We bought because that's the way it was going to be and was going to have a ten acre park with a dinky swimming pool, which I'm sorry if you guys approved that you don't know what you were doing, because all around the other developments they have huge swimming pools. For the size of this development it's -- Lorcher: Too small. Callison: It's a joke. It's a joke. But, anyway, getting back to the development. The issue is traffic. The biggest issue is traffic. If you travel to McMillan and trying to get off of San Vito, you are waiting forever to get out and it's almost impossible. Adding the other development going out to Ten Mile is not going to help reduce that. Someone said it's going to be a left lane turn. Go ahead and try to get on Ten Mile and make a left turn there with no signal. You are not going to make it. You are going to have accidents quickly. You can make a right turn and that's it. So, now you are limited. You are spending 3.8 million dollars to put a road in and that's going to cause issues. They need a light at San Vito. A light definitely has to be put there. Not a crosswalk, because Ada county said originally, well, it's too close to the intersection of Ten Mile and McMillan. It's not. You drive anywhere off Eagle and you will see less distance where there is stop lights. If you don't put a stop light there and when they put Highway 16 in with all those developments going out there, Ustick and McMillan are going to be inundated with traffic and Ada county has to build a light system. That's the only way it's going to make us safe to get in and out of that development and what they said about speeding, it is. Someone -- when they get on Gondola they are speeding. Those kids -- people are speeding and when they get off at San Vito they are speeding across there and when you are adding 270 homes and the 72, which are planned for that those apartments behind Walmart -- or 69, you double that by two cars per -- per residence. That's the max. If it's half of it it's still 340 cars that's going to be added to that development. So, it's a safety and a concern to traffic. F-19 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 16 of 33 Lorcher: Thank you very much. Callison: Thank you. Lorcher: Madam Clerk. Conly: Thank you, Madam Chair. Patty Scales. Lorcher: Good evening. Scales: Hello. Patty Scales. 3673 West Windhill Drive. I'm in Bainbridge. And I also oppose the density of this community. When we first moved into Bainbridge I think it was about 120 homes and, then, three years ago I believe it was about 170 homes and those have both not gone through. The homes that are going to be built, he has got 254 where their square footage on their lots are three to five thousand and he has 16 that's 5,000 and above and in his paperwork and proposal he says each home will be able to accommodate four vehicles and there will be an additional 130 cars -- spaces to park in the community. I know that people won't have four cars, but there might be some that do and if you do the math on that that's 1,200 cars without the commercial side and I have heard many times today the right-in, the right-out, but they are not addressing the left-out and Bainbridge is their left-out and that's the community that I'm in and they are opening San Vito and Fairborn and I'm three houses off of San Vito. There is 13 houses on my street and there is 24 kids, ages two to 12, and when those kids are out playing the other neighborhood kids come over and there is a lot of kids. If they choose to take the street behind me, which is Ladle Rapids, it's going to send them right by our community pool and there are kids running in and out and across the street on their bicycles, on their -- on their skateboards, you know, on their scooters and they won't be able to see these kids, because they are going to be running from the cars that are parked on Levingham, which is what Ladle Rapids turns into. So, the safety of the kids are very important and not only will they use our community for their left-in and left-out, they are going to use it for Costco. They are going to use it for Rock Harbor Church. For the LDS church. To go get gas. And we aren't built to accommodate that kind of traffic. We don't have main thoroughfares. They are actually going to be driving on our streets that our kids are on and it's incredibly unsafe. Incredibly. And I'm also not opposed that they build. I expected it. And if they want to do 270, which in a perfect world, don't open up our access roads, but that won't happen, because they said they are required to. But they also said they can't accommodate a light, that that's not up to them. So, unfortunately, the residents will be using our community, because it will be the easiest way for them to get out of their community and go left and it's going to make our community unsafe and I think if you lived on these streets you wouldn't want this to happen to your kids. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk. Conly: Thank you. Richard Boyle. F20] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 17 of 33 Boyle: Good evening. My name is Richard Boyle. I live at 5230 North Botticelli. I am right on the back side as well that meets up to the R-8. When I purchased the lot for my home custom -- my custom built home, I bought it with the -- in mind that I had a park behind me. They are taking the park away. They are going to give me a 20 -- 30 foot strip behind me instead. I paid a premium for that lot, because the park was behind me. So, I'm not -- I'm not opposed to the development, but I am -- as everyone else seriously opposed to the density. Way too many houses. Nobody's really brought up schools, other than the kids going to and from. They built the new -- whatever -- Pleasant Valley -- whatever it is. It's already over capacity. You are going to put a -- all the apartments in and, then, you are going to add 270 homes, they said, well, they are -- they won't be -- they won't be kids, these are going to be empty nesters. Well, I'm not far from an empty nester and I can tell you the size of the house is going to have to be narrow and it's going to be two story for the most part. Empty Nesters don't buy two story -- two story homes with their bedrooms upstairs. Sorry. I don't buy that. So, I -- again, not opposed to developing. I knew they were going to do something back there. I am opposed to what they have done to the property behind me. Again I paid a premium for that lot to have the park behind me. For the developer to -- oh, I overdeveloped that. It never was supposed to be a park. That would been nice to have been told when we were buying. It's kind of sad that the -- nobody said, well, we are going to take half of that out and put it into homes someday, so -- and we have paid to maintain that area -- that space for years now. I guess that's about all I have to say. Other than the traffic, as all of them have said, leaving to come here tonight, San Vito getting onto McMillan, I was over five minutes sitting there, left turn signal on, trying to get onto -- left on the McMillan. This is not going to help. Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Conly: James Ferguson. Ferguson: Hello. James Ferguson. 3629 West Renhold Drive. I am also a resident here at Bainbridge. Pretty much everything's been said that I want to said, but I will just add -- I oppose this -- this level of -- the -- the density of this project. It doesn't seem to fit the surrounding communities in my opinion from what you see there, from all the -- the four square miles that Hethe had pointed out, this seems far denser than any of the other areas surrounding there and like multiple people brought up, the -- the traffic -- the safety is the biggest issue. You know, I look forward to having some more neighbors. I got some great neighbors now. I look forward to having some more -- some more great neighbors. But it needs to be done in a safe fashion, because this isn't a project that's going to just get built and go away in a few years. This -- this is going to last decades. Decades and decades and decades; right? So, I think there needs to be some careful consideration to the traffic lights that people have spoke about, the traffic safety -- you know, an updated traffic safety setup, because, yeah, it's -- I'm sure you -- some of you guys have been over there, but it's -- it's mainly for the kids, like -- like Ms. Patty had talked about. There is a lot of kids in our neighborhood. We are very fortunate for that. And I think safety -- you know, Meridian's a great place for everybody. It's a great place to raise a family and I think we need to maintain that level of -- of -- of home and safety F21 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15, 2025 Page 18 of 33 for the kids and so appreciate your time, Commissioners. Thank you once again. Best of luck. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Conly: Thank you. Again asking clarification. We have Mike and Janice Borchard. Asking if each prefers three minutes? Just you? Okay. Thank you. Borchard: Good evening. Thank you guys ever so much for being here and for listening to us. Just kind of a little bit of a recap with what everybody else is talking about. Lorcher: Before you start if you can -- Borchard: Oh. Lorcher: -- give your name and address for the record. Borchard: Been here before. I should know that. Janice Borchard. 5466 North Botticelli Avenue, Bridgetower West. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Borchard: So, we all kind of knew that there was going to be a development behind us. A lot of people moved in knowing -- and I have copies, but, anyhow, we had a concept of what the future development was going to look like. You know, it was R-4 with some commercial along Ten Mile and, then, a few years back, you know, all that changed. We love Meridian. We love the abundance of parks. The spaciousness. You know, everything that you guys have on your -- your web page. Back in January of 2021, a proposed development -- and it was R-8 and I have documentation. I have -- it's -- they were five to seven thousand square foot lots was proposed and denied by you all, because it was too dense and it was the row housing concept and when everybody looked at the pictures it was like no green spaces, fire services. Safety was a huge concern. This was only like 169 lots, not 270 -- or 269 that's being proposed now. So, you all shot down a much lesser density before in January of 2021. Okay? And, then, the application was pulled by the developer. Just kind of taking a little bit of a recap for the general area. The apartments -- there is 245 apartments that you all approved in '22, you know, between us and Walmart. This used to be a senior development. It was proposed to be that. The zoning didn't get changed. The use did and all of a sudden now from seniors, without having a lot of cars, we now have 245 apartments going in with cars now and people -- you know, kids using the schools. So, you know, keep that in mind for apartments that are going to be in that area in and out. But it's a -- the Black Cat and McMillan, it was denied by you all and there was major modifications. It was approved -- 80 acres. There was a huge reduction in their R-15, 80 acres total, and now it's only eight acres of R-15. So, most of it is going to be larger single family homes. There was 23 and now it's only eight. Prescott Ridge, which was approved in F22 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 19 of 33 May of '21, 128 acres. They only have eight acres of R-15. The rest is 99 acres of R-8 and, then, a hospital. So, you have got some multi-unit, you know, townhouses and four-plexes in there. So, keep in mind the number of R-15s that we have going on. Bridge -- Bainbridge, which is just north of us, they are primarily R-4 and they have 13 5,000 square foot lots, which are where it connects at that buffer between Bainbridge proper and Ten Mile. So, again, you take, you know, all the hundreds of homes there and you are seeing that. I really hope you guys notice the difference in this proposed Adero neighborhood. They are way out of proportion for R-15 versus R-8. Not consistent with our neighborhood at all. So, thank you for your consideration. You guys have always been amazing in doing what's right for us neighbors that are already here. So, thank you. Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Conly: Thank you. Moving to our online meeting participants. Roger Soucy signed the online sign in-sheet. Did Roger wish to speak? Soucy: No. That's okay. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you, Roger. Madam Clerk. Conly: Thank you. And just verifying one more person. We saw a hand up earlier. We believe Christian Jensen. Did Christian wish to speak? Jensen: Hi. This is Christian Jensen. 3833 West Daphne Street in Bridgetower West. So, we are directly to the west of the approved apartment area and I -- everyone -- all of my neighbors have spoke very eloquently and I agree with everything they would say. I live right by that intersection and I just want to attest that when I leave for work, if it's anything after 7:00 o'clock in the morning the wait is five or six cars deep and the weight is long and I do believe, as was said earlier, there are safety concerns as we go forward with pulling out onto McMillan, particularly when you are trying to cross traffic to go -- go left towards Ten Mile. So, biggest concern is traffic once again. I'm sure new homes will look good, because they are new, but when we think about the density we just don't have the road infrastructure to support that density of population, especially since the apartments have already been approved and we have now got two different developments wanting to use San Vito, which is already overtaxed because of the -- all of the neighborhoods that have grown to the west of our neighborhood -- west of Black Cat. So, thank you very much. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Conly: Thank you, Madam Chair. No one else online has raised their hand. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Is there anybody else in Chambers that would like to speak? Sir? And, then, you. Hi. F23] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 20 of 33 Carniglia: Hi. My name is Troy Carniglia. I'm at 4029 West Philomena, Bridgetower West. Lorcher: Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Carniglia: I just had a question. He -- the developer mentioned seven homes per acre. Would that include the pond is how we got up to that statistic? Lorcher: He will answer that question in his remarks. Carniglia: Okay. And, then, I find it interesting that if they are using that pond we pay in our HOA towards maintaining the pond and the grass area. So, I'm not sure how that transfers. Lorcher: Okay. I will ask him to answer that as well. Carniglia: Okay. And, then, also wanted to talk about the apartment and homes that's already been approved. That's approximately -- I -- it's -- I heard it was 249 acre -- or 249 residents or -- Lorcher: That application is not in front of us tonight -- Carniglia: Right. Lorcher: -- so I don't have the -- Carniglia: But with 270 units the average amount of people per home is 2.66, which would be 718 residents and that would be 1.83 cars per household, which would be about 500 cars per -- per that area, on top of the apartments if it's similar in the amount of residents, that would be a thousand cars in that -- in that area. Like they said, the infrastructure, it's -- we can't handle that. I do agree that that area needs to be developed, but I don't think it needs to be 270 homes. It needs to be similar to what we have already in our -- in our area. Lorcher: Okay. Carniglia: And that's it. Lorcher: All right. Thank you very much for your testimony. Carniglia: And I appreciate you. Lorcher: Thank you. Ma'am, would you like to come up? Garrison: Hi. My name is -- 24 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 21 of 33 Lorcher: Pull it down. Yep. There you go. Garrison: My name is Tracy Garrison. Three eight -- or 3898 West Lucina Drive. Lorcher: Okay. Garrison: I'm in Bridgetower West. And the only concern -- I just want to say everybody has done a phenomenal job as far as expressing all of our concerns. But I just want to reiterate the schools. I -- I work in the schools and I know that we are over capacity at this time and I just think the higher density will just add more stress to the school system as well. That's it. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you for your testimony. Anybody else in Chambers like to speak? Ma'am. Ratzesberger: Good evening. My name is Megan Ratzesberger. 4000 West Cedar Grove Court. Also part of the Bridgetower West development. I wanted to agree with everything that's already been said and I wanted to add just a little bit of -- shoot. Took a picture. Here we go. So, as she just mentioned, the schools that they have listed as the schools going -- you know, the families going to these schools, I just wanted to add as of yesterday -- one second. I -- I thought I had the thing pulled up. I did not. I just want to agree with everything that everybody -- that everybody's said already. We do need stop lights. We need wider roads. Anyways, my husband and I are here to object. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you for being here. Anybody else like to testify before we close the public hearing? Conly: Madam Chair? Lorcher: We will -- oh. Sorry. Conly: We have one more online request. Lorcher: Okay. We have a lady here and, then, they still have a rebuttal. Ma'am, would you like to come up first and, then, we will take the online. Rice: Hi. Lorcher: Hi. If you could state your name and address for the record that would be great. Rice: My name is Allison Rice and I live at 4305 West Anatole Street in the Bridgetower West Subdivision. Lorcher: Okay. F25] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 22 of 33 Rice: And it's the part of the Bridgetower West Subdivision that's north of McMillan. Lorcher: Okay. Rice: And I'm terrified of public speaking, so -- Lorcher: Okay. Rice: -- got some notes here. My husband, daughter and I have lived here since 2020. My child attends Pleasant Valley Elementary School, which is within the Bridgetower West community on the north side of McMillan. I'm a member of the community that is for responsible development. Based on the materials provided as part of the application for a rezone, I don't think that the residential component of the rezone is really responsible action at this time for several reasons. Due to the time limits I would like to focus on one key issue area and that is school capacity. The immediate schools in the vicinity are over capacity. It's evidenced in the numbers provided on the project website. It's evidenced in the trailers put up at Pleasant Valley Elementary. It's evidenced by the members of our community that are south of McMillan that now will have to leave Pleasant View Elementary and be bused to Hunter Elementary down the road in the future school calendar years due to the overcrowding at the school. Just wanted to note that in a memo from Heather Hill to Linda Ritter that's available on the website, it notes that within the past five years within a one mile radius of the project location 1,156 school aged children have enrolled in schools. The proposed development will contain 270 single family units, resulting in approximately 133 school aged children. The memo also states that there for the calendar year 2024 to 2025 all three of the closest zoned schools that are identified in the application, which includes Pleasant View Elementary, Star Middle and Owyhee High School, were all over capacity. I have got a couple of notes here about, you know, capacity from a cumulative perspective in the other developments that have been recently approved for construction and just the amount of kids that that will add to the existing schools -- it's a lot. The application narrative online I think is a little bit misleading with respect to schools and what it says from the developer. It doesn't reflect the current numbers in the school's capacity memo. Exhibit N states that Pleasant View is at capacity, but Hunter and Willow Elementary are under, Star Middle is near capacity, but Sawtooth and Heritage are under. Owyhee is near capacity, but Rocky Mountain and Meridian are under capacity. I just didn't think that that was accurate based on what the city had presented in the materials online. I would like some clarification on that if I could get some. I just don't think they are supported as part of the materials provided. The narrative says that a simple boundary line adjustment by West Ada is a solution. It also says that the state legislature has recently provided funding for schools for building. I haven't seen plans for building of more schools. I just -- I would argue that the people in Meridian are pretty exhausted with redrawing of school district lines to accommodate new development and I'm sure that the folks that are south of McMillan and our Bridgetower West community have a lot to say about redistricting and now being bused to Hunter school in the future school years. F26] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 23 of 33 Lorcher: Okay. Rice: That's all. Thank you very much for the time. Lorcher: Thank you. We do not have a representative from West Ada here this evening, so we won't be able to answer your questions about the schools. If you do have questions about the schools I would suggest you give their office a call and they could probably clarify the numbers, the boundaries and the redistricting. Okay? Thank you. Madam Clerk, you said there was someone online? Conly: Thank you, Madam Chair. Calling David McAdams. Lorcher: Okay. David, if you can state your name and address for the record that would be great. McAdams: Yep. David McAdams. 5552 North of Asissi Avenue and that's in the Bridgetower West HOA. I raised my hand and everybody kind of right before me was saying exactly what we wanted to say, which is the -- the overpopulation of the schools, having two communities built in those two areas behind Walmart and, then, above Walmart that we are talking about today is concerning for us, because Pleasant View is so overtaxed. I have friends and colleagues that I work with that have people in Owyhee that is also overtaxed and these are going to continue to draw more families there and overburden the schools even further. The fact that, you know, they had to put out an exclusion zone this year and send people who are getting ready to start their kindergarteners to Hunter Elementary, rather than letting them go to school with their siblings at Pleasant View and make the families decide whether to send everybody to a different school or let them continue with their friends just shows the overtaxed and overburdened system that's in place and this area is in dire need of increasing the capacity before -- of the schools before we increase the number of residents living here. So, not opposed to the development, just opposed to the density and the speed at which it's happening before we have the rest of the infrastructure in place. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else in Chambers that -- or online that would like to speak? All right. Would the applicant like to come forward? And, please, keep in mind in regard to the comments about schools, we do not have a representative from West Ada here this evening and so I'm sure your research is well thought out, but without them to be able to verify anything -- West Ada tells us that they can accommodate the kids, but also keep in mind that there is Cole Christian and Gem Prep and other private schools in the area as well and so those need to be in consideration when we talk to schools. But, again, those representatives are not here tonight. All right. Hethe. Clark: Thank you, Madam Chair. So, Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise. Just to kind of go over a couple of items here, I think a lot of what we are talking about -- and, you know, we -- we, obviously, met with the neighbors, we want to address concerns, but a lot of what you are hearing tonight is elements that the city and ACHD 27 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 24 of 33 had already put into place quite a long time ago. So, for example, the Adero -- excuse me. The collector road. That collector road has been shown on the master street map for quite some time. It is planned for that location across the south of the -- the Bridgetower HOA facilities that -- it is stubbed right there. It's going to continue on. That mid mile collector, though, is something that really is needed to get people off of Ten Mile and McMillan. Experience has shown time and time again that when you have the mid mile collector network in place it takes pressure off of the arterials. Now, with regard to the light over at Ten Mile where we are going to connect with the collector. As it stands right now -- and you guys all know this -- that ACHD has certain warrants is how they refer to it before they can put in a -- before they will put in a traffic light. Even with our project it doesn't warrant a traffic light there, but we fully expect that once their commercial goes -- once the commercial goes in that it will warrant and as the staff report has as part of its comments that that TIS would study that element as well. Similarly, when we talk about the -- the densities and whether this is consistent with the area and, you know, whether it's appropriate -- a lot of the neighborhoods that we are talking about in the neighborhood of this project as you can see are in a different Comprehensive Plan designation. In other words, the city has planned for something a little bit different here. We have put R-8 on our far west of the project to be consistent with the medium density residential density, but as I mentioned in the mixed use commercial there is a higher -- there is a -- the floor of six dwelling units per acre and we are doing seven. So, we are doing the very low end of what the city planned, but it is absolutely what the city has planned for. With regard to schools -- well, actually, let me -- I will end with schools and let me talk about the pond. The pond is not included in this seven dwelling units per acre calc. The pond, as I mentioned, that -- that whole park area -- the development agreement that currently exists calls for a 10.2 acre park. We are going to make that available to be able to be conveyed. The pond in the middle is anticipated to be shared between the two associations and as you probably have had experience in some of these applications, when it comes to irrigation ponds if you can collect more water in the pond the thing tends to function better and so those water rights from our property, the -- those rights will be allocated and, then, there will be storage over there. So, that's the really the only interface. But that will be a benefit to both associations. But that HOA open space is being preserved and -- you know, so -- and one other thought on that. There was a lot of comment about the developer, the developer, the developer. We are not that developer. We are buying from that developer. So, you know, I'm hoping that I haven't bullied anybody. I -- you know, will -- you know, I don't know what happened in the past. I can't speak to that. But we are -- we are not that developer. We are somebody else. So, then, the last element that I would just mention is the schools. So, just a couple of thoughts on that. Now, you -- you guys have heard -- not all of you, a few of you haven't heard the speech, but the city has worked with West Ada for years to try to understand how and when West Ada is going to increase capacity and there is a letter that West Ada will typically send that has, you know, how they deal with student enrollment and they talk about how as student enrollment increases they are going to look at busing, they are going to look at redistricting, they are going to look at portables and, then, eventually they are going to -- they will build a new school when they deem it -- deem it warranted. But they try to be very good stewards of the tax dollar by not building a school until it's actually -- they F28] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 25 of 33 know that's actually warranted. So, in this area we have -- we have, obviously, paid attention to the schools. There are the three that are shown on here, Hunter, Willow and the one that everyone's talking about Pleasant View. In addition, Madam Chair, as you mentioned, there is a couple other options that are nearby. If you look at the -- this is data from the West Ada School District's website. If you look at the enrollments you can actually see that the Hunter enrollment is -- from its high of above 800 is down almost 300 students. Willow Creek is also down from its high and as a result that led the school district to already have issued the letter that was mentioned before during testimony. So, what is happening is exactly what West Ada has told this group and the City Council will happen is that as it evaluates this, it looks at the various capacities and it considers its options. One of those is redistricting. And so we would anticipate that that would continue and as I showed you on the prior maps, there is really not a lot left to develop in this Willow-Hunter-Pleasant View area. That was one of the reasons why I showed you that map, so you can understand what's coming. So, with that I'm hoping that that answered that question and I'm happy to answer any others. Lorcher: Commissioners, do we have any questions for the applicant? Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: I do have a question regarding kind of transition space and ratios. I know you mentioned R-8 on the west side. Looking at the north end -- the north side of the project, it does look -- like I did some rough math just counting pixels on a screen, so this is probably a little off. It looks like on the -- that west side it's closer to one to one, maybe 1.5 to one ratio -- home ratio. But the north end it looks a lot more like a two-to- one kind of ratio and I'm just curious -- has thought gone into -- I'm sure thoughts gone into the application. But has any particular thought or focus or efforts gone into trying to ease that transition space anymore and seeking alternative -- perhaps increasing density on the south side to offset, for example? But just curious of your thoughts on that. Clark: I understand, Commissioner Smith. So, we did look at transition, try to make sure that that -- it was adequate here. So, this is on the west side and you can see these are the dimensions of those lots. When -- you know, some -- some -- for some of those lots is a little harder, because they are -- they are pie shaped, so it's harder to judge. We usually look at the frontage to try to judge that fairly and that frontage is pretty consistent between those and as you mentioned it's -- we think that matches pretty darn well. On the north -- and I should have mentioned this before. So, my apologies for that. On the north we did look at that transition as well, but what -- what you have on the north is we had existing irrigation facilities that need to be relocated and so what we have done with those facilities is run them up to the north side and we have added a 30 foot wide landscape buffer and pathway that actually will get folks over to the -- to the HAWK signal to go over to Heroes Park and so rather than doing the -- 29 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 26 of 33 adjusting that density, we felt like that actually, in and of itself, provided for an adequate buffer there. Smith: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Smith. Smith: Thank you. That helps. I -- and this is -- I'm not trying to, you know, just do some engineering -- overengineering this, but just -- I guess from my perspective I think it doesn't necessarily mean, you know, you can't look at those ratios as well; right? It's, you know, belt and suspenders, it's always nice to have that buffer, plus a more even transition and I'm just curious if there is any particular reason why it seems like density is maybe a little -- or just even slightly lower on that south end that you would want, in my mind, closer to that -- you want some higher density close to that commercial aspect. It just -- I guess it seems to my eye -- and I haven't run all the numbers, so I could just be wrong here, but it just to my eye in looking at the map it seems like the density at that top line is even more dense than some components on that southern -- maybe eastern edge that you could, you know, out of your neighborliness or out of kind of just -- just trying to keep that cohesion and transition space you could reallocate potentially. And I just --just curious on that and that's my last question. Clark: No. Noted. And, like I mentioned, we were really focused on the distance, because that's typical. The other element is that you are crossing a comprehensive plan designation when you cross that line and so it's going from the medium density into the mixed use commercial as well. So, it's a different planning zone and so, anyway, we did -- we felt like we were trying to address that with that buffer and so we would prefer to stick with that. Smith: Thank you. Clark: No. Thank you. Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: Madam Chair, thank you. One question. The staff recommended approval and, then, they had a bunch of recommendations and modifications on conditions and you brought up one additional one on 1-U for the conditions that the staff want to change. Are you guys, as the applicant, in favor of what the staff has put forward here? Clark: Madam Chair, Commissioner Rust, yes, that's -- that's correct. We are in agreement. So, the -- the slide that Linda put up reflects the conversations that we have had since the staff report was released and the modifications that we have arm wrestled over and agreed upon. So, that -- that slide is accurate and, then, there -- there was the three conditions where there would be direction for us to continue to work with staff. She had two of them up there and the additional one would be 1-U, which is the collector construction timing condition. F30] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 27 of 33 Rust: Thank you. Lorcher: Any other comments? I guess my only comment was as -- did we -- did we answer the question about the pond? Clark: I think so. Lorcher: So, you are nodding, yes, you are -- you are good with that? Okay. That was -- that was taken care of. Well, the pond is used for irrigation; correct? And it will be shared between the two. Yeah. We will just have to talk about it without getting comment from the -- sir. He needs to be able to speak. Okay. Thank you. Can you address the pond, please? Clark: Yes. So, the pond is within the park. Park will be maintained at 10.2 acres per the development agreement -- Lorcher: For Bridgetower. Clark: For Bridgetower. Lorcher: Okay. Clerk: For Bridgetower, not for our -- yeah. And I mentioned that during my main presentation is that that park is being put on -- platted so it can be conveyed, so that Bridgetower can have control of their own park. Lorcher: Okay. Clark: Our HOA will have its own amenities. We won't be -- we are not going to be playing in their park. It's -- it's theirs. Lorcher: Okay. All right. Any other comments from the Commissioners? Okay. Thank you very much. Clark: Thank you. Lorcher: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Rust: So moved. Smith: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 31 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 28 of 33 Lorcher: Commissioner Smith, would you like to start? Smith: Yes. Sure, Madam Chair. I will start. I have kind of an abstract version of notes that's just kind of become chaos on my page. I will try to keep it a coherent string of thoughts. I fully empathize with issues on traffic and with schools. I spent I think probably half of my elementary school days in portables, so I understand the -- the -- I understand kind of the benefit of being in a full classroom. So, I get that. And if I could have my way ahead and dump a billion dollars and have, you know, new schools everywhere and teachers getting paid more and things like that. Lorcher: Okay. Smith: That is not really the purview of the developer though and so where I stand on -- the same thing on the stoplights. I will say the applicant is fully correct regarding warrants. I have the pleasure of serving on the Transportation Commission as well and one of my favorite people to wrestle with in that commission meeting is John Wasson from ACHD. Lorcher: Okay. Smith: Oftentimes we will ask about ways to improve things and -- and the response is that with ACHD's limited budgets and resources they have to prioritize certain things that make certain warrants. So, those aren't necessarily -- not that they are not concerns to me, but I can't hold them against that app -- the applicant on this. I think that the real thing that I -- I do -- I would love some -- maybe some conversation on and I don't know if there is any language that would be, you know, a perfect kind of broad brush, I do -- I would like to try to limit the -- you know, the big box potential on the commercial side. I think, you know, that the purpose of a mixed use isn't to just say half of it's housing, half of it's, you know, commercial, it's -- there is -- there is -- you know, the comp plan has reasons for kind of new mixed living and better integration and I know that big box isn't the intention of the developer, but I would love to see if there is a way -- and if the Commission is amenable to it -- trying to slightly guide the direction of that to be more in line with the comp plan to limit any potential of kind of a sea of asphalt if you will from developing and I don't say that to necessarily limit the viability of the development, but just to try to kind of drive that alignment with the comp plan. That's really my main concern. I do agree, the city needs to build more and things like that. I guess the only other item I would say is it sounds like that traffic interconnectivity is going to be, you know, an important component. So, regarding the collector issue that was mentioned by staff and by the applicant, I personally -- I understand it might -- might be a little difficult, but I -- I would strongly prefer that being completed in phase one just because it seems like that southbound exit out of -- out of Bridgetower seems like it's an issue and so having that additional interconnectivity to be able to get out east might be -- might ease that pressure a little bit. So, I think the applicant might -- some of the benefits of the development might actually be a reason for accelerating that -- that connectivity to that connector. But those are -- those are my thoughts, so hopefully I kept that relatively in line, but would like to hear from the rest of the Commission. F32 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 29 of 33 Lorcher: Thank you. Rust: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: I'm going to keep this brief. Just looking up some stats on Meridian pedestrian- vehicle incidents. Those numbers have been dropping steadily since 2019. 1 think we are down 25 percent in the last data set that's available to 2023. 1 said this a month ago at our In-N-Out meeting, but I really feel like safety gets thrown around way too often. We design our roads safely. We have a hundred years of -- a hundred plus years of motor vehicles on roadways and how they interact with pedestrians and this idea that -- that we are going to endanger children I just reject that completely and I don't think that that's a valid argument. There -- there is plenty of areas that are completely developed in Meridian that have R-15 zoning just like this where -- that this is not an issue. Is there going to be more traffic? Absolutely if this gets approved. But the -- to use safety as a cudgel, I just -- I find that distasteful and reject that out of hand. To that point also there R-15 areas in similar areas around north Meridian. So, this is not out of step with other things that have happened in the surrounding -- I will say six square mile area if you look at the zoning map on the GIS. I -- I understand the -- the desire from Commissioner Sandoval and others. I don't know that we need another Hobby Lobby or something like that necessarily, but I also think that it's -- it's -- we start getting out of our lane as Commissioners when we start trying to -- to parse things out. I would rather the market speak and if we believe that the zoning is applicable for this area, then, we should keep it to a zoning discussion. So, if there is a way that we would -- we would want to tailor to the zoning, change it from C-G to something else, that we think would be in the best interest of the city, I would be open to that discussion. But in my mind that's -- that's probably where we can draw the line as far as how we can influence the process of what actually goes in there. So, I'm in favor of the application moving forward. I think this fits with the general character of the area, continuing to provide more diverse types of homes for people to come in and buy. That's something that I talk about a lot in my responses. And I'm also very inclined to work with the applicant to give them a chance to work with staff and try to come up with a way to fund that road better. I have been on that side of the -- the aisle and it -- anything you can do to minimize having millions of dollars sitting there unused I'm on board with -- with working in a way that will benefit the city and benefit the developer and get to a good solution and I think giving them time to do that before they get to Council is in the best interest of everyone. Lorcher: Okay. Rust: Thank you. Lorcher: Thank you very much. Perreault: Madam Chair? 33 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 30 of 33 Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. First let me apologize if I created any confusion with the -- with the multi-family question. I was looking at a map that included the Bridgetower project and had assumed it was included in this one. So, I apologize for that. So, our role as Planning and Zoning Commissioners is pretty narrow and we look at whether the applicant is meeting elements of the Comprehensive Plan and meeting the -- the zoning that is stated in our future land use map and in this situation the applicant has met all of those requirements. So, just a note for the public that the Comprehensive Plan, it has been approved with votes from the public. So, it takes about a year to go through that process with many many opportunities for public input and so the decisions regarding what are going in these open areas of Meridian have had a lot of public input that have gone into them. It's not just the developer comes and requests the specific -- the specific project that -- those decisions about the density and the zoning and the intended future use of that has already been decided in a conceptual way prior to this. So, as far as that goes in our narrow purview, the applicant has met there -- has met the -- the requests of the city for what is intended for that area. So, that is challenging for us when the applicant comes in and agrees with all the conditions of approval and is within the -- is within the Comprehensive Plan intentions and so with that being said it's -- it's challenging for me to say no to this application. They are agreeing to all the conditions of approval that the city is requesting. The other note I just wanted to make quickly is that for those of you that have concerns about speed and traffic, please, do contact ACHD, because they do have traffic calming measures that neighborhoods can apply for, like speed -- like signage and speed bumps and those kinds of things. So, if you have had any challenges getting a hold of ACHD and having those conversations, I would just encourage you to keep running it up the line and keep making those requests. Thank you. Lorcher: I will make a few comments here. I think that the street -- the Gondola connector street is -- is the best -- well, not the best solution. It is a great solution to be able to alleviate traffic on Ten Mile and McMillan and all the things around, because it gives families another opportunity. That street may go 20, 25 miles an hour and it will be nice and slow for the safety of families, but -- and, then, when the commercial comes in there will be some other traffic measures. Since we do not have the ACHD representatives here as well and this -- ACHD is the one who kind of controls the roads, hopefully, the conversation with the developer and to get a light where it's needed would be very helpful and I agree that Eagle's got lights super close to each other, but -- I mean if everybody is stacked up for a mile and, you know, they are not timed right, then, it -- it makes it even worse. I'm surprised there has been so much objections, because there is no apartments, there is no townhomes, they are all single family homes and they are -- they are going to be homes that are going to be owned by families. They are -- they are not rentals, they are not short-term Airbnb -- you know, they are not that. They are single family homes where people will take pride. I imagine the price point is -- is going to be -- you know, I probably should have asked that question, but they will probably be somewhat significant and I think you will get a quality neighbor in there as well. In regard to the commercial, I agree with Commissioner Rust, it's not within our F34] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 31 of 33 purview to limit what it is, but if we have a Walmart on one side and a Costco on the other side, I don't know what big box can go in the middle that would be even greater than what those two already exist and -- I mean I use Ten Mile and McMillan, Ustick on a daily basis and it can be challenging at times, there is no question about it, but something is going to go here one way or another and if your developer or your sales person sold you and said, no, it's always going to be a park or that it's going to be this and it's going to be that, they don't know. Especially if you have been in your house for a while we cannot predict or commit to what's going to happen on the dirt that exists in front of your subdivision. The market changes, life changes, ownership changes and the vision of the first developer -- if they choose to sell that's within their right; right? If they have somebody who wants to buy it and they told you one thing and, then, that buyer -- or that developer is no longer there, then, the next developer is not held to those standards and so as a Commission we want to make sure that what goes in here is in the best interest of the city, that it follows the Comprehensive Plan, like Commissioner Perreault had mentioned and, then, City Council will, you know, reevaluate all of those things, along with the ACHD traffic study, to make sure that this is the right plan. Personally I do think the density is a little bit high compared to some of the other ones, but that probably wouldn't stop me from saying no either. Commissioner Smith. Smith: Madam Chair, as -- I guess I have one kind of -- one -- one or two things I want to tag on just to the previous Commissioner's statement and, then, I also have a question for staff. One thing I will also say, to echo Commissioner Perreault, if you are not getting a response from ACHD, again, like I said, I'm on the Transportation Commission. Over there we love getting feedback and being able to hold ACHD's feet to the fire and so always feel free to also reach out to city staff or your member of City Council to also convey that to us and, then, you know, I'm not going to beat a dead horse on the -- on the mixed use commercial aspect. It seems like there is not an appetite. I would maybe like to start introducing that discussion in the longer term of the commission. I think -- I generally agree with Commissioner Rust's views of let the market do its thing, but -- but at its core zoning is also not that; right? There are cities like Houston, for example, that zoning effectively doesn't exist and the market truly runs -- runs free and -- and that works for them. I don't think that's necessarily how we want Meridian to run and so it's -- I think it's about kind of finding that balance and if -- if my taste is maybe not in line with the majority, that's fine. Lorcher: I think Linda had said that when the commercial portion comes up that's going to be re-evaluated. The bubbles were there as kind of a placeholder; correct? Smith: So, I -- I understand that to that effect. I did have one question for staff, just because it seems like we are probably nearing the end of discussion, I wanted to confirm -- the components in the staff recommendation, the clarifications and things like that, those are not already included in the staff report; right? Any motion would need to include those as -- Ritter: Right. Right. F35] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 32 of 33 Smith: Okay. Thank you. That's it. Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Sandoval: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: Yeah. I generally agree with the other Commissioners on this one. You know, it fits really well with the Comprehensive Plan. I think it fits in the neighborhood and it's -- it's fair and equitable to everyone around this development and as far as the transition with ten foot pathways on the left and right side of the road and a single lane. that's how I understand the east side to be, I think that's a pretty good transition to that commercial space. So, regardless of what they put in there I think that addresses that pretty well. So, I'm definitely in favor of recommending approval. Lorcher: Would you like to add anything or you just want to listen tonight? Stoll: I just want to ask a question -- Lorcher: Okay. Stoll: -- if I may. So, does staff recommendation include having the collector built prior or beforehand? Ritter: Commissioner Stoll, staff's recommendation is that no certificate of occupancy be issued prior to the road being completed in its entirety. Stoll: Okay. And, Madam Chair, if I may? Lorcher: Uh-huh. Stoll: And staff is not recommending right-in, right-out on Ten Mile; is that correct? Ritter: The applicant is requesting a waiver from City Council. So, if City Council approves -- recommends that, that they will approve that, but they have to do the traffic impact study update and ACHD will determine whether or not that right-in or right-out was warranted. Stoll: Okay. Lorcher: Okay. With that in mind, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of File No. H-2024-0068 as presented the staff report on May 15th to include the changes of condition of approval as presented. F36] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 15,2025 Page 33 of 33 Garrett: Second. Rust: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to approve File No. 0068. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. This will go to City Council in a couple of weeks. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Lorcher: I will take one more motion. Rust: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Commissioner Rust. Rust: I move that we adjourn. Smith: Second. Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:51 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN 6-5-2025 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 6-5-2025 37 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the April 17, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 3 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission April 17,2025 Page 69 of 69 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Lomeli: Madam Chair? Lorcher: Madam Clerk. Lomeli: I just wanted to, before we adjourn, let the crowd know that I do have a phone that was brought up, so if it belongs to anybody here to come grab that. Thank you. Lorcher: Can I get one more motion, please? Rust: Madam Chair, I move that we adjourn. Sandoval: Second. Lorcher: It has been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much for coming tonight. We appreciate your comments. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:11 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 5 115 12025 MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK F72 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for In-N-Out Burger (H-2024-00058) by In-N-Out Burger, located at 5985 & 6037 N. Ten Mile Rd. F73 CITY OF MERIDIAN wl IDIAN;=-- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND � DAHO DECISION& ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-Through Establishment in the C-G Zoning District within 300 Feet of Another Drive-Through Facility,Existing Residences,and a Residential District with Business Hours of Operation from 10:30 AM until 1:00 AM Sunday Through Thursday and From 10:30 AM until 1:30 AM Friday and Saturday,Located at 5985& 6037 N.Ten Mile Rd.,by In-N-Out Burger. Case No(s).H-2024-0058 For the Planning& Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: April 3 and 17,2025 (Findings on May 15,2025) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025,incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code(see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17,2025,incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the"Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,"codified at Chapter 65, Title 67,Idaho Code(I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has,by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian,which was adopted April 19,2011,Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s)received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 4. 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. 5. That the City has granted an order of denial in accordance with this decision,which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page 1 74 upon the applicant,the Planning Division of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning &Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 1I- 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 Conditional Use Permit is hereby denied as presented during the hearing on April 17,2025,for the following reasons:The hours of operation are not compatible with the residential area to the west and there are substantial traffic concerns, including traffic conflicts,that will have a negative impact on the north-south private drive aisle that serves the surrounding commercial area. F. Judicial Review Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521(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. G. 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 April 17,2025 "Exhibit A" CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page 2 75 By action of the Planning&Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the 15th day of May ,2025. COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER JARED SMITH,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER BRIAN GARRETT(ABSENT) VOTED COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED COMMISSIONER MATTHEW SANDOVAL VOTED COMMISSIONER SAM RUST VOTED COMMISSIONER(VACANT) VOTED Maria Lorcher, Chairman 5-15-2025 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 5-15-2025 Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services divisions of the Community Development Department,the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-15-2025 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION&ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2024-0058 IN-N-OUT BURGER AT TEN MILE Page 3 76 EXHIBIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (:�WEAN!DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend DATE: (Continued from: 41312025) Project Location Area of Impact �- TO: Planning&Zoning Commission = City Limits r O Analysis � �� FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner ,t 208-884-5533 T sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Todd Smith,In-N-Out BurgerIRE" — SUBJECT: H-2024-0058 :24 ., � In-N-Out Burger at Ten Mile LOCATION: 5985 &6037 N. Ten Mile Rd.,in the NE '/4 of Section 27 TAN. R1W. FTT Note for clarification: The notice of public hearing included "extended"business hours of operation as the use was believed to abut a residential use and zoning district, which would have limited hours from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm per UDC 11-2B-3B; however, upon closer examination,prior to issuance of the staff report, Staff found the proposed use is actually separated from the residential use/zoning by a 20 foot wide strip of commercially zoned land. Therefore, business hours are not expressly limited by the UDC although they may be limited through the Conditional Use Permit as a condition of approval for compatibility with adjacent uses. The staff report clarified this matter in Section III.C below and Staff also clarified it verbally at the public hearing.Any references in the staff report to "extended"business hours of operation should be disregarded. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Conditional use permit for a drive-through establishment in the C-G zoning district within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, existing residences and a residential district. The request includes extended business hours of operation beyond the 6:00 am to 11:00 pm limit,with hours from 6:00 am to 1:00 am Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 am to 1:30 am Friday and Saturday. B. Recommendation Staff: Denial C. Decision Commission: Denial II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped - Proposed Land Use(s) Restaurant/drive-through establishment - City of Meridian I Department Report 77 Description Details Map Ref. Existing Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial District) VILA.2 Proposed Zoning NA Adopted FLUM Designation Commercial VII.A.3 Proposed FLUM Designation NA Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 10/7/2024 Neighborhood Meeting 7/15/2024 Site posting date 4/7/2025 _ Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District No mitigation required by ACHD • Comments Received Yes - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Driveway access to a private drive aisle along the west side of the site that connects to W.Lost Rapids Dr. ITD Comments Received Yes Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see public record: https:llweblink.meridiancity.or /WebLinklbrowse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=O&repo=MeridianCitX III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview This property is designated Commercial on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM)in the Comprehensive Plan. It's located within the commercial area where Costco is located,which includes several smaller commercial pads around the perimeter of the development fronting on W. Chinden Blvd. and N. Ten Mile Rd. Multi-family apartments exist directly to the west of the site (south of Costco)across a 35-foot-wide driveway that provides access to the overall development via Lost Rapids Dr.,a collector street between W. Chinden Blvd. and N. Ten Mile Rd. Table 4:Proiect Overview Description Details History H-2018-0004(AZ,PP,CPAM,VAR—DA Inst.2018-079970),FP-2019- 0056 Acreage 2.22 acres B. History In 2018,the subject property was annexed as part of a larger development area consisting of residential and commercial property zoned R-40 and C-G and included in a preliminary plat. A development agreement was required as a provision of annexation,which governs future development of the property. The property was later included in a final plat as Lots 14& 15, Block 1, Lost Rapids Subdivision. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ C. Site Development and Use Analysis (Staff comments in italics) 1. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The proposed use aligns with the Commercial FLUM designation in the Comprehensive Plan. A restaurant is a principal permitted use in the C-G district,but a drive-through establishment requires approval of a conditional use permit(CUP)when the property is within 300 feet of another drive-through facility, a residential district, or an existing residence in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3. In this case,the property is within 300 feet of another drive-through facility directly to the north(i.e. Cafe Rio), and existing residences and a residential district directly to the west(i.e. Olivia Apartments&Townhomes,zoned R-40). Single-family residential uses and zoning also exist to the east across N. Ten Mile Rd.but are separated from the site by a 5-lane arterial street. The C-G zoning district limits business hours of operation from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district; extended hours may be requested through a CUP. Technically,this site does not directly abut a residential use or district—there is a 20' wide strip of land between this site and the adjacent residential development and R-40 zoning district owned by Costco, zoned C-G. Although hours of operation wouldn't be restricted by the UDC in this instance per se,hours may still be limited through the CUP. The Applicant proposes business hours of operation until 1:00 am Sunday through Thursday, and 1:30 am Friday and Saturday. Although business hours are allowed to start at 6:00 am, the Applicant states the business won't open until 10:30 am. Deliveries are proposed to occur between the hours of 2:00 am and 9:00 am during non-business hours. The Applicant states trucks do not have to back up to deliver,which will avoid any back-up warning beeping. Note: When Costco was approved, deliveries were not allowed to occur between the hours of 10:00 pm and S:00 am to minimize noise impacts to adjacent residential neighbors. Because this site is in such close proximity to residential uses to the west, Staff does not recommend approval of extended hours of operation beyond those allowed in the district, in accord with Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.0117 below. "Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code." (Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.01F) If the CUP is approved,the Commission should specify allowed hours of operation and if deliveries are allowed after-hours as proposed. 2. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Development of the site shall comply with the dimensional standards of the C-G district in UDC Table 11-213-3. Staff has reviewed the proposed plans and building elevations and they comply with these standards. 3. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): Drive-Through Establishment: The proposed drive-through establishment is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11,Drive-Through Establishment. All establishments providing drive-through service are required to identify the stacking lane, menu and speaker location(if applicable),and window location on the site plan. The proposed site plan depicts stacking lanes and service locations as required. Only one (1) menu board and speaker is proposed; two (2) umbrella stands are proposed for weather protection for employees to take orders remotely farther down the drive-through lane. The site plan is required to demonstrate safe pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation on the site and between adjacent properties.Sidewalks exist within the street buffers along Lost Rapids Dr. and N. Ten Mile Rd.A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the perimeter City of Meridian I Department Report I11. Staff Analysis ■ sidewalk along Ten Mile to the main building entrance in accord with UDC 11-3A-19B.4; another walkway is proposed from the building entrance to the north. If approved, Staff recommends a minimum 5'wide sidewalk is provided along the west side of the site alongside the north/south drive aisle for pedestrian safety. At a minimum,the plan is required to demonstrate compliance with the following standards: 1) Stacking lanes have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons; The site plan indicates capacity for 29 vehicles within the proposed stacking lanes. While this would typically be sufficient, Staff is concerned it may not be sufficient for this constrained site. These concerns are informed by ongoing traffic issues in the area and operational challenges observed at the In-N-Out at The Village at Meridian. There, during the extended period following its opening—and potentially still during peak times—vehicle queues exceeded site boundaries, spilling into internal drive aisles that serve parking for the broader development. In that case, the impact was mitigated by lower parking demand due to the area not being fully built out, and the absence of overflow onto a public right-of-way. Since its opening a year and a half ago, activity at that location has decreased, resulting in reduced stacking and impact on adjacent properties. While the addition of a second location may help distribute customer traffic, the proposed site presents greater risk due to its proximity to residential uses,public right-of-way and other high-traffic commercial uses. Vehicle queues may obstruct key internal drive aisles used for on-site parking, the access driveway off Lost Rapids, and potentially the adjacent public right-of-way(Lost Rapids Dr), compounding existing circulation and safety concerns. Many letters of opposition have been received from area residents and patrons of adjacent commercial uses attesting to the traffic and congestion issues in this area and concerns the proposed use will only exacerbate these issues. 2) The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, except stacking lanes may provide access to designated employee parking. Approximately 400 feet of the stacking lane is a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; however, Staff is concerned stacking will extend from this area and block circulation lanes needed for access and parking internal and external to the site during peak hours. If approved,parking spaces nearest the stacking lane along the west boundary of the site should be designated for employee parking only. 3) The stacking lane shall not be located within ten(10)feet of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is not located within 10'of any residential district or residence. The nearest apartment building is approximately 80 feet from the stacking lane. 4)Any stacking lane greater than one hundred(100)feet in length shall provide for an escape lane; and The first 170+/-feet of the drive-through has a double stacking lane, which transitions to a single stacking lane with an escape lane for the last 230+/-feet up to the pick-up window, meeting this requirement. 5) The site should be designed so that the drive-through is visible from a public street for surveillance purposes. The two (2)pay windows are located along and are visible from N. Ten Mile Rd.for City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ surveillance purposes. The applicant shall provide a six-foot sight obscuring fence where a stacking lane or window location adjoins a residential district or an existing residence. The site is separated from the multi family development to the west by a 2-way drive aisle so this requirement is not applicable. Restaurant: The proposed use is also subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11- 4-3-49 for restaurants,as follows: Parking: At a minimum,one(1)parking space shall be provided for every two hundred fifty(250) square feet of gross floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan shall be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies with the requirements of this title. Based on 3,886 square feet of gross floor area for the proposed restaurant, a minimum of 16 vehicle parking spaces are required; a total of 73 spaces are proposed, which meets and exceeds the minimum standard. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): "Require appropriate landscaping, buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc)." (Comprehensive Plan policy#3.07.01 C) i. Landscape buffers along streets Street buffers are required to be provided with development per UDC Table 11-2B-3 based on the street classification with landscaping per the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. A 35 foot wide street buffer was installed on this site along N. Ten Mile Road, an arterial road and entryway corridor, and a 20 foot wide street buffer was installed along W. Lost Rapids Dr., a collector street, with the subdivision improvements as required.Additional buffer width is proposed with development of the site ranging from 7 to 11 feet along N. Ten Mile Rd. and 22 feet along W. Lost Rapids Dr. with additional landscaping. ii. Parking lot landscaping Perimeter and internal parking lot landscaping is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. Planter islands are required to be placed at the ends of rows of parking to delineate and guide traffic movement within the parking area,prevent cross space driving,and to reduce the visual impact of long rows of parked cars.If approved,planter islands should be added at the ends of rows of parking that abut the southern driveway for the site. iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses Landscaping within buffers to residential and/or non-industrial uses is required to comply with the standards of UDC 11-3B-9C.No residential uses adjoin the site (the residential apartments to the west are separated from this site by a driveway); therefore, a landscape buffer is not required. iv. Storm integration Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ v. Pathway landscaping Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.No pathways are proposed or required within the site. 2. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Nonresidential parking analysis As noted above, a minimum of one(1)off-street parking space is required per 250 square feet of gross floor area for the proposed restaurant.Based on the 3,886 square foot building, a minimum of 16 spaces are required.A total of 73 parking spaces are proposed, exceeding the minimum standard by 57 spaces. ii. Bicycle parking analysis A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space is required 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.Based on the proposed number of vehicle spaces (i.e. 73), a minimum of three(3) bicycle spaces should be provided. A total offour(4)spaces are proposed, which meets and exceeds the minimum standard. 3. Structure and Site Design(11-3A-19) Architectural character: Buildings are required to be designed in accord with the City of Meridian Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). The conceptual building elevations included in Section VILE appear to comply with these standards;final design is required to comply with the non-residential design standards in the ASM. Site design: Extend or improve streets, drive aisles, cross access easements or similar vehicular and pedestrian connections provided from adjacent properties.No cross-access easements or driveways exist to this site from the adjacent property to the north. A 5-foot wide sidewalk exists along the west side of the lot to the north adjacent to the north/south drive aisle from W. Lost Rapids Dr. If approved, Staff recommends a sidewalk is also provided on this site along the north/south drive aisle for pedestrian safety and access to/from the north and from the sidewalk along W. Lost Rapids Dr. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of 30%of the buildable frontage of the property shall be occupied by building facades and/or public space. The proposed site design meets this requirement along N. Ten Mile Rd. with only a drive-through lane between the building fagade and the public street but does not meet the requirement along W.Lost Rapids Dr. Parking lots: For properties greater than two(2) acres in size,no more than 50% of the total off-street parking area for the site shall be located between building facades and abutting streets. The proposed site design meets this requirement along Ten Mile but does not along Lost Rapids. Pedestrian walkways: A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of five(5) feet in width is required from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance(s)for non- residential uses. The walkway should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surface through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks and have weather protection (including,but not limited to, an awning or arcade)within 20 feet of the all customer entrances.A pedestrian walkway is proposed from the perimeter sidewalk along N. Ten Mile Rd. and along the northern boundary of the site to the main building entrance. If approved, the pedestrian walkway along the northern boundary should connect to the sidewalk required along the western boundary of the site;and all walkways that cross vehicular driving surfaces should be distinguished as noted above. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ "Consider needed sidewalk,pathway, landscaping, and lighting improvements with all land use decisions."(Comprehensive Plan policy#6.01.02D) E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.01.02B focuses on minimizing access points to arterial streets by implementing strategies like cross-access agreements, access management, and developing frontage and backage roads, while enhancing connectivity between local and collector streets. Access for the site is proposed via two(2) full-access driveways from the north/south drive aisle that exists along the west side of the site,which connects to W. Lost Rapids Dr. Direct access via N. Ten Mile Rd. is not proposed or allowed. This is in accord with the above noted Comprehensive Plan policy. The Applicant submitted a traffic analysis focused on the Ten Mile&Lost Rapids area, included in the public record. In short,the analysis states the proposed queuing capacity for 29 vehicles will provide sufficient storage capacity to accommodate vehicles observed at 18 other In-N-Out establishments once operations normalize.An overflow management plan is identified,which will be implemented when drive-through lane overflow occurs and will extend the available queuing area by an additional 21 vehicles to accommodate approximately 50 vehicles on-site. The plan extends the queuing area by closing the southern access point and re-purposing 14 parking spaces along the site's western boundary. This modification limits access to a single entry and exit driveway at the northwest corner of the site. While Staff doesn't necessarily disagree that the proposal should be adequate once operations normalize, Staff is concerned about the impacts to internal drives and adjacent public right-of-way and associated public safety in the interim if vehicles stack beyond the boundary of the site. ACHD has indicated that no additional improvements are required to the adjacent streets. 2. Sidewalks and Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Sidewalks and parkways are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Detached 5-foot wide sidewalks exist along N. Ten Mile Rd. and W. Lost Rapids Dr abutting the site.No parkways are proposed or required. F. Services Analysis 1. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided as set forth in UDC 1I- 3A-15. 2. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18. 3. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities shall be installed at or below grade in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. All development shall be connected to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems,unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Service stubs were provided to this property with development of the subdivision. Comprehensive Plan Policy#3.03.03G requires that urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, and water and sewer utilities. Additionally, City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ all utilities for the proposed development must be installed in accordance with the standards specified in UDC 11-3A-21. "Support infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development." (Comprehensive Plan policy#2.02.02C)—Based on the above analysis and the public testimony received, Staff believes the proposed development will have a negative impact on adjacent residential properties. Concerns include deteriorating air quality from vehicle exhaust while cars idle in line for service, and noise generated outside acceptable hours for areas next to residential uses. Additionally, the proposed development will most certainly increase traffic and congestion in an area that is already strained, further exacerbating existing transportation challenges. As of the date of this report, 146 letters of public testimony, mostly in opposition to the project, have been received and are included in the public record. IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division Staff is not recommending approval of the proposed conditional use permit; therefore, conditions of approval are not included. If the Commission wishes to approve the request, the project should be continued to a subsequent hearing date for Staff to prepare conditions of approval for consideration by the Commission. Other agency comments may be accessed in the project file in the public record.Copy and paste the following link into your browser: https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=367313&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX V. FINDINGS A. Conditional Use(UDC 11-513-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The Commission finds the site is not large enough to accommodate the proposed use and comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11, which require stacking lanes to have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of driveways, drive aisles and the public right-of-way by patrons,per the analysis above in Section III. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. The Commission finds the proposed infill development will not be harmonious with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed use and hours of operation will negatively impact abutting existing residential development, area residents that live nearby traveling on Lost Rapids and patrons of other commercial uses in the area due to excessive noise, traffic and congestion. 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Commission finds the design and operation of the proposed use will not be compatible with other residential and commercial uses in the general neighborhood, due to noise, air quality and transportation impacts, which are already challenging in this area and will be City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ exacerbated with the proposed use as discussed above in Section III, which will adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use,if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed,will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The Commission finds the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity and thus, denies the proposed use. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools,parks,police and fire protection,drainage structures, refuse disposal,water,and sewer. The Commission finds the proposed use can be served adequately by essential public facilities and services as required. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The Commission finds the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes,materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons,property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic,noise, smoke,fumes,glare or odors. The Commission finds the proposed use will be detrimental to persons,property and the general welfare due to excessive production of exhaust fumes from vehicles idling in line for extended periods of time, noise, traffic and congestion based on the analysis above in Section III and the many letters of testimony received from the public included in the public record. 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. The Commission finds the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any such features. 9. Additional findings for the alteration or extension of a nonconforming use: This finding is not applicable. 10. 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. 11. That the proposed nonconforming use is developed to a similar or greater level of conformity with the development standards as set forth in this title as compared to the level of development of the surrounding properties. This finding is not applicable. VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Conditional Use Permit as discussed above in Section III,per the Findings in Section V. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on April 17,2025. At the public hearing.the Commission moved to deny the subject CUP request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: City of Meridian I Department Report Vl.Action ■ a. In favor: Todd Smith,In-N-Out Burger(Applicant): Robin Sellers: Shawn Sunwell b. In opposition: Wade Ramsey(Bainbridge HOA): Brick Oliver(Cadence HOA): Bri Jones(Olivia Apartments): Diane Hough Jon Wheeler: Bob Hough Val Daigle; Don Dalton: Bill Beve: Shawn Sherman: Clayton McCormick: Pat Catenzero: Diane West: Mike Gallenstein: Steve Lozano:Jeff Wertz: Becca Gulden: Robyn Sellers: Jonathan Walker: Robin Friehling: Shawn Sundwall: Maritza Gardner: Lindsay Poyser: Michael McCallister: Dale Draney:Brian Henszel: Joseph Minor: and James Ferguson C. Commenting: Giancarlo Ganddini d. Written testimony: See public record e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. Traffic generated from the proposed use and on the adjacent roadways b. Access to the shared driveway between the proposed development and the Olivia Apartments. c. Hours of operation d. Lights,trash, loitering,and noise from the development. e. Analysis in the focused traffic study f. Impact on property values g. Safety of the kids playing at the surrounding parks crossing the street to the proposed use and additional traffic generated from the proposed use. 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. Hours of operation b. Focused traffic study findings C. Proximity of the proposed use to the multi-family development 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None City of Meridian I Department Report VI.Action ■ VII. EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps (link to Project Overview) 1. Aerial R.,.R. . �r>- Legend +�IRK TW_ 71'^y6 a � Project Location 1� Wo �N ra_ ` L r-- -a► t• t R4,Rxi r 1 �� - Area of Impact W b 11117. L J won WO :'1■Y�' �• Ir OAnalysis a�v@Ea "r �R �r l\ �� �Arf14 O! :Rolf;"er _IN , ' ^_ 1 .:Ye1l::fiealMd�laQd���l' 4 r - _ I1111471 A,rl nNMI. :�7iR1R11�qu,�x,R$ ` - anR4AL R7xlaa er1 CC:.Zip. .7111-,q R a=1411A RAHR"FR�R91�A s a is C nn= }la [exe a `•� P 4 i>Wlf Il Ri r]ARLRN F iN xxIIRIF%iAe}A# nn�4fa1 lFllllll `#s 1R y �I1�xlxRl91!lirxe¢ A w_+n� A�I J 1+RrL#,xRTiIx FR-lY#i i atl!R!9!3 +ar ' s.■�".�"'.� 4�1 -, "ar 13 �ragnrRRR11ineee:ItM"3•rry1♦n.. AYlA q ail 1 =7 w uar ■Is6 n+ �IR ; �p iti risRr ;��F r+IfJ1 �+,fay �f:.19E11xiMA111l:FER! a 1r;IR 7.' ♦"aAtFRlPi3A�a� AREAS, IPxiRialti}, :rrA Vv7i7RIR,�1141�* 1 . gip,.n •i 1:AR Ilr 1,a.,a #y#C, '� sdl rl� F .Yr�ax Exll'C,s rrurr rrRsr ,r'�:• _ >o T YLR h t -^ L IIL, rlRAa7l Aa7 'u i�A 14aR i�■#I1RgMxr. y ;.#PIIl17s '�' ♦'!',yl u >< r¢Ix1 IIx! �� az'A a 4R 9921 W � o�atisr"�vxAie°niiia :"i U i;rrq A11>t#11 �"i*#xxal IRx,rx� - Arn Le -Fid e l��"� brs. 11 �« r:yrele,xPn .3 "Cirtl rC"tlC� b!>oM!AR!tow.rylt!ltRAl 114111 a�>,r>.@ a #IR,IIARI i V RP#R vxtiYr �!3'brlV ' @ .iR!lIRF� .� _ 1rAF9 PRii 'r, t'�RRArR R#'+AL .. !A i erar>! •>!,a. ti - - 3121--r>;xr. ��d rlrrarrxN2 v AaA SraxaR fi9w�� !!y r 7R}xFlt `xi r4 },i 9 A7'1a) n n}Ri,}RxxiI arA 4 x� P a m 2R,Hx o I 'L w.La7lrxrb!' re 1'1 La�u'LI e � I 1411a d 2- w R ��j .:r. P�Nsl,ie9er8Fl� PaRR7 RR t �1x�11r `I"R5"I sn;ro '�!:All.�e .,LIRM. F,I iMy '1 r 4 11r71�yy. 7i1A1111 2. Zoning Map Legend Project Location R-2 Area of Impact A 9 RUT OAnalysis 9m R-8 C-G C-N R'r�5 'dJL RUT ® I ' � ETM C-C R-40 rV MR-t8 J ® T r Er: R1 �R t _ L-o alp ®� -C ��� RUiTFF-i ruT�i L City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ MEN M • ►► ,.a_ :*,;� �! III: 111 a� 1 �■ ■r/�a �� 1�lrflli � nu■nnmm�nl■Imglll[IIIIIIII)� �_II0111lllllllflllllli ■uuuunnn! �m ��,�,,y�y��1-,1 111111 111111 nllllln=�311111111 11111111�. fill _lllllll■kr■rIl {AJIY:J-Ilti! Allli.illllF Illlllln�- 1 ■■!r1■■�q■AAEII= 111111111�• 'lull_�- • _ O -llllnl■1■■1-■ = _ _Ir11ll In` - 1 liu " w nn nw. Iln11111IT11iBf., �-rlllllln n1111a Ifrl -!rl,- mill Me ,:Urk-!!■■: —- 1■ln■lima!nl■Irr, I ■� 1♦�1-u-Wu11P i.mme��illim_ ��-•T� ��:i Au■lall!■rRllllr �7111A�-,Riliill lllAl:IIIIIIIa �rl�IIII IIIIIIII R�������-A 4� ■ll■■Ilia P■■H � � r Um■1 rule ■:.:_:J::: ql •}.1 �mm�n ■■ �/--- � � �:---Illlllln nn - r In,.�■ • 4 - - p�plrl 1■1 r■. � nn nlnun��iy � :�■rnOaiA�j+ dI►♦f �..:=: � :�-. r�:± � �!i■IIII III1111111111r1��••Nry. rnrrrral►��+�•uu■lu uili �C:rll Irli ;��: . r►r' 1lmu■nwuur /tat ♦ •.! uj 11ma1 �l_hf,�;�� �� �::ilnl IIIIt:7,r,f�O C a■i�r f1 � !ilil fliaiR���lrlr■I uj w-=�� V A11�-A�„ --lAllrrnn�� ►!I� � r■■IIr 11 i-■lF1■ul 0 /�\�.i/ Y � IIII�i 1-�■�� ■�.ainil■Ra■..��l.+�� ■■ * ■! 111111 IIII it .-IIIlu1e=- Illln nrll�'�='+� �' r.■11 +� ��►►►'r�iiiuii FZ•1(� .i .ilrli Irnr: Ilmll Ilalaa �::7 IIII�1"I _ ■■r111 r� - s ►ip1 nuw nl■■ ►IIII!I■11► f � J gauulll - Q IAllllii IIAIIIII flllllllll IIIIIIIF� Ir■rm I\ • - ►,► J t_IIIIIIIl1��lilt► rrq: c On rir / plarar . - liilllll;�1rHi1 rl. IIIP rm ■ - r - �♦ ■■■••■■d r.aa►'p�� m .��.>.mnW N nlinr i� Z�Ir1�17\mil„ r � �•ma■-. nn,,• •�.�nllfl'�■• W.•,,�,� .=rim ,.� - . - • • ii„r .. n ur► � .nil�� �rrri r116 rl[r�:;--.■ �llirl; ■ j�i� er ��-■ Iar11!►�■1`�a�111r �4 � .. .rnua Jr r '1 :uiTi::: I�mAI■►�� ♦ y.� ?iiiii.'. - Alunr■■--■nn mm��:4ion■:Ea iiiiiii r■nlrrl EAR i ' ■III■IP '�-rlbirllilr+{Il::rolnll'la.'�i<nnaii�:�:,i� vor�■� \ - -■rl ■ nulr ul1! lll■■••.�Sfl IIIIIrr ' =■nl nunnl. ■mraman canna- nnm�lu■1 mruul unl onllyd!!r Ir► ►1�= Inman t♦1'aOlson nnr� i■o■m` aiin 111�;�ilm�� _I■ 11 ,�Irrl`P=■ar na■lnaaiU � "� . n.ii- C Illr�li • �fr-ril■Innl�rann■rlII. _ nmm�uun=� 95 ! /f ■ tJ_DI/11 ,,,Y� .■il■■m nnlllr1111- ■ nn■IN■rll = ►J■ii If,SIilliir�� .- �allall ■ v a p nuwnni: l-w fii nl� uu= D - .,1, ^,■��-d■■■aah\I - Illllln■ 11=,,,," illrr�J 1,•xl ■l}`Ia1p►-�':IIIIIAI1111111a - nullrrn mpll■nnm■:�II��u�uuunl ■ ■lima� ' nununuu nnn111 �II �'' ��■r:�=,::' - ■is Cller■.uA I IR■ram �, FREME . - ��A►*i►��a■a1 .Ttlfrr r fir � ._� ■�,1` !um ill ICU� yI'•I, � �y • � �i Il�r•d •�C rlla�l■,_ �Sri , ' ��`r, a, ♦ ► - '-non ■■r Iy. - n■■1 n1um,�,11111AAlfllj 111111iil 1ii '111111111_ umulnnu lu! EIIIII.111111' 111EIIll'o■111111111 llllilll .r111F111 r 1I�,��. s111111■xnn �11�.■�■.�,.,' . illlli flllll Ilnlllr■a7�11111111 •m9='�=r lent= i �-ulna m■rl I r!r n� ■ ,TL7C7=•1■1■n11� i w!In lln!� -� �III�Iln1111i1 IAlnf �/ 1 ■ram elrl■I Irak ��^�in!��- � !�n-lll�■„ -: r� Q'�. nnu111--rnlla 1lrl 4!■y- nr1: ��- unae111■■■nuR * � .null, nlnn= __ x:-.w . lumen unul�rl,►i`111 r■r •.M•I IIIllllilll- -ia-[11 Illnllr _ "i V nnl[i:Inllrll �i/lppplllllBll ,�1��::::;;:14 �p� nannmr�lnl��■ ♦ ► I' ...... k r I�aarunn■+ s■i!i _Illllll.. nri t +:i Ira 1• •••-.fin..? a s : I■■unea* V►► �j1r•��1►\ �:;��1lr/lill ��: —� Am enuunl: �■Na .I■ininr■ + A ♦fw�.. -_- :- C♦!, inr1111 i11111[IIIIArI] ulryl :!Rrllmn��+ IrAnlll! !r �m� ;.■r!l l!r! ;-;: ♦ti �piinpla►•+i�i�uluunu/� Q IIII �� .a�l r` ■ -- r ` � /I//'� i•Ir1nA1f1111llllui�f\�t■r cal a�� ■1■art■■a ��nl,�:�. �.w :::um mli:�,y►il- ■ ■■ fr f►i � !nn nob*+4luumeua'�.j■ •�:-. _�_ � arulnrn-- �. ... u � ■ run nl'O1J r111�■ilr� 1! Y •r4uu m aM -s ,..I! 1'f.. r► - .. ■r � r�rryatunnu Z Illlll lflf �� --LIIufIL. Inn nnl�'�_-w- � r. 1� +! �� ri►slnunl •ICI fii rnnn In■■ Q - .rnn olir; Lnlal nalaa --.:mt ■■■fl! f ► �� ►irk■ �J�li annul I' �IIIIf rf111► rlullri In1111 1iI11A1111 Illlllln �iaa�•• � 11■In11■ irll► iiil r nlnunun[I111111nlnununm tit i lr■r11r /r1 naa rlaaaf/� - 1 �� .� �- _= Ili nu rli G,� ♦ nnu nr:,,- � gnlllll■r nfrn rl�lunnunl a==_=_� r■ganunal � r � u■a m �� �� Ilnnll���inirr►. i�;:�nnllwnl=-____z�� �IIi11R���lal�%�' /i�11]■UniAaanr���riiii it��: ■rim • .,qmr►� •,irnm_��_-�:■■��,p r� �:■ Iiln''l�liiiii iunli■� ." 1p■ .lra-1 --- :rra rir� -_- rem ::...- nm►:•. ■ �. --- ■r ��- ■■ .RC --:: rnoa'l. A lama■■nraco:°I :w l:� annl►h�r+•irinij�♦ _z< I��■■ _ 1.- : Ir1a�� ■111■--r-- �■r■laan rilaaal�:I rill ■:Ea mn■-� �rRlail� � � ���4■■rrrr■ :lull::;; riliiOl' p real■rmll ■anllp-:�• �I'fli•�ono - °. a■.■rrlr �. iiniion,lll I. .- ll� 'unm: ■: ■� ' it - ■i1 ■nuaalRrn■■noon:�Nt nun um l���Sf>>e111rr ` ;na,. -.■!rrlr W•:In milrmlil 1■ammlan raamn■. imam�InrA1 1:ulu Nnnlnl!!r' r„�=:•moon'��:mn aa■n!"i■n or■�)�� IIIISIIII,IlIIV_� J_ ' w 111-;�loll `�I P�� - 1"11� Ills:��a11111111a,'Irraal■nr raa■r■■rarU rnay�I Ilxumulnl= -- r f � r111111111► a q ■w nnlnuln■ - �-•• c• r�Ilil11 I r.r. - ���� r11�11�1 1r-r/nalapl,agll'11111 r.: r - runninn _ �/: '/Iirlrl 1""'+I ei',--, 1_�■■/Illlllllllil�t��rllll■.Ill +aaalfli1111 r 1��•rrlrll� � I „ nn`1= �-.L,a�� =n■llrlla��� null n �_ nneq �Illirl rJ 1....i Z1, ■nA� u n1lln►i;��:nmm�umu t nut■■E �IIIIII.; IIJ�, _ f_� lrlr}IIII11unm:111-u1�n-n�= e nuliunu■i= ,lull-�Iliil �L~Li1�1A/ amr=�! in go-Ill Nei B. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL R5330761510 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Scare: 28 27th Percentile Description Location In City Limits GREEN Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrfloodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. GREEN Emergency Services Police Nat enough data to report average response t,rne RED Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community ParkWalkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park with' GREEN 1/4 mile walking Report generated on 03-31-2025 by MERIDIA%sallen City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ C. Site Plan(date: 12/19/2024) „3a g g a sa sus sa 0 [ �43kAgc 6 GA CA N5I`w` 53 ggy a 5 S�5 13 a.'. F w 5� € 433 ,,,. �a 9- ,, Z a'§3 ye�"sA aS s¢a ::`s &'=-5e g^g a sgsa a� p s '� 5 o W @€,r?e;ss II R"IN as H'dR s§se w Z u ❑"° 0 ®0®0 §a �oa� 9 5 8 Se g �� a 3e £ 0. JQ iA- a 3 3 5 n £% W % 4�a� a Z tz a 3". � �B s ii& a S a a 9 A 9"x t W fA = W e4gg ! E� 5 e�� WrWu F a 8 3;aa q W��a,�;�_ z = g 9$y�9 S�°aRA 3 ffi E o e c _$'s33 V Z � e'j�"ff % :..y€ � Rye�ea@a7 eye tltltl g w w°°5 3H'� "s �d g o s§ g € s s }r @ :4 ��" ❑¢ @�s��4� �ul-0 .. •a +$e z � �' ® fe�sff g3 F_aa ;, - 3 safe€a 4�'���°�c��a§W a � C7_ 9 �Z m 51c On e i U F11S 017em s CIVOU E-1IW N31'N r z � Go :.. ;..:::. w : :N:: .. :... _ �o 'g- r aMy r3 ___ -. T� ���, _ �s5 y aa44444 ni � Y �' k� d "• w i r f gP LLJ HS 4'9 jE R 5 T ' "� S e6� d of a orn -- •i co iLHUZ fi g — �La,4 .. . .. 01 7€N�9 lima r � o City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ D. Landscape Plan (date: 2/21/2025) V 3 e g g ® yy ' a e 8g� gp&�g g2 � o n 3 g `i< J o � LU w 39g � v o Wga Jw �Al-I ass . . .eorN.. ZV s wU) 0zza 1 y U n a } 0 x� w 0 Z. m r Fz� wog Opi Z¢a lam' d2l 4 f o � o 'a - - z �3 � a --1 r E 1 � I _ WI 1,- ------ - - ?Ir 0 C'3A p air Gil W� -L 6ALAP Nw Om Or r Z : _ - 9z City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ = fig a 11 e�W Z I+ 1ii i + i® a v •n s� Z~ o 0 0 0 " o " o " " o o "" o o ° o " Cp i,.• 0�,� W -iW ga 7LLJUll 0 CCR I ON § a _ g WM. CC i1` • `� a gg � ga Z�❑ G O2"• ❑ a a I 1 1P A� �o l E 2 3a o z -- __....... ..:. NRL - - - -- - _ a --------- ------- ....•....................... ....... ... - W� -- — I er 2 g AN ..::: .:......::.s ...5...s �-... 1 f ®E3P9 00 A Ng I �2yo� 55a���� NW City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ E. Building Elevations(date: 9/18/2024) aI NVICIN1 A (Q] 3�IW N31 N '3 OA�9 N30NIH:) MbMS) w �OV SNOIlVA313 A2JVNIAPAW ¢¢ ;p _ lo b § 3 gg g gg k -- -------- r R I I'M� s P i �eH i sg 3 MMull ai,gg 6El _N ". $ r R s a dele Y00000 000 000 00 00®©®©'�9�lig 1�13�I�ligldl ii III �_. F e ' 61 e . � ICI I� j ', ICI III III � •sl I I 1 t- "1IFF r I g j j Ian I� It—rl II Ii i l �W' hv� ii IEl 191 isl IT i LL Q ZoEwl ] \, �� K ■ o0o z rr o j Z E a �e E �, wa ICI k LL w _ Q LL Z/ LL aw E Z u —J III 's u3 II� FS 4 II NIEl =e Iml I ' j $ ICI " i j� i� I� ,gry9 yliR� I� sly g� s. YO City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 2 s al NVIa1213W (a21 31IW N31 OZ0 az, SN011V 13l3 Al JVNIAHI3 ld Z c 12 49 a 7 s Q @ @z lz IPH y Arun. ❑0000 000 000 00 00®©®❑ �61r, I�Ir,l�lr.l�l �� I� I� I I Isl I I I h,. I i �i, •�l I u,� W� Mi lli m �. Lmj d II ii Z0 F 11 9] ii Z u w � 0 I I _ Zo Z ° .A %I z I ', ° I IIi:f ---P S r= w C .;° 91 z., dl X } _ - — A) : Im o-aI 9 I I a III$ I I L-----____I_ I� c g 0 g City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Final Order for Sadie Creek Drive-th rough(TEC-2025-0001) by Mike Maffia, MGM Meridian 2, located at 3030 N. Cajun Ln. F95 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: MAY 15, 2025 IN THE MATTER OF THE ) REQUEST FOR A 2-YEAR TIME ) EXTENSION ON THE ) CASE NO. TEC-2025-0001 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ) SADIE CREEK DRIVE-THROUGH ) ORDER OF CONDITIONAL IN ORDER TO COMMENCE THE ) APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION PERMITTED USE,LOCATED IN ) SECTION 5, T.3N., RJE., ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) BY: MIKE MAFFIA, MGM ) MERIDIAN 2 ) APPLICANT This matter coming on regularly before the Planning & Zoning Commission on April 17, 2025,upon the Applicant's submittal of a request for a two (2)year extension on the conditional use permit within which to commence the use as approved with the conditional use permit(TEC- 2025-0001), in accord with UDC 11-5 13-617. The conditional use permit was originally approved on April 21, 2021 and would have otherwise expired on April 1, 2023. An administrative time extension (TED-2023-0002) for two (2)years was previously approved for this subdivision by the Planning Director on April 14, 2023 and would have otherwise expired on April 1, 2025. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: The above named Applicant is granted an additional two (2) year extended period of ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION FOR SADIE CREEK DRIVE-THROUGH(TEC-2025-0001) Page 1 of 3 ■ time,until April 1, 2027, within which to commence the permitted use in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F, subject to the conditions of approval as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17, 2025 incorporated by reference. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of April 17, 2025 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION FOR SADIE CREEK DRIVE-THROUGH(TEC-2025-0001) Page 2 of 3 ■ By the action of the Planning &Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on the 15th day of May , 2025. COMMISSIONER MARIA LORCHER, CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER JARED SMITH,VICE CHAIRMAN VOTED COMMISSIONER BRIAN GARRETT VOTED COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT VOTED COMMISSIONER MATTHEW SANDOVAL VOTED COMMISSIONER SAM RUST VOTED Maria Lore her, Chairman 5-15-2025 Attest: Chris Johnson, City Clerk 5-15-2025 Copy served upon Applicant,the Planning Division,Public Works Department, and City Attorney. By: Dated: 5-15-2025 City Clerk's Office ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION FOR SADIE CREEK DRIVE-THROUGH(TEC-2025-0001) Page 3 of 3 ■ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,­, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 4/17/2025 Legend - DATE: Project Location i TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Area of impact : City Limits o FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner 0 Analysis 208-884-5533 Irifter@meridiancity.org , APPLICANT: Mike Maffia,MGM Meridian 2 t SUBJECT: TEC-2025-0001 Sadie Creek Drive-Through , LOCATION: 3030 N. Cajun Lane, located in the NE '/4 of Section 5,Township 3N,Range lE (Parcel# S1105110120) I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Request for a two (2)year time extension for the(H-2021-0006)due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. The City is also processing an application for a Development Agreement Modification to separate this property from the current Development Agreement. B. Issues/Waivers The property was originally purchased with the intent of leasing to Starbucks,but they ultimately decided not to proceed. Since then,the applicant has actively marketed the site and now has strong interest from a reputable regional credit union looking to build a new branch. Their plan includes a drive-through,which is essential to their operations. C. Recommendation Staff recommend approval of the proposed time extension for a time period of two(2)years as requested for the application to expire on April 1,2027. D. Decision Approved City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ I1. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Commercial - Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial - Existing Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) VLA.2 Proposed Zoning General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) Adopted FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R) VLA.3 Proposed FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R) Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 1/28/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 2/13/2025 Site posting date 4/3/2025 I1I. STAFF ANALYSIS A. General Overview Per UDC 11-6B-7C, "Upon written request and filing by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsections A and B of this section,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." Table 3: Project Overview Description Details History CUP-2021-0006; Centrepoint Mixed Use MDA,H-2022-0035 DA Inst. #2022-079000,TED-2023-0002 B. History On April 1,2021,the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Sadie Creek Drive-Through establishment(H-2021-0006)that is within 300 feet of another drive-through. The CUP approval was valid for a period of two(2)years. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review will still need to be submitted and approved by the Planning Division prior to the Building Permit submittal. A time extension was requested and approved by the Director(TED-2023-0002)for a two(2)year time extension in order to 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.The time extension is valid until April 1,2025. The applicant stated additional time is needed to complete the transfer in ownership due to delays related to inflation resulting in higher construction costs. The applicant is now requesting an additional two(2)year time extension due to delays caused by adverse market conditions, including increased construction costs and limited tenant interest. Per the applicant,this additional time will allow them to work with a reputable credit union who has shown interest in purchasing the property and building a new branch which includes a drive- through which is essential to their operations. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics 1 00 IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. The applicant shall comply with all the previous conditions of approval associated with this development except as modified with this approval and compliance with any future amendments approved with this Development Agreement Modification application.(CUP- 2021-0006; PBA A-2018-0361 (ROS#11747,Parcel F); Centrepoint Mixed Use MDA H- 2022-0035 DA Inst. #2022-079000,TED-2023-0002). 2. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review is required to be submitted,reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the Building Permit submittal. 3. The applicant is required to dedicate twelve(12) feet of right-of-way to the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD)and reconstruct the right turn lane to current ITD standards as the southbound right turn lane on SH-55 (Eagle Rd) onto East Seville Lane does not meet current ITD standards. B. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=391630&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X C. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) httWs://weblink.meridianciU.orgzl ebLink/Browse.aspx?id=391630&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X V. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommend approval of the proposed TEC application and find it in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC with the conditions included in Section IV. B. Planning and Zoning Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on April 17,2025.At the public hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject time extension request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Brandon McDougald,Kimly-Horn representing the property owner b. In opposition:None c. Commenting:None d. Written testimony:None e. Staff presenting application: Linda Ritter f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. Removal of Condition#3 which requires the applicant to dedicate 12 feet of right of wavy to the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) and reconstruct the right turn lane to current standards on the southbound right turn lane on Eagle Road to the east of Seville Lane that doesn't meet current ITD standards. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 1 01 ' 1 1 ct Location of Impact a �1ff Analysis -r /5 ■ ! 1P - i . ! i a 1 w: 'USTICK _ - y e I. . 7 Lu •` Fr,' l w ... Wry=�..,. +, IF �. �- F.AIRV.'IEW - 1 . I• " nll nun . S�If•:::;��` 111, _'j a•��I=pA Yini.ny%•�..��-•'.,ur4 or..,.o1a''f-.■.■ImnI ."a�--• r';.�' �Jul:..�-us.0.r'.•_ • na... ..: i Y" all ■1■rlilr■■IH n , �� —�. '•i inin:Ey'.9•�►iI\OE HIM .......... I.•I,I•4I�:Ia.::.I n::Ii..Ii.n:.■r-:•.a::W`.\L i�nliinin1i.,.tiru.i...:..�- Project Location �:. �i�_■♦ I,;.r,:...,�,•... :i/ Wool_?'..:- -s eir' -.G.i a7: 1,�: .• �' t1 :�l Analysis110111511 I: ■ �■■n.;, ■ni::::lrlp .rm�1u m• _ �■. 1111111■■ ■1 Jill.�� RM log ■r- ] =� rI ,,,.I� lz •�i■■■■■ - J 111111l11111,.1 -I 1�� •--_ _ {��_.r.����1�3 � .•.•.•�� �q �,In y.nr.:_...ur•ro.:iil_ u r1:..pq:. - Vs► -,nl.:'4 r..■��■ �■�' —�.IIi�{.-�?'.:iii.��1::'�al:i.F 11.1wmm:::::. . �� GI/. `fr •iY�- =m na••rq a��. �, IS%.'iii in::.'::;::'�i�":'mvsn ire:�i�....n.r�2 P..i�i■ __ ..��o + e�yn4i1//ii■ �iii1 �.. • . _ 2 r �, ■1�ia.�^ uR�:. 1"•% �[ 'as __. •• ■/I�r�i■*�A�'•rw .. ; + •�i ..��i:iin'Ir . _,I:_ _ �:ii �9�ll�.�r �,II♦�=��Ili iii:::::a nm:.tl►A irk ��i!'i'i:. ���- . .lin�i i:::;l � lour.: •nil t•:iiip 'i11= �` nun-_'"' ��I�f/ice������iiiii:�'•.9::: �, r..n�'ur� ::iiii . IIiL h•:��d:lin e�ia ��1/i. �•::�..::::�:::: 1C' 'v i'n 9 S :ini =8iii :{{ 1'y ;I�1' >�:;���fiAf/1 r►"'-..nnj;�y tl��%�■l, 3 : USTICK ':�. '", .. i _..r...��S-1�•IIr1.�•:�.11n! min � ■ 1■' - � Ir MIN 1116.■... -niC•--.—... �ririuq r� n giii� ■_r ■ -.:, ;IIIIIII��.0 uum►Iflll lun iln::■._:.....iiw 1 ''' pn■__ui " V a\/N�:•••••� � � 'nn as �,��•_IIII::IIIF-- Illlllllll==-.n r3 •:fir.♦ nll.11lr�A � w:.�..•d::lul::111[a.III( IIIIIIIIIII::■a`.iiili� :11111 � ia:►,. IIr111...� �: �f, � 11111 IIIrl11,n� �Yn.1.1101111.\I Lll.nl 11111111 :Ri:iii-■•••",Illi •�1 '"■ _•^.:•;:I'.:n:ir �' —1 - n M1r'� :■u1,.11011hn r O L•.��':i1}1 _ 1: �� �•n.. Al[ - i11111 1ir1111'IRItIr� �:hii:iii:rill��: :s ■?'• • .:'.'.:�3 iniii'1 ii r� ''ll .Il-. .ur._I 'Y.::���:::��::•y: "ill .. r=:,,;N v '';r::..frlr,.;,,.�a:Y. 1 illlll►..1:11.1■.� .,.rr,.........^�■•:■_.;.,:1,,;... n"ii Iniri�r:•. :�.. ":-- ►:� - ►-OIIue■11^•Yi•�•.1:::::.:=■..�� �1 `;as- �...L: ,•" _ � ..-:. .�i�• II�•�III111111= '-'"� ��:=e�::::€ ins.: IN 'e :_g•aLU ::::sir r 'n•......... a iiN.u... J IIII� ■t' .uT i=.�' .....: :�.�_�_�. ..:: ©� ''� irk',_�►• y ' — FAIRU�IEW �r „��-n�■rr■Ir��.iyi .r i� _ fu.m.•-ilia.. H� =I 5=:'}'Arhp 1R :_:i'i+� ■ _ _- _____ { - w P i�r•�isi.-�■- • aI - nay.iOnI:C.n■I�. 'S\SI :uiil:: ,_!i 4_•:i::�S\"Ei�.Z. I'� ��' •• n::lq�� um-•. i:N •^i','�'.•'•'► .::•• 5•,Inm1: �i^'"' +' u '•ice:rr �1 :l f_:rl gAnn1P.-r.f,f,.■ nilnu Project llllfl■ :�■'R'1y7�:■—1 ■■ nnm-:e.:_ -_nliir II 'Gii j� III 1�`Ira+�'6,=r 1 Area Impact • I - �- >:r rnri: C�.IN`I:'•ll:T1an' �:l:a E:*�i�-� --7- Analysis i, .. + __.•--__P wP'll■u■lfwt■-: = 'uiu r,-jn��o::►HAA1..rn4•••■1•k 5 G 11 ■U■■i• �- ... ly r- ..�:: a■��1��4��lIp1._ •.:::lle:.".:S`:::;:':a:;I::I ��C: ��::. .ter n.. �_ , � ` r •'k~ •■:•'::, :: •iil:a.d�^....n„1 ..,�>•u.i::■i- ]fii���■-■I�L• • _ .,.C: '.ii::::::: :_.!Inn■nunnnrrrrn ■1�:i�.iLmR,!i. _ ... l �/-'^■■-14W. W.W.W.W.W. W. � •• •••• ' ■'� .::.. l �u°i=a ..:IS. OEMUSTICK _ r:a�_li ar1.�-S.M..114111- \ii 4 - :::ilr � .annkr,�•.��.. - �. :,mi'ri'iu iii�::I::i:■ii'I u'lioiu I iii:■:•H' G•••Illl rr' � 1...:n ■�_:IR1 1 m u III ,e ::.::-_.,��i�:1 �,',:�' .'.-•.::- "'C�'S,�auf`.ws.MA1111111A � a'iii::'1+■�- � ■■•'��='-'? 1111`i 9'lll lun:ui'.?--:iti"'i:::::1 ii,:-r�-.,.,. IurunlP rypl , pun... nmeuu„IlGlmus:,,,y Ir mrd 11111111111111� lsi:::e:'ii'.+d-+, @:: V r - ••'!+� I:ure:: nnl■Ilu■m.. _y�0 a?L.•ip O:L/.•�a� S� O Ga.GC�+ .nrl::�`onumll::� :::�`�■ii:iiillli jil,Pn ♦ . unun ♦ n nlw' nm anon 1 :rurm illlllun, .:., u11sses S'_:F;�=•CGS-: �ti so ISO • - ...,. '� W ■■ fir•_;,, :::::: -_�_—=: = Ruin ■u u C low`u'1 - e - FA'I�RYI�EW �- ,,r- n�■If■n��■: o D - - o - o - - o - o f1 � . w■ . 1 I a-unnnn F- �r h�'ni� ��111■ _ 'iti�l�::::' - .s......-it!•■�77�..,.,�•�i Legend �: .'-�..'.'•e, R`t Jllil:....::;.: �•4„=,,,easy Project Location I ,.�iii..saa•n17�1►11,Iy��-••=11'�♦ :u::• ri::::'::i:ii::is:• IIIIIIIP • ��A���p� ■��-AG 1:1]la ]C�:IGG,s. y� ♦ , ;� f�•r..r �.,•,�,.Illlllfl:=•:,..,a..:i■ CIIIIINIIl1 �Ko�a•,• �a-.:;,■_. .;Ilnrr,,.:;,a::::• II,P.,.- :,r:•;.. Area I�,•'lllllll�� �$fi� �;:_-_:: ,.: I,111::: ► E,:;al::.City Limitsn: •:•,- — .. ,a R... . �:•;Y^ a�+•::—. —r.R Planned Parcels �.111IIIII■■■Iw■ riiu,■us♦. '•�'�'`t 1� ""'• ....u..L�11111■II■1:■u1u111rfk��.`.�..::■.■■116■■�.:. i �_u�1�1:.'��I►♦_ w � �...rr�•v. �� _.n. •.a.•o nlnnnlln.a.a isa . 7a✓'1=_-■ � �•rlt. 1■■■■�� !II"__=• r,..r.:annuru....ul..l �� :�•�'�' s ` ��:.:• :u::n;i�a—■.��■�■■rr,�f S. . ..:.::;::�i'r:'...Il:rsr Analysis Ire ,..- u..-■ .+ _.� �.. _ �_::..::..... -.1:ILa614:,::r:1Ga¢arl%.nna 1 ♦ rail- ...�G+. _ •.J ■■ _ ,.a .,r ��-* ■ ••' „• -� :/► irnna.C•'•r = Y -: • �. ram/, "q,....,�■:.:.:i::: MEN - ail..�_� -�� 7�`-��■" R.n, •y��i�1'�1 I•ll ,•1� ',firer: _�� �.:9�� un-ue�ia' = �■ ice.-� ��•I. Ili.. 1:°....-. rr� —�■ .nin° uu�ns•7y'- -4fi a�7�,� i - _ .►� Ir I■-:VS�::::�"::: ::::C :::::I "'�� ��� ■' �� � _ �� +■��Ii■1i#1� ql-iy.C■ryl u■�3A1 - ....._rl: p,.: ter;�' USTICK � ='r;; •._..r...��_I����u.�•:..11n! 'i'�'�R:yi T iun ' -_ � 1 li� -�ie� � �■i nt•mil iu `-llijYj �. •n,a .ml,l�n, ■:'::__�■■ ��� III _•�:pl.l :I- ■ iliul ',�:Sinn•�+dr, li• •r','plii th � ■ : li .:F.I�Esea, ti I`ni�.,.,. 11 .. rr1�. �••••1, �n�_ nnn+ Illlllllllllllry;a umntli,in,ln..••n.,l i�tii'i:l e-::i'• ' r V ►\Ii,�=:...�::::L ~,� 1.A� Q■ 1�� .I tP_lue•- nnlum--•..nu.- �� nlrllllf•=a• - 1 - �■-+ ..•a:�lnl::111G:�( 11111111111::�V,n••: tl1111 •/�♦:•:�ii�: �♦r unu lLi �:'::::a � �■, I � �a::i:.•■...ii�llli -1,a r- � ■■■a • ���/�1I ♦♦rT•nu nw nw' nnin anon :ruruyElllllhn, ��PP�� .�.bon�isf.' N "e`:.•:=�1 I:::.,.., 'r--- �.'��1III� '� r n ulnl•, . . I�V O,�� u 1114�G.:f y' :�:p-=iniinu.a � +J■4■ : nn_:a ,.:::::::::::u:Ill�i n2 1•■■ 6 I ul�. 6:� �1 ' • _ :,.•..:::.-- . C=--Ill. ..nn,n.nn.. iunn:►lI•inlUnu "•••imun�=�,•,nl,,:...5. -�' l7 -G'm=onu_li i..::iii::::i::�n� 11 Iu ,•1 V ,•I::•:'::vu,Y.'.�::L'al■r- •�- l p1■/IIIO■a uu ,..•� Zit riiiiii.. mum■.■n-• --'=1innl nl un � •.L u. .:. p!_�• , Ili ♦d:-'.':: ',�,,,. '�• _4:::=::� ::::•��a��'`� �W� tlll�\�'111111111°':;.:•.n,;..—_ ,Rua■ ... B„ :i'IIn:�L1:,�a1: ■,..r,�o� .J■ IIII�■■te ,fir i�1iq ....• -�■_��� ..:: •. ,u■unNair,in 7- yG oleo■ _ . -■!::ISi�..,bi..�„ in Ellin NIP {..,� FAI RY3 E,W I•r,anR.■1:ui' '=1C7?51,.- _■ ■. _�a;n:S77 1 I r /-1• r -1 1 1 B. Approved Site Plan (date: 1/27/2021) ,„,ye�lrn.wrc THE '. .,.". LAND 6Ii8,IP I ` _ arwuru`"� ■ ca wwrwrwnr. T Condltlonal Use Permit-Site Pia. C. Approved Landscape Plan(date: 1/27/2021) IPLW LE ..._ — -=- — -: ---- Lw sa%i1.:Fr --i"rciMd a ? I: MUM El awnEl .lll-.'....................• - — - QQ 0 LIAO City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits 104 D. Existing Conditions . �� MAN a _ _ -[ ! .ni.�MSr• -y `j lip City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits Fl 05 E. Service Accessibility Report Overall Score: 37 �Slst Percentile Location In City Limits GREEN Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrflGodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. GREEN Emergency Services Police Meets response time goals most of the time GREEN Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Not within 114 of current or future transit route RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 1/2 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Parkwithin 1 mile OR a Community Park Walkability Park within 1/2 mile OR a Neighborhood Park within GREEN 114 mile walking City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Exhibits 106 E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline h2 Planning and Zoning May 15, 2025Commission Meeting Slide 1 h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order: hoodc, 12/19/2006 FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map Use Subdivision.to develop the Adero Mixed055407) to create two (2) new development agreements Development Agreement modification (Inst. No. 2019 The images provided are intended solely for architectural reference. They are not architectural elements depicted in these images.representative of specific individual uses. Future buildings may or may not incorporate condition stands as presented.and will have this issue resolved prior to the City Council hearing, for now the Staff is working with the applicant regarding requirements for transitioning –1g approval may be required based on the findings of the updated traffic study.the Ada County Highway District Planning Review staff. Additional conditions of . Coordinate the scope of work with as determined by ACHDthe commercial lots applicant shall submit a traffic impact study to address the potential impacts of Prior to submitting plans or a final plat that contains any commercial lots, the -1c future required commercial applicationsare intended to serve as general guidance for the provisions contained herein building elevations for the commercial development included in Section VII and landscape plan and conceptual Conceptual plans provided, including theplat. Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary -1a amenities being built with the second phase.remove this condition as the phasing plan has been revised to show the 1v as presented.resolution prior to the City Council hearing, for now the conditions stands Staff is working with the applicant on this issue and should have a 1p collector roaduse pathway and landscaping on the west residential side of the new excluding the ten (10) foot multiit develops prior the residential portion if including landscaping, multiuse pathways, and landscaping on both sides construction of the entire new collector roadway (Gondola/Malta Drive) The commercial portion of the development shall be responsible for the 1k final plat for the commercial portion is approved for phased development, unless the that is adjacent to the plaza areacommercial phase of the project Development of the proposed plaza area shall be required with the first 1j W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068) by DevCo, LLC, located near the NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0068 A. Request: Rezone of 11.18 acres of land from the R-4 and C-C zones to the R-8 zone; 35.82 acres from the L-0, C-C and C-G zones to the R-15 zone; and a portion of the C-C zone (approximately 10 acres) to the C-G zone which in total is 21.37 acres. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 270 residential lots, 44 commercial lots, 4 office lots, 31 common lots, 2 common drive lots and 1 park lot on 69.18 acres of land in the R-8, R-15, L-0 and C-G zoning districts. C. Request: Development Agreement Modification (Inst. No. 2019-055407) to create two (2) new development agreements to develop the Adero Mixed-Use Subdivision. 107 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: May l5, 2025 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 4 PROJECT NAME: Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify (Please Print) HOA? (mark X if yes) If yes, please provide HOA name X" 2 J fu 4 c 47 Aj �j 6 7 V 8 J N" 10 7 13 -7 14 OIL u roc 4j COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,­, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 5/15/2025 Legend DATE: Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission :::Area of Impact a� = City Limits -@ FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner O Analysis 208-884-5533 Irifter@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Laren Bailey,DevCo SUBJECT: H-2024-0068 m- Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood MDA, PP,RZ LOCATION: Near the NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Roads in the SE'/4 of SEC 27, ` Township 4N,R. 1 W. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Rezone of 11.18 acres of land from the R-4 and C-C zones to the R-8 zone, 35.82 acres from the L-O, C-C and C-G zones to the R-15 zone; and a portion of the C-C zone(approximately 10 acres)to the C-G zone which in total is 21.37 acres; Preliminary Plat(PP) consisting of 270 residential lots,44 commercial lots,4 office lots, 31 common lots, 2 common drive lots, and 1 park lot on 69.18 acres of land in the R-8,R-15, L-O, and C-G zoning districts;AND Development Agreement modification(Inst.No. 2019-055407)to create two(2)new development agreements to develop the Adero Mixed-Use Subdivision. B. Issues/Waivers • Request for Waiver for a right-in/right-out access to Ten Mile Road: Ada County Highway District(ACHD)has a revised Traffic Impact Study(TIS)to determine if this access is warranted for the commercial development. • Revised TIS: ACHD has requested a revised Traffic Impact Study(TIS) for this application to assess the impact of the proposed commercial lots and conduct a signal warrant analysis at the Malta Drive/Ten Mile intersection prior to submitting any commercial plans or a final plat submittal. C. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the rezone from C-C(Community Commercial)to R-8 and R-15 (Residential)zoning districts,L-O, C-G and the preliminary plat associated with the residential and commercial development. D. Decision City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview 108 I1. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential,Office,Commercial - Existing Zoning L-O,C-C,C-G,R-4 VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning R-8,R-15,L-O,C-G Adopted FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Community(MU-C),Medium Density VII.A.3 Residential Proposed FLUM Designation Mixed-Use Community(MU-C),Medium Density Residential Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 9/24/2024 Neighborhood Meeting 10/16/2024 Site posting date 5/1/2025 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IV.H • Comments Received Yes - • Commission Action Required No - • Access N.Ten Mile Road - • Traffic Level of Service See Figure 2:ACHD Summary Matrix ITD Comments Received Yes/Letter IV.I Meridian Fire No Comments — Meridian Police IV.0 • Distance to Station 6.2 Miles and 2.9 Miles — • Response Time Priority 3:4:06 Priority 2: 7:38 Priority 1: 12:59 Meridian Public Works Wastewater IV.13 • Distance to Mainline Available at the site • Impacts or Concerns No Meridian Public Works Water 1V.13 • Distance to Mainline Available at the site • Impacts or Concerns No School District(s) West Ada School District—No Comments Received • Capacity of Schools Pleasant View Elementary School—650 - Star Middle School—1000 Owyhee High School— 1800 • Number of Students Enrolled Pleasant View Elementary School-747 - Star Middle School- 1014 Owyhee High School- 1887 Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics 1 09 Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:S0427417210 Date Retrieved:2025/1/29 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator: 1,842 Surrounding Area 355 19% vot city a 0 ® City Limits 2,803 1,504. ■ Not City Household Household& Population Growth ■ f % Households 02020 Population Change:25.3°/° Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses ■ Single-family 9% % 4% Multi-family4P9 87% ® Commercial Preliminary Plats (last 5-years) Conditional Use Permit(last 5-years) Proposed Proposed Pending Pending Approved Approved 0 500 1000 1500 0 200 400 600 8W ■ Single-family ❑ Multi-family City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics 1 10 2.00 2,000 Single-family y Residential 0' 1.50 1,500 41 Parcel Diversity a 1.00 1,000 U 0 Parcel Count 0.50 0.49 500 L m *Average Acres 0.00 19 0.12 0 a R-2 8 R-15 Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average 10.00 L 08.59 Residential Net Density V = 5.00 05.28 a �4.a9 G)2.05 4.85 0.00 Dwelling Units I Acre R-2 R-4 R-8 R-15 Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts. Figure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics Level of Service Planning Thresholds 1. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH� Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service x McMillan Road NIA Minor Arterial 1185 Better than °E" *Ten Mile Road 1,507-feet Minor Arterial 783 Better than °E" *Gondola Drive 334_feet Residential 101 Better than"D" Collector *Bolsena Way 590-feet Local NIA N/A *Acceptable level of service for a three-lane minor arterial is"E"(720 VPH). *Acceptable level of service for a five-lane minor arterial is"E"(1,540 VPH)_ *Acceptable level of service for a two-lane collector is"DA(425 VPH)_ *ACHD does not set level of service thresholds for local streets_ 2. Average Daily Traffic Count(VDT) Average daity traffic courts are based on ACHD`s most current traffic counts. • The average daily traffic count for McMillan Road west of Ten Mile Road was 12.003 on November 16 ', 2023_ • The average daily traffic count for Ten Mile Road south of US 20126(Chinden Boulevard)was 20.182 on August 22"d, 2024_ • The average daily traffic count for Gondola Dive west of Bolsena Way was 1,699 on November W', 2023. • There are no current traffic counts for Bolsena Way_ Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes &Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Figure 3: Service Impact Summary ImpactService ■ . Ready Marginal Caution oce v�r�aAh �.� o \�`o� a�� \ `\Ae ��`� t �a o�� o o Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics 112 III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview A significant portion of the proposed development is located within an area designated as Mixed Use by the Comprehensive Plan. These designations are intended to promote a complementary blend of compatible land uses within a compact geographic area, ensuring that services and amenities are easily accessible and convenient for residents, employees, and visitors alike. The Comprehensive Plan emphasizes the importance of both functional and physical integration of land uses to foster a strong neighborhood identity, enhance the community's sense of place, and support flexible,high-quality design and development patterns. The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designates the area proposed to be rezoned as Mixed-Use Community and Medium Density Residential. Mixed-Use Community: The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community- serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings. In reviewing development applications,the City will consider the following items in MU-C areas: • Development must comply with the Functional Integration principles for development in all Mixed Use areas. • Residential uses are expected to comprise between 20%and 50%of the development area, with gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre(of the residential area). • Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places should comprise a minimum of 5%of the development area are required. • Where the development site has transit available or stops are planned,an additional 15%of the site may be dedicated to residential uses. Alternatively,this bonus may be applied where the development site is within one-mile of planned transit stops or an identified employment area,and where last-mile transportation features are incorporated into the site including thoughtfully located and integrated ride share parking, commensurate with potential trip capture. Other innovations to reduce traffic and/or parking impacts and capture local trips may be considered. • Sample uses appropriate in MU-C areas include: All MU-N categories, community scale grocers, clothing stores,garden centers,hardware stores,restaurants,banks, drive-thru facilities, auto service station,retail shops, and other appropriate community-serving uses. Sample zoning includes: R-15,R-40,TN-R, TN-C, C-C, and L-O. Medium Density Residential: This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight 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. The proposed Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood represents an infill development that completes the final phase of a larger,integrated mixed-use area. This project offers a complementary mix of land uses consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically supporting the vision of a vibrant mixed-use community. The development is designed to seamlessly connect with and enhance the surrounding neighborhoods, contributing to a cohesive and well-planned community fabric. According to the Comprehensive Plan,vibrant mixed-use communities are characterized by shared spaces that foster connection and recreation among residents, employees, and visitors. These areas serve as hubs for business, collaboration, innovation,and social interaction. The success of such communities hinges on a thoughtful balance between residential and non- City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 113 residential uses.Without this balance,the intended intensity and density of mixed-use areas can lead to fragmented development and unmitigated impacts. The concept of"1 st Place"(home), "2nd Place"(work), and"3rd Place" (social or recreational spaces)is central to the vitality of mixed-use environments. Access to a nearby"3rd Place"is essential for emotional and physical well-being, offering people a space to relax, connect, and recharge. While not every mixed-use area must serve all functions equally,they are expected to be more than just a place to live or work,they must contribute meaningfully to a sense of place and community. The proposed Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood is ideally situated to support this vision. Surrounded by residential neighborhoods, employment centers, and recreational amenities,it embodies the key characteristics of a vibrant,integrated mixed-use community. Rezone: The applicant is requesting to rezone parcel SO427428024 which is approximately 9.20 acres from R-4 and C-C to R-8. The applicant is also proposing to rezone parcel S0427417210 approximately 59.966 acres of land currently zoned as Community Business(C-C), Limited Office(L-O)and General Retail and Service Commercial(C-G)as follows: • Approximately 35.822 acres as R-15 • Approximately 1.363 acres as L-O • Approximately 21.366 acres as C-G Table 4: Pro aect Overview Description Details History AZ-05-040,PP-05-039,PP-05-040,CUP-05-041,MDA Inst.No. 111010393 Phasing Plan 5 phases Residential Units 270 units _ Open Space Required: 15%/Provided: 6.28 acres/16.6% Amenities Required: 5 amenity points/Provided:27 amenity points _ Physical Features Existing park with water feature Acreage 69.18 acres _ Lots 270 residential, 1 existing park,31 common lots,2 common driveways,4 office lots,44 commercial lots for a total of 352 lots Density 7 du/acre _ B. History The subject property was part of a larger annexation completed in 2005, encompassing approximately 312.67 acres of land previously zoned RUT(Rural-Urban Transition)in Ada County.As part of the annexation request,the applicant proposed a mix of zoning designations: 35.19 acres were designated C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial District), 19.27 acres were zoned L-O (Limited Office District), and the remaining 258.21 acres were zoned R-4 (Low Density Residential District). This zoning mix was intended to support a balanced community with commercial, office, and residential land uses. C. Site Development and Use Analysis The Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood consists of the remaining 69.18 acres of land annexed in 2005. The property will be developed as a mixed-use development consisting of single-family detached residential, office and commercial. The development will be designed as follows: • Residential: The applicant is proposing the development of 270 single-family detached homes,to be constructed in four phases. To accommodate this residential component,two zoning districts are proposed: R-15 and R-8,providing a mix of lot sizes and housing options.As part of the project,the applicant is also contributing additional acreage to the City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ existing park located at Lot 46,Block 5. This contribution will fulfill the requirement outlined in the existing development agreement to establish a 10.2-acre park, enhancing recreational opportunities for the surrounding community. • Existing Bridgetower Park: The Bridgetower West Neighborhood was originally preliminarily platted under a development agreement that required the dedication of a 10.2- acre park. However,the majority of that park was never formally dedicated to the Bridgetower West Homeowners Association(HOA),and the prior approvals for the neighborhood have since expired. The Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood application addresses this issue by incorporating the remaining portion of the park that was never deeded to the HOA. This application creates a clear path forward for the current property owner to record a final plat that establishes the properly sized park parcel,thereby fulfilling the original development agreement and enabling the parcel to be dedicated to the HOA. This park will not be accessible to the property owners within the Adero Park Mixed-Use Neighborhood development. l " 10.2 Ac, r � 4-� • Office: The applicant is proposing the development of four office lots at the corner of Ten Mile Road and W. Malta Drive,within the area designated for L-O(Limited Office)zoning. This location was strategically selected, as it sits between the proposed Adero Park Mixed- Use Neighborhood and the existing Bridgetower West Subdivision. The applicant views this as an ideal site for office use,providing a natural transition between residential areas and supporting the overall goal of creating a balanced,integrated mixed-use environment. • Commercial: The applicant is proposing to defer development of the commercial portion of the property to a future phase, as specific end users have not yet been identified. To illustrate City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 115 the potential for future development, a bubble conceptual site plan has been submitted and is included in Section VII,Exhibit E. Prior to proceeding with the commercial component,the applicant will be required to submit a new development agreement application, along with updated conceptual plans that demonstrate alignment with the mixed-use principles outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The commercial portion of the property should not be rezoned or subdivided until an updated Traffic Impact Study(TIS)has been submitted,reviewed,and approved by Ada County Highway District(ACHD). At that time,the applicant must provide documentation to the City that clarifies the intended development approach for the commercial area,enabling staff to evaluate the project comprehensively and ensure consistency with transportation and land use planning goals. 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): There are no existing structures on the site. The site will be developed with a mixture of single-family detached residential homes, office and commercial buildings. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The applicant is proposing single-family detached dwellings which are listed as a principal permitted use in the R-15 zoning districts in UDC Table 11-2A-2. The future land use map identifies this area as mixed-use community. R-15 is an allowed use within the mixed-use community designation. This designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of eight (8) to twelve(12) dwelling units per acre. Per UDC 11-2A-7, R-15 is considered Medium High Density. Per the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, this designation allows for a mix of dwelling types including townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. The applicant is only proposing single-family detached homes. Residential gross densities should range from eight to twelve dwelling units per acre. These areas are relatively compact within the context of larger neighborhoods and are typically located around or near mixed use commercial or employment areas to provide convenient access to services and jobs for residents. Developments need to incorporate high- quality architectural design and materials and thoughtful site design to ensure quality of place and should also incorporate connectivity with adjacent uses and area pathways, attractive landscaping and a project identity. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.06.02B encourages and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live, shop, dine,play, and work in close proximity, thereby reducing vehicle trips, and enhancing overall livability and sustainability. 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The preliminary plat and future development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 and 11-2B-1 Commercial District for the Mixed-Use Community, C-G,L-0 R-8 and the R-15 zoning districts. The proposed lots and public streets for the R-15 zoning district appear to meet UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. The minimum lot size for the proposed preliminary is 3,040 square feet with an average lot size of 3,795 square feet. Two (2) common driveways are proposed with this subdivision. The applicant has provided common drive exhibits which demonstrate no more than three(3) units are served whereas a maximum of 4 units is allowed. The common driveway meets the minimum width of twenty (20)feet and does not exceed the maximum length of one hundred and fifty(150)feet. Solid fencing adjacent to common driveways is prohibited, unless separated by a minimum five (5) foot wide landscaped buffer. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 116 D. Design Standards Analysis The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in 11-2A-7 for the R-8 and R-15 zoning district. Stafffinds the proposed lots comply with the dimensional standards for the R-8 and R-15 zoning district. 1. Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan 2.02.02C, Comp Plan 3.07.00, Comp Plan 3.07.0IA, UDC 11-3A-19): The property is currently vacant and zoned Community Business District(C-C), General Retail and Service Commercial District(C-G) and Limited Office District(L-O). Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.02C supports infill development that does not negatively impact the abutting, existing development. Infill projects in downtown should develop at higher densities, irrespective of existing development. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.07.0 encourages compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.07.OIA requires all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening, transitional densities, and other best site design practices. 2. Qualified Open Space &Amenities (Comp Plan 2.02.00, Comp Plan 2.02.0IB, UDC 11-3G): Based on the standards in UDC Table 11-3G-3, a minimum of 15% (or 6.05-acres) of qualified open space is required to be provided within the development. An open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.F, that depicts 15.6% (or 6.28-acres) of open space that meets the required quality and qualified open space standards. Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum offive (5) amenity points are required to be provided. The applicant has provided twenty-seven (27) amenity points, which is well in excess of the required amenity points. The amenities proposed are three pickleball courts, play structure, climbing dome and rocks, swing set,passive open spaces and seating areas, numerous pathways and pedestrian facilities, two dog parks and several open space areas with attractive landscaping. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.00 requires the applicant to plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample open space, and generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.0IB requires the applicant to evaluate open space and amenity requirements for consistency with community needs and values. 3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC 11-2A-6 requires a twenty-five (25)foot wide buffer along arterials (N. Ten Mile Road and twenty (20)foot wide buffers are required along collector roads (W. Malta Drive). The landscaping along Ten Mile Road was installed when the road was widened. The applicant will be required to remove the gravel and install landscaping that follows UDC 11-3B-7. ii. Parking lot landscaping Per UDC 11-313-8,the applicant shall provide perimeter and internal parking lot landscaping to soften and mitigate the visual and heat island effect of a large expanse of City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ asphalt in parking lots, and to improve the safety and comfort of pedestrians. A five-foot wide minimum landscape buffer adjacent to parking, loading,or other paved vehicular use areas. The requirements include 5 ft.perimeter adjacent to streets and islands of at least 50 sq. ft.per every 12 parking spaces. The parking lot landscaping for the commercial portion of the project shall be analyzed with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. The parking lot landscaping shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-3B-8 which also include a five (5)foot perimeter adjacent to streets and islands of at least fifty(50)square feet per every twelve(12)parking spaces. iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses Per UDC 11-3B-9, a landscape buffer is required in the C-N, C-C, C-G,L-O,M-E,H-E, and I-L districts on any parcel sharing a contiguous lot line with residential land use. Additionally,the comprehensive plan speaks to plazas and open space providing integration in mixed-use areas. The proposed plaza area will be a minimum of 16,000 square feet with amenities that promote transition from the residential areas to commercial uses, including,without limitation seating areas, gathering spaces, and multimodal facilities such as bicycle repair stations,workout stations, etc. Staff recommends the plaza design be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the final plat approval or with the development of the second phase of the landscape improvements. iv. Tree preservation Per UDC 11-3B-10,the applicant shall preserve existing trees four-inch caliper or greater from destruction during the development. Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten-inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four-inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees).Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within common open space, and when used as focal elements in landscape design. The applicant shall add a mitigation section to the landscape plan for trees that are removed meeting the criteria above. v. Storm integration Per UDC 11-3B-11,the applicant shall meet the intent to improve water quality and provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the integration of vegetated,well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green stormwater facilities into required landscape areas,where topography and hydrologic features allow if part of the development. Development will be required to meet UDC 11-3B-11 for stormwater integration. vi. Pathway landscaping Landscaping for pathways shall meet the requirements outlined in UDC 11-3B-12. Stafffinds the landscape plan shows the applicant meets the requirements of UDC 11-3B- 12 for pathway landscaping. 4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): 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. On-street parking is also available on the proposed streets. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 118 i. Residential parking analysis The proposal will be required to meet the standards for parking as set forth in UDC 11- 3C-6. ii. Nonresidential parking analysis Staff cannot analyze the parking for the nonresidential portion of this application as the applicant does not have a defined development plan for the commercial portion at this time. The commercial portion of the project will be developed in phase five(5) and will be required to comply with the commercial parking standards listed in UDC Table H- 3C-6. Non-residential parking will be evaluated with the submittal of the certificate of zoning compliance. The parking shall comply with UDC 11-3C-6. iii. Bicycle parking analysis A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space is required for every twenty-five(25) vehicle parking spaces per UDC 11-3C-6G. Staff cannot analyze the bicycle parking for the nonresidential portion of this application as the applicant does not have a defined development plan for the commercial portion at this time. This will be evaluated with the submittal of certificate of zoning compliance and design review. 5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan, Architectural Standards Manual): Ten (10) conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed residential subdivision as shown in Exhibit VII.J. Buildings shall be designed with elevations that create interest through the use of broken planes, windows, and fenestrations that produce a rhythm of materials and patterns. Design review is not required for single-family detached structures. However, because the rear and/or sides of homes facing W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive will be highly visible, Staff recommends a DA provision requiring those elevations 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 adjacent public streets. Single-story homes are exempt from this requirement. The applicant did not provide any building elevations for the commercial portion of the project. However, the building elevations shall comply with the Architectural Standards Manual, UDC, and Comprehensive Plan. This will be evaluated with the submittal of a certificate of zoning compliance and design review applications. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C encourages the applicants to maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. To support this policy staff recommends the applicant provide additional housing options (i.e. townhomes, single family attached) in the development. 6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7. 7. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17): Comprehensive Plan policy 3.07.01 C requires appropriate landscaping, buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc). Per the UDC the minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be eight(8) feet. The width can be measured from the back of curb where there is no likely expansion of City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 119 1 the street section within the right-of-way;the parkway width shall exclude the width of the sidewalk. Class II trees are the preferred parkway trees. The applicant is proposing parkways along the entrance to W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive of the subdivision. E. Transportation Analysis The Ada County Highway District(ACHD)reviewed the submitted application and has determined the following: Traffic Impact Study: Additional information is needed as the Traffic Impact Study(TIS) did not include the commercial portion of the property. ACHD has conditioned the project to submit a revised TIS to address the potential impacts of the commercial lots prior to submitting plans for the final plat. Additional conditions of approval may be required based on the findings of the updated traffic study. The TIS shall also include a signal analysis for the Malta Drive/Ten Mile Road intersection. Collector Street: The collector street(W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive) shall be developed as a three(3)lane collector street(either a 47-foot wide or 37-foot wide street section) at its intersection with Ten Mile Road within the influence area of the intersection.West of the intersection,taper the roadway to 2 lanes as follows: • Construct W.Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive as a 36-foot wide residential collector street section with 2-travel lanes,on-street bike lanes,vertical curb, gutter,a minimum 8-foot wide landscape strip and 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk; or • Construct W.Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive as a 26-foot wide residential collector street section with 2-travel lanes,vertical curb, gutter, a minimum 8-foot wide landscape strip and a minimum 10-foot wide multi-use pathway on both sides of the roadway. • The multi-use pathway will need to transition to on-street bike lanes at the intersection of W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive and San Vito Way. W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive shall be constructed as a completed street(travel lanes, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping). Staff is recommending these improvements be included with Phase one (1)of the development. While the applicant is unsure of the commercial business at this time, staff is in agreement with delaying the installation of the buffers along the east side of Malta Drive/Gondola Drive. The landscape buffer on the west side of Malta/Gondola Drive shall be installed with the residential development portion of the property. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.07.01 C requires appropriate landscaping, buffers, and noise mitigation with new developments along transportation corridors. The landscape buffers will be installed with the inclusion of the 10 foot multi-use pathways or bicycle lanes along the collector street. The new collector road is required to connect to N. San Vito Way and N. Vicenza Way which connects to W. McMillan Road. This will provide an overall transportation connectivity to the area and hopefully prevent individuals from cutting through neighborhoods to get to these areas. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 120 Adero 1 st Phase Improvement Area `A Bridge#ewer LLC Applicant proposes to Improvement Area develop in the Phase 2 Apartment Improvement Area The roadway portion to the south has to be constructed in order for the Bridgetower development to receive occupancy for any of its buildings. If the roadway section in red is not completed with Phase 1,there will be an approximate 0.12-mile gap in the transportation network in this area. If the new collector roadway does not connect at a minimum to N. Vicenza Way,residents of the proposed development will be forced to use Ten Mile Road to access the commercial businesses to the south.Additionally,the new collector will provide a direct route for residents of the southern developments,reducing the likelihood of them cutting through northern neighborhoods when dropping their children off at school. Individuals dropping off children at school will be able to use the collector as a more efficient and appropriate access route,minimizing traffic impacts on local residential streets. A private agreement stipulates that the third segment of the new collector roadway,extending from N. Vicenza Way to N. San Vito Way, shall be constructed by a separate parry. However,the agreement provides the applicant with the option to complete this segment if deemed necessary to support development or ensure roadway continuity. Right-In/Right-Out Access to Ten Mile Road: The applicant is requesting a waiver for a right- in/right-out access to Ten Mile Road for the commercial portion of the development. Per the Ada County Highway District,existing driveways onto Ten Mile Road are to be closed and replaced with curb,gutter, sidewalk and landscaping. No new driveways are approved as part of this application. Other than approved with this application, direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis 121 1. Access (Comp Plan 6.01.02B, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Access to the property is W.Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive, the new collector road, via Ten Mile Road. Comprehensive Plan policy 6.01.02B requires the applicant to 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. 2. Multiuse Pathways (UDC 11-3A-5): Multiuse pathways shall be constructed in accord with the city's comprehensive plan, the Meridian Pathways Master Plan, the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map and Roadways to Bikeways Master Plan. 3. Pathways (Comp Plan 2.02.OIA, Comp Plan 3.07.02A, Comp Plan 4.04.OIA, UDC 11-3A-8): A 10 foot wide detached pathway is reflected along W. Malta Drive/Gondola Drive (the internal collector) which is consistent with the alignment shown on the Pathways Master Plan. There is also a five (5)foot wide detached pathway along Ten Mile Road. Several micro pathways are reflected in providing connectivity to internal portions of the development. All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.OIA requires that 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. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.07.02A requires pedestrian circulation plans to ensure safety and convenient access across large commercial and mixed-use developments. Comprehensive Plan policy 4.04.OIA ensures that new development and subdivisions connect to the pathway system. Together, these policies ensure that all new projects prioritize safe pedestrian access and integrate seamlessly with existing pathways. 4. Multiuse Pathways (UDC I1-3A-5): Multiuse pathways shall be constructed in accord with the city's comprehensive plan,the Meridian Pathways Master Plan,the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map and Roadways to Bikeways Master Plan. A ten (10)foot wide detached pathway is reflected along W. Malta Drive/Gondola Drive which is consistent with the alignment shown on the Pathways Master Plan. There is a five (5)foot wide detached sidewalk along Ten Mile Road which is consistent with Ada County Highway District Master Street Map and Roadways to Bikeways Master Plan. Several micro pathways are reflected providing connectivity to internal portions of the development.As mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan analysis above; to improve more direct pedestrian connectivity, staff is recommending additional micro pathway connections. 5. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): All sidewalks constructed as part of this proposal are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. 6. Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4): There are no private streets proposed for this development. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 122 7. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6): i. Dead end streets No streets or series of streets that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than five hundred(500)feet except as allowed in subsection(b)of this section. The City Council may approve a dead-end street up to seven hundred fifty(750)feet in length where an emergency access is proposed; or where there is a physical barrier such as a steep slope,railroad tracks,an arterial roadway, or a large waterway that prevents or makes impractical extension; and where a pedestrian connection is provided from the street to an adjacent existing or planned pedestrian facility. Cul-de-sac streets may serve a maximum of thirty(30) dwelling units. The applicant is proposing a cul-de-sac that appears to meet the requirements of UDC 11-6C-3B-4. ii. Common driveways Per UDC 11-6C-3D, common driveways shall serve a maximum of four(4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three(3)dwelling units be located on one(1) side of the driveway. The applicant is proposing two (2) common driveways that meet the dimensional requirements as outlined in the UDC. iii. Block face UDC 11-6C-3-regulates block lengths for residential subdivisions. Staff has reviewed the submitted plat for conformance with these regulations. The intent of this section of code is to ensure block lengths do not exceed 750 ft, although there is the allowance of an increase in block length to 1,000 feet if a pedestrian connection is provided. In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred(1,200)feet,unless waived by the City Council. It appears the block lengths do not exceed 750 feet as required by UDC 11-6C-3. F. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (Comp Plan 4.04.02C, Comp Plan 4.05.0I1), UDC 11-3A-6): Per UDC 11-3A-6, requires limiting the tiling and piping of natural waterways, including, but not limited to, ditches, canals, laterals, sloughs and drains where public safety is not a concern as well as improve,protect and incorporate creek corridors (Five Mile, Eight Mile, Nine Mile, Ten Mile, South Slough and Jackson and Evan Drains) as an amenity in all residential, commercial and industrial designs. When piping and fencing is proposed, the standards outlined in UDC 11-3A-6B shall apply. The applicant needs to request a waiver from City Council to keep the canal open. An irrigation ditch under the jurisdiction of the Settler's Irrigation District runs along the northern boundary of the property. The applicant is proposing to tile the ditch and construct a pathway within the irrigation easement. Prior to the City Engineer's signature for the final plat, the applicant must obtain a license agreement from the Settler's Irrigation District authorizing use of the easement for this purpose. Per UDC 11-3A-6E, in Residential Districts, irrigation easements wider than ten (10)feet shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty(20)feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise waived by City Council. Comprehensive Plan policy 4.04.02C requires the applicant to continue partnerships with area irrigation districts to continue to expand pathway system along existing waterways. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 123 Comprehensive Plan policy 4.05.OID requires improving and protecting creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial, industrial, and residential areas. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-I S): The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments by the City's adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practices as adopted by the City as outlined in UDC 11-3A-18. Storm drainage will be proposed with a future Certificate of Zoning Compliance application and shall be constructed to City and ACHD design criteria. 4. Utilities (Comp Plan 3.03.03G, UDC 11-3A-21): 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. All utilities are available to the site. Water main,fire hydrant and water service require a twenty foot(20) wide easement that extends ten (10)feet past the end of main, hydrant, or water meter. No permanent structures, including trees are allowed inside the easement. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.03.03G requires urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities. IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of rezone of this property. Prior to approval of the rezone ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of rezone ordinance adoption, and the developer. A final plat will not be accepted until the ordinance and development agreements have been 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 new DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the rezone. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: Commercial(Development Agreement No. 1) a. Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat,landscape plan, conceptual plan, and conceptual building elevations for the commercial development included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. Future development of the site shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of development. c. Prior to submitting plans or a final plat that contains any commercial lots,the applicant shall submit a traffic impact study to address the potential impacts of the commercial lots. Coordinate the scope of work with the Ada County Highway District Planning Review City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 124 staff. Additional conditions of approval may be required based on the findings of the updated traffic study. d. New buildings on pad sites adjacent to W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive be limited to no more than a 1-story disparity in building height.Natural features,differences in grade, and other context sensitive neighborhood preservation design features should be considered with transitions. e. Building elevations shall comply with the Architectural Standards Manual,UDC, and Comprehensive Plan. Building elevations shall be evaluated with the submittal of a certificate of zoning compliance and design review applications. f. The buildings shall not have loading docks or outside storage adjacent to W.Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive without screening of loading areas and mechanical systems. g. The business hours of operations for the C-G zoning district along W. Malta Drive/W. Gondola Drive shall be limited from 6:00 a.m.to 11:00 p.m. h. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of forty(40)percent of the buildable frontage of the property shall be occupied by building facades and/or public space. i. Approval of the proposed plaza area shall require the following: (i)minimum of 16,000 square feet; (ii) amenities shall be provided that promote transition from the residential areas to commercial uses,including,without limitation seating areas,gathering spaces, and multimodal facilities such as bicycle repair stations,workout stations, etc. The plaza design shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the final plat approval or with the development of the second phase of the landscape improvements. j. Development of the proposed plaza area shall be required with the first commercial phase of the project,unless the final plat for the commercial portion is approved for phased development. k. The commercial portion of the development shall be responsible for the construction of the entire new collector roadway(Gondola/Malta Drive) including landscaping,multiuse pathways, and landscaping on both sides if it develops prior the residential portion. 1. Multi-family residential development shall be prohibited within the C-G zoning district in order to preserve the commercial land use and prevent further reduction of the commercial portion of the property. in. The landscape buffers along Ten Mile Road and the new collector shall be constructed within the first two phases of the commercial and office development. n. The L-O zoning district shall be required to have a thirty(30) foot landscape buffer and a 5-foot-wide pathway as depicted in the concept plan. o. No new driveways are approved as part of this application. Direct lot access to Ten Mile Road is prohibited unless otherwise approved by Council and ACHD based on an approved updated TIS. p. No additional driveways shall be permitted on the new collector,except for those explicitly identified and approved as part of this application. q. Pedestrian circulation and cross access shall generally conform to the layouts depicted in the concept plans provided in Exhibits VI.G and VI.M. Residential(Development Agreement No.2) r. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan,phasing plan, and conceptual building elevations for the single-family dwellings included in Section IV and the provisions contained herein. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 125 s. Future development of the site shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of development. t. The rear and/or sides of 2-story structures along W. Gondola/W. Malta Drive 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. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. u. Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for homes within the first phase,W. Gondola/W.Malta Drive shall be constructed in its entirety, excluding only the ten(10) foot multi-use pathway and landscaping on the east side of the new collector roadway. v. The amenities within Lot 33,Block 4 shall be installed with the first phase of development. 1. The Preliminary Plat included in Section VII, dated 12/17/24,is approved with the following revisions: a. All utility easements reflected on the utility plan shall be included on the final plat. b. All pathways and micropathways shall be within a separate common lot or easement as required per UDC 11-3A-8. c. Add a note to the plat stating plat note both the L-O and C-G zoning districts have a blanket cross access easement for access to the public roadways in accordance with UDC 11-3A-3. 2. The Landscape Plan included in Section VII, dated 12/18/24, shall be submitted for review and approval with the following revisions prior to final plat approval: a. Work with the Irrigation District to enter into an agreement to provide some type of landscaping other than gravel in the common open space area on the northern part of the property. The applicant will need to revise the landscape plan accordingly with the understanding that trees will not be allowed in the area,but shrubs may be allowed to be added if negotiated within an agreement with the Irrigation District. If not,the applicant shall submit for alternative compliance for the landscaping in this area. b. Revise the landscape plan to show an open vision fence on lots 45,47,and 49. 3. Business hours of operation in the L-O zoning district shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. 4. Prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the multi-use pathway along W.Malta Drive/Gondola Drive to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation or unless required by ACHD. 5. The applicant shall coordinate with the Irrigation District regarding gravity irrigation service to ensure that Lots 78-84,Block 5 do not require an easement exceeding ten(10)feet in width. If an easement greater than ten(10)feet is required,it shall be located within a common lot with a minimum width of twenty(20) feet and situated outside of any fenced area,unless otherwise waived by the City Council in accordance with UDC 11-3A-6. If the irrigation easement is located in a common lot,the applicant shall install a micropathway within the common lot to connect to the proposed pathway system to on the north side of the property. 6. The applicant shall construct all proposed fencing and/or any fencing required by the UDC, consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7 and 11-3A-6B, as applicable. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 126 7. The development shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-313-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-313-13. 8. Pathway and adjoining fencings and landscaping shall be constructed consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC I I-3A-7A7, 11-3A-8 and I 1-313-12C. 9. The development shall comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3,including but not limited to driveways,easements,blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 10. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 11. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6 for the nonresidential uses based on gross floor area. 12. All common driveways shall meet the requirements of 11-6C-2-D including a perpetual ingress/egress easement being filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. 13. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed commercial and office development prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structures shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19; the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 14. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC I 1-613-7. 15. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions of ACHD. 16. Staff's failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. B. Meridian Public Works Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Water mains need a casing when crossing irrigation that limits access to times of the year. Either provide casing or proof that the City will have access at all times. Current configuration would not allow the casing to be installed per City standards and would need to be adjusted if casing is needed. 2. Engineer to verify if there is a well onsite. 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. 3. Stub will need to connect to southern stub off of N Vicenza Way when this area develops. 4. Stub will need to connect to north stub off of W Malta Dr when area develops. 5. The water line from San Vito Way needs to connect to the rest of the development. If the existing stub is not used it needs to be abandoned and a different connection will need to be made. 6. Eliminate dead-end at station 3,by connecting water through pathway. Provide a 20' easement with the water main centered in easement.No trees or other permanent structures allowed in easement. 7. Locate meters and fire hydrants so they are at least 5'from trees or other permanent structure. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 127 8. Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls, fences,infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.) are built within the utility easement. 9. Provide 20'Easements for mains,hydrant laterals and water services. Easements should extend up to the end of main/hydrant/water meter and 10'beyond it. General Conditions of Approval 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. 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. 3. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works), a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 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. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 4. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 5. All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 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. 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. 8. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 128 9. Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 10. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing,landscaping,amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. 11. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-5C-3B. 12. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 13. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 16. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 17. The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 18. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 19. At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 20. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found at htip://www.meridianciiy.org/public works.aspx?id=272. 21. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 22. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 129 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. Meridian Police Department https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X D. Meridian Park's Department 1. The project developer shall design and construct multi-use pathways consistent with the location and specifications set forth in the Meridian Pathways Master Plan Map and Master Pathways Plan Document Chapter 3). Any proposed adjustments to pathway alignment shall be coordinated through the Pathways Project Manager. Interactive Pathways Map 2. Prior to final approval the applicant shall dedicate a public access easement for a 10' wide, detached multiuse pathway connecting from the existing pathway at W Gondola Drive, running along the north side of W Gondola Drive,continuing along W Malta Drive, and out to N. Ten Mile Road. Easements shall be a minimum of 14' wide(10' pathway+2' shoulder each side). Pedestrian access easement need only be dedicated for multi-use pathways that lie outside the public ROW.Use standard City template for public access easement. Submit all easements online through Citizen's Access Portal. 3. Construct multi-use pathways per paving section based on existing site conditions as recommended by project civil engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-8 and 11-313-12. Prior to final approval the applicant's engineer shall provide written documentation that the pathway segment was constructed per the recommended specifications. 4. The owner(or representative association) of the property affected by each public access easement shall have an ongoing obligation to maintain the multi-use pathway. E. School Impact Community Development httgs://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X F. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho(COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridiancity.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X G. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianci(y.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X H. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancioy.orglWebLink/browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X I. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinklbrowse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X V. FINDINGS A. Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E) 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: City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 130 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-8 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 district, specifically the purpose statement; Stafffinds the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the regulations outlined in the requested R-8, R-15 and C-G zoning districts. 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. Not applicable B. Preliminary Plat(UDC-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 and is consistent with this unified development code; Stafffinds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section IV. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Stafffinds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's Capital Improvement Program. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Stafffinds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Stafffinds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be preserved with this development. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 131 VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the rezone from C-C(Community Commercial)to R-8 and R-15 (Residential)zoning districts,L-O, C-G and the preliminary plat associated with the residential and commercial development per the provisions in Section IV in accord with the Findings in Section V. B. Commission: Pending C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action 132 ' 1 1 ct CHIN DEN Locationof Impact 0 Analysis a. ■ k. y � / r a_ I-I'1.' 11 11111 IiIlN bll E _ - 1 ■■II •,r al Ir, r. ,1F 1 % s _ c fi R. MCMILLAN.- _ I a uu r- ..,.. - -- legend CHINDEN Projectfnnnnonl nnl_ 111l111��� •nfnnnlinffunlln�, ��ana1,111n11 f �ITq-� �--- Millnf ualnl eC IIIIl111! ulu 1- 8'�L •tools.nal -_ 1 ` � Illln 1111111 1=p IlrnllF nn11s q■ ' _ r Area of Impact 0 Analysis r■FIIIII - w. ■ 4 IIIIIrn11x11x r1111� �� �51i1ln nl• f � =1 /�iL /1111111/±■,1■,r 1 1 r �.�� I In11tlr,N OOIrq/ �� t .Ilnn nm,■xmu 2:= rinuun■xun►��L llrr�■ ��,1 ,1 !1■1■■lllll•r �' _ j:`pa iiigoii�iairr • •!��: ♦♦ Na�N1\I �� � Illlrq rnlR � � 1 • Jpti� �- �mm�n• V ��: _x.-n-- Ilrr■qrr �-� irir�°�irrr■nna�►�i1��ilii'�� - ""•a■�ri I�Ii' - r r+-=I l■n u lrras Gay rllr nri Ili�■�.. ■r r `f■i■nrnA\ .a■u • Z;;••r Nn nlli. rr 'Nr� iii \��aluiiiin M i■■■ri■, - phi�.a� .•■■ riff •r■r, _ . erg�_ � ■-■nl�l!rr=- rr . . In,n.xS I 14 DTI - lll,�.. ��:,,�, �.011llr�m.... ■ fil a' ' a r•Ilnn ant/ ��rNur 11111111111 � ~■� � �� �.- 1���• ��♦��aFlr�piiiiiiiiii Slillllll'�w a� `inn,■■11�' �f d�1 1 .In1 Ill � Ilft • ♦ ♦Ir �I 1*1 n■►•anan lu �I • �� rrno mr� � ■ N►_ {�rr��1:uneunl 111 rlln IIm nrr, �ilr���� r,uln■INS Miller inu >tn■■■ov �� 1nN■r a►. •ulr b wr mmu■ r .nr■■■■no.� ■ a {MI/-Ina, �Nrr r nr !■�rrrnnis {IJ lu■ 1 ■ ■w■■■nun.Ily♦�iirii 1�nl •:uar'a+N V r nnm mum r'urrl\__..! I1a10■�uarr lii 1 rr, Iln parr . 1 � pu■>,■■onn'-'{■nui■'- rnlr p.■� NINEfill rl�wr `� ii■iiil�: ■■ �=rl nm■9:•,mll �� m��N� � m i iiiie fir�a r■n nmO■:olnrr�_iil 11111■--C ml a rr■II m■■�� moNrr■■ ■ ■■man I nn i ■..,..�s�1i IIIInI��`_ NII nn■■n■r arum 111111 -1 nunlnl n„r ■r■■■■■dINS II Z ■!■ r o ari■■ n m - m = _ _ W �nm■ mn ■r nnr �q �r11r wi rrlrr� ■■��no1i� F- .�uu,■rrrf r■■n�11111 :.. a it Nun �� :llll r- n plr-'.liiniili�ni� -111r 'nplfulmn:III-rIN�Ngnlllh �nnr� n-aln ■nu� ■.0 a --- == =iGl.._ � -a_. r ri trp ��iiiiiiii� O II llllll ri111x111 IIIIIIfI 1111■Inl ► n a-�a.i rn11r ��N■N n■ f lI ar�i mlrnuu xuul •nxxn nnlnu �- �irnr► • ■■■ ■u xlxlluli 1!1 1 ��loom nnq "■ Illrrr I 1 _IlUllllli�,n11rr� xlllll ■■11 r 1`rllrrl(r/�� Ir 1 =nnmyn■ITuml-� :,nlll,- al -err -n1� �ulrtr�� �Jf ylii+lnr■�rrr�. __ s n o •�H Itr4�� �:• ��N� 115111111 l r♦�r x�xx •^ ��r�„� r����i<f�a�ijl.iq�l yl- .•��r rn■=�-� ': .W■-11n=- Ill +..Il{■rrrwrrjr►� ` — _..� nlrai:fll CHINDEN Legend Project Location uun11111AAu11111 IlmnlrlaWpruuun: ■nnnru■u■q ��■n� ram■ mum!I'" :,m[ mr un= C:■aloe nnm' I rl,llla==llnlllrl. ■rrae=_ �-rnllla a■Im: 1 Are• of Impactrru�nunm= . =.-- • - • n■ sun. - rn■a��lulru flllll ■I 7 � IIIII!IAAL rm p,... nub■m' .". 'ounm➢n1aE■ In► -nu1Ei■� I�m_-.�tl .��• aaalun[■amnry♦ �• t AnalysisMINIM r,ran:IAIlnu 'y il_w. . 1 __1 nnonn unary♦�♦ �1n'■ _,Iuul=Inaaa-[gllnn �• '. nnn11 �=: �'.::IR ..•� nanannr■■■ar •rr�rL - �i1- •q, mnmr nrr/� 6r ■I -�-_■11111■n■ nose► r ._.- �- '::;: ■a r nlannr r► 'p ���� a\ ■ r =C-\1Ip■■1111� --. : nu •nu* •0�6 a fr "'■■ii1 Ire' ��,;:: ► -IR lanllll r IIIIIg1 r vnrr, ■agar[f nq +� f I u-=�■noonla► �I1 IIIE"-■�.. r iI ■.- .� rir'� �m■nnlll a�����iu Bf •i�►■ ��+ � nwos r �••'� inn nni ■!■II hie =� �j� r��InnnsnA rG9■�ii::nuu- IiAI!!a-rIf111 an rirlfjff !r■■■■■■{t,�.rrlgln aW► rl/r1 �/♦IS� Ills�r r+ ��-r-.nna■11n ���+ ■r■nnr a►r ■ raa111ar a11I iffoar : M F I ,an.2- ♦---- �� �� ♦♦♦Q�i�/llllMlAn[Ila; nllllll'111111 3 link■[_ --.�nnw nnl►� ==.��. ■:err �.r rH■rnualn- fl■ln�wl■Ilill!HI#■r r -:-■ ■n1 nnnr■'r I[■■n!n1■i -.-IIIII 1 offs III rr■���fr ■ �� rl1111n o1r.� r►NIA_:nuuuxe -■r Im IIII IIIIr=llnnoI na[ndlolnmu unuu� ■ irn u�� _In■1 Irnr,I■■oLro rl _ ■nnrar �rmn Ii►:�l (M- � rq ■ter ��� P��11lr 1:r nnnnnln■I 1�- ♦ Q r rpur ! Irfm■snoop■ ltJ\IIIEIE�� IIII"i i ■i ii�I�iiirii 1-� l n I [ •:tsar.s�rrr V�- !r ell 11 Mnr/oo■n�:-a:■:a■�r '..SY•lips►♦ ndnl1i►��.._ -"M!! or■ ►� -�11 • �.:■ user nl■►a=. :! 51 nr E■rr r �mn■ � 1"'18 ram-�:= ..rule mom-►um■e?■ noon�::a,nm__'V r�►r: �e um:.:==1ii !IIII Ili!i■on sou�:C■nnu p=nl nnni.:::runn--7i riirr IIf►� ■r a•null:■_=► ■nnunw.■■rnn■r-� a w■■■■■� \ � pl':nllrp=��:! 111111�r11■,■■r■lmnn ■■!■soon�,��,i!!!!11■OIEIn a1n11 • 11■.■......1 IIII►�`_ Z; :.■ mull�r noon■noo�'rrn no��:.I i 1■n �.ituun�unE J mmunnnri a■ui nnr■sir■nl Irk Illun►I' W qu- uu i Innrlr Ulose mogn lsro/■r J11E1 . ■■� IIII!:q _ ■::luny- n1u1►► • �Inuan■ 111111 o i .■. nunllTllrlrl���'I --i ■ • �1"��Ilr/ 111111 ■InrrnM! �■ Illnnlnn_ num€nnm"'J I'-' r.. r ■i �Inllr,� IIII o- IIIIII[flll= rem rla■■1%LL� mm�mm- IIII■ =nllq -rrtr i��`■IIIIIIIIIIaI,ni Illlnll , K l'■111 j1 IIIIIIII�- 111r■rinll= 1111111r.--. _ alrlalnln� 11■111111111: Illlllllnull-,,,,,i !IIIII�' • - • rnI I _ IIII'IF•1'S��•-_.•-7r•ar-7 �Iluuupp■ i11_sll 1►�' �\.x. I MCMI�LLAN- _ ■1�: W—rnnuof �■ ��a ar e � Inls Cp! �InIli'ns �nnnn� nnul/?innl,u wuln► � 'Inllun ►au�°-�`.I ■ ■ i!! i/ i!n! Inr Ina;;rnulllun nAlnr� �t:iiiiiri #:�-rn111 nnwll"ry■liltw Ii I it Ili■!-_M■Bltll IIu11r►� ►' ii IIIIIf+ �11A+ ■■ undlln100%rliimll - - Illln.=1�ii,ningnll __�\ —� _�i■1� 6 - !! j I��r i1►; i n# �■n,■ -_°��i_ ar+��xo---r_•fib ® r � I■#r ' �j�� f#i��;:�rrn!ri� .n� .■.fir rnre�h`_�:Y• ' � ern o� � girirl�� -[Pop ■r . r Legend ���I` klll Ills. {rlr�l�nnnll\�r� I Project LocationIlllllllllllllllllllrlllmq ' C1,!'II\DEN®� 71 /,# illll[nrlgwp tllllll �ru■rn■rm,�` ■aT IIII€f umm�� IIk111I11 :lunar._umrn������� ^na,u■nnm t �- 31 ■11� r� noon anon.=_�nnmr- unn_-_.nu,= ram,■■nun r 1 >■:a.i■� 7 Area of Impact F1Ir111[nai l II a • �ellrll!IIIL ��--mr=... � _•••• ram y -C IIUI DlnaE■ 1n► I�uI O - "■nall■nna "=== I n■uinM imrnr►��� a City Limitsvunn�- I :_:- al!lnlan■lEllln• •,,per-I■ -�sl[In11n1111:nlllu■- �r IIIIIIII �: :::`�� � IIIIIImr tlurf ♦i� n ti sc�' �d. tenant ante �.N 11 ■I :---::Illlllu■ unn► �� r�'� s � �C:::#uq� N nun[n r �dr y�i:�U Planned Parcels • � ___►1#ire■nIp-�: �If uu .n.ks��rl -=�innoonn■�3•i \rllrr�C:� -.. : . ,■iaalll n IIIII n1 •♦i q ��■111nE1f■ • �■ii1 Ire' =r R � I ha== snoo■IlN� v 1r�--�_■� r iI �:��" --• r•.r•unrllll 'au\rrp' ��fnnrrnls►���E[uunun parr' � rr inn luli:_lwvii ♦ rr:pra�► vu■I■■■■P\:-launmlu �1•�C� yil = nt--.1'1C 1`-r , „nrlllilln:� p■- I• rr■Iri / au oil jlOs���i■� - Ilu�.�• .�:;::�Iilnlnm..�_���- !�■r!■�fa1 of� Mg1nn t/ wfffa -Ina....�% �.:�■/�n[n nni►r�__: ;�l■��4 4 *#��`�riirun11u11■d ■- 11111111'lllll� - - ■!oo1 !!■■■ap ♦ runmm�•' rl!nrrwpin gas■r. =•r� Anr■n nlul ..-ui r\ I�rr11►�r ..�ram;;Qgfllnn w!M�' -..Nr�__euurnur - "111A' �111 111■�:Illnnlun n1Ax11 IA■1m111]rlllllh ■KI NS r •Lam.. ■ rnunr.�, r lnnnn I■,1111r:I!!11 s'IIIII!llllulllllllllillilllllIIII!!!=- ' �\rn■■■!■r�� 1�111_-� � a��'p1'� � . � - 1� _ r! noon■ • �. �L1■■■Iwrri; /�uaaar erne ar y♦ ♦411I1r I::I■rnlslO■I �iiiiiiiiuii�-____= ul■�■ lil■�i r■nrinnn■� rfan■q►\, ll�'" p�■�<;'pi.. ,_ . n!1' ■ oonnnlil! - �■ mnn `�■nunn■n w1 � ■• � m ■ ran a�'1 yrrnrn�-nl [rr1:��iiiiis�N.-U�►��nlr�•'f�l nl► !!n!■I! Ilnl 1■=_�jxnt•■■ '■11:�Q��� :�molt n■!■1■r�un1►°■■� ■. •.;I I� ��` I ,� ■■ n n.:h-=.':i iinii��p.�lnlo nano i � /I 1�\ . ■■antra=r �ilQ�.:: �.r ll■n►�.i�\ rl� ■/■■ 1!n-- i■■r■■■!om!■lr-1211 1m■■■=l IIII■■■ .=- ■room=_SL7 ri ran s■�iiii■ r run:::p: u nn1 p nor■sn■i' ■■-ill !!!fr■.::nnul::. � IIII il��� Isle a nnq ■■mu!■■u■r■nnln-' �a1 r:::.:: ■1s!. !.IIIII � '■�inlii■ =■nurn??��n null!■a11r■s■mr■rl■ uunsr„�I'I Onnnnl■ilE1E111!IIIIIII .I �7 un ►q��tIlnunnlnlfu rflnllun�m�'Jmr C�__� _ - fl :i �■iA11-:�. 1m11110 _,!■Ir■■w .ownsGId■IIIIIII IIII, .■.■.l.■ n ran nn■■r■rq■O■mI/�I loon-q numm■ml�� _-= u iln��!!li!+. d11E111►` . ■..� !nil ar�■� ■-■ �nool�- > ..� � f��unu►�" rs:�nrmm�tnnnllnlli ...� nuuununll - -I s�'_ ■ ■ _ _ _"qg� IIIIIIA l ''1��■1llnaam ■I■n111111� IIl1!!i!_noon unm_J �'■=f-�� r.f i1��Ii!■1 I��+I �i `- 1 =■ ,-onset- ■ wi r nnurnq-`��-. , irn� 1 x ■n - ,.1-�:elan■ttr.� e nuuurun=_ L� 1 E� • !. �' nl ��■puununmi 1ur11r =1uumluu fnmm� _ _.uul [�+�I � _ i ikulnr IIIIIIII �■unAlllllll" IIIIIII■u6:• :-Iron, .__ - _= aru111afya�iiii���Il�m ■rr1111kN IIIIIIrFllli nnuneunn: .nllul�lli 1. ,,r I- ■IIII �■ =�1'i �r ■■�11,�::�� IIIIIII►hlnllllll Ir11111 n loll - r..."• �TII:�hAfanli\." ply l3tl p.11 l 'I= r1�. + M IN M I�:LA N e=_:■�e � nu■uum==mum-�= L 111111 IIT I � � Rd nnunr/J� ='== nuunnmi--`anu■nnnllll-r rr , 1 null _� /#__5C.�,��jllloo�nr -mane C-u■- ce co= 1 L_ - alln- r: - rill!■nni■rIf ■num ria�■ IIIII1l�rilllnllr a :_a=!�y IT 1111ln11 -r i u�0111 �p q �a;!!n!1 - �■y/ rlr w■ IAlilnlllllllllll -�1uu11r _ ___„ +�J `inupllaC-■ — �, =_nnx- rural f r' �Ir yr pn miss urn i Ilul1l1111 ink ram■ n,l�_= f 1�'�=:Ilelnn�Sa-:- - 1�� aunt r onm r hill-�Illrlll,ll 11r1[Illllld ,�� --7• ■� 1 Illli� �'::loop+ �Ylliirr 4 �- 4 fl In■r■■■�- IIII!:=11111111111111 1 Iltlllllllll+lr 11..'�_9.0 7e7[..[:� �1:1'!C �uf -■III 1i: 11 � � ,,111Unlni�nla� unrl.=1nm11, �nl>,� l -■nu11/ p�Z�■ �n j If1 r e r:ri >f�Q �## ii4 ♦• N �!!r!l! IIIJ +—.•y =pp aira� ! uI ff•►`�aip Irt�#a::�■lagl1 i� � y# •q�p CIrn111:: ' ,ray:�.r.. i.l�►r!! n �#i:id_/,:�nr.._ 5. Map Notes Nearby Recent Preliminary Plats(within last 5-years) H-2019-0146 H-2020-0004 H-2020-0022 H-2021-0001 H-2021-0018 H-2021-0051 H-2021- 0080 H-2022-0034 H-2022-0028 H-2022-0047 H-2022-0068 CR-2022-0006 H-2022-0074 H-2022-0076 H-2022-0087 H-2023-0014 H-2023-0016 H-2023-0026 H-2023-0035 H-2024- 0050 Nearby Recent Conditional Use Permits(within last 5-years) H-2018-0018 H-2019-0074 H-2020-0032 H-2020-0017 H-2020-0092 H-2020-0101 H-2021- 0056 H-2018-0088 H-2018-0004 H-2022-0006 H-2022-0025 H-2024-0016 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 135 f t r` 4 � — �aL�. was 77, Opp y Ate.IS T C. Service Accessibility Report PARCEL S0427417210 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY Overall Score: 24 15th Percentile Description Location In City Limits GREEN Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains a 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or > 2 acres GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOW Emergency Services Police Not enough data to report average response t n-,e RED Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route RED Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master street= Arterial Road Buildout Status GREEN plan) matches existing (# of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community Park Walkability Park within 112 mile OR a Neighborhood Park within GREEN 1/4 mile walking City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 137 A Preliminary Plat(date: 12/17/2024) PRELIMI NARY PLAT FOR ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION ,�na """"""""� - LOCATED IMTIE SE II4MYLT%N12T - _ -•�-•.,:2 —•� 1� — — Y TOlML4HIE9 M01[R1,0.RNCEI W6T:601Y MERIgAM -wev✓o ve xcxi�bi•-e...,, .�i n�.r� ea c, WIN .Z z rn 0 - , t2 E' a � d City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 138 E. Commercial Concept Plan/Building Layout C-G PLAZA i C-G _} WALMAR7 I_-- - DRAINAGE WALMART v v ♦■�--------- DRAINAGE ■ ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION O PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN, ID „H FSRUAITYz7,2m =I- ) —_,__—_—_+_—_—_—_—.—,— —_— _ -------- ---—_—_—_—.—_— —_ _—_ '.- —. __-__-.-. _-- _----_.—__—..—. _ _ _ __ __� - _ -- ---__---_______.._.._..__.______..__.__- ._ � I I II I ------ ---- I j I I 1 j I � 1 I COMMERCIAL LAYOUT CONCEPT 2 - THE La��D OL t,'u U. T 517E rl NxwluE HE EIN ARE FOP ILLvST ITIIE PURPOSES OhL-.THE+REPRE ENT PRMVIW Fl✓E - fYSm ON FVIVRE -\ REWIR[uwrs[:E _ M AH FA sE PI ft W Ntr cw H—n USES, DESILH EIEAAEHTS Iry THE FlAAL DEVELOPNW. City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 139 F. Phasing Plan 3� PRELIMINAR\RAT FOR ------ - ADERO PARR SDBDIVtSION ._.._..... _-- _ �'-••� � _- .... �tlounPlNmEtR vr*as�mre�inu� ••• "-`•.». .. -_—_-_ orr�a�wu�S.ucowin.nun .w..- •- --, .,,....a.._, ....- .���. z +v'+r: 0o3 ;ti x r and Commer-1 phasing to be d tletermine8 a witblibal Plat .aPAlVcatio.... lit• O C 7 f PPI.0 G. Commercial Access and Pedestrian Plan(date: 5/8/2025) --- —--- ---- ----------- --- ---- —————---- -------------------- -- -------------------- ------------- -------- j 1 $ il I J�E T COMMERCIALACCE$$AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN --- oP Tic":xroPOa s° 'asEo �m;s \\ I ---- --- PIWS W fvRnxIEE SPEtlfelewlAi'Oi�9 EUM, OR D= xm w•nw -- �. i City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 140 H. Landscape Plan (date: 12/18/2024) - 1 1111 1 117 - ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION - ,EME LILTS PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN, I❑ City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 141 I. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 12/19/2024) I f r l 1 j r AOERO PMKS KDIV1510H 'J OPFH 5PA[I F]IHI&T � I rorA —IOFHHu.—_,.�33x QUAl—OPEH SPREE-td]8 AC(1 s.s%) ­FTIncOM—,1AA j C9a/ J. Amenities Exhibit(date: 12/19/2024) Proposed Arnenities; One Acre Central Plata(Flock 4,Lot 33) * Three Pitkltball Courts * Fountain , plat/Structure - v ■ Dag Park r ■ Clirebing Rack E f * 5eatir`g gendws + * Attractive Lar4dscaping I � City of Meridian j Department Report VII. Exhibits 142 r MON &LmbA&M&M * _ 7 6.v y. k r City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 43 • Pathways—TheAdere Mixed Use Neighborhood will include the following ped cstrian pathways: • 10'Wide Regional Pathway 2,752 LF • Y wide pathway in liner op@a space 1,700 LF Pedestrian pathways within the Adg Mixed Use Neighborhood will total a half a mile in length. + bog Park(8Iock 5,Lot 45) . Fenced encloser . Dog waste station it Sitting Bunches Ir Attrartive Landscaping - . Other open green areas—Several other open spaces will have the fallowing Amenities, t .- + Shade strum-ures + large open grass areas • Internal Pathways + Picnic Area ■ Attractive Landscaping City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 144 K. Common Driveway Exhibit(date: 12/17/2024) LETa Ta ,OIRM s�EEr LccEss.oRri ,LOG m I BLOCK 4 I a rsxEs aRecr srRLn ON WEa SIDE of LO. 3.Ao'sRELwsr o a aF warm I I I I I s ryr so I II II I � j � jl II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E I ag go 10..00• � sa.az' .,:. r---- -- -- ---- ---- 1 , srREF'r eccEss Sl NE Vs II "' �� lncnrm oN sorml sloe or Inr. y z3 ff r — I:• E zo.ro'LAwzr Sm rz.00'aExr� I $� zz.ao'moNr I I, � serawx rrrb--sErRecK rm, —��---asere.cK nn. o 02 +I nn I 4 I'• I •Y. VW w'^`• ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION LOTS 19-23 AND 43-M RLOCK 4 COMMON DRIVE EXHIBIT ' m..lia)�su a,•� m City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 45 L. Block Length Exhibit d,..d LLL V __-_-- -- ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION J' I BLACK IENLTN E-SIT City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 146 M. Pedestrian Connectivity Exhibit - Hero's I Park ! I • 111111 f 11111111 1111i1IM111 .jIm g. Red =Internal Sidewalks and pathways Blue = Regional Pathways City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 147 N. Residential Building Elevations(date: Click here to enter a date.) NNW } City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 148 �x x 4 - •u F. r �t City of MeridianDepartment Re 11Exhibits O. Commercial Exhibits(5/9/2025) The images provided are intended solely for architectural reference. They are not representative of specific individual uses. Future buildings may or may not incorporate architectural elements depicted in these images. oi . Byw Uniture B Mattress _ r _ -— r _ wmr "� _ ■. J AIM—� — City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 150 , I II }Yii � F _ CHFUIT UNION City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 5-1 �Chl�l■I�i11i�11� In F � NMI Ago �-�t W. _ Oral CaEfif7 UNIW4 I i ��E65 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 52 i ff � is e .r City of MeridianDepartment1 P. R-8 Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map 5awtcroth Land 5urveynng, LLC P; (208)398-81 04 F. (208)398-5 1 p�5 2030 5.Ws5hmgton Ave., �mmgtt,iR 83C 17 R-8 Zone Description BASIS OF BEARINGS is S.89621'10"E.,between a found aluminum cap marking the C1J4 corner of section 27 and a found aluminum cap marking the E114 of Section 27,T.4 N.,R.1 Wf.,B.M. A parcel of land located in the SE1/4 of Section 27,Township 4 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho,more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at and aluminum cap marking the E1J4 earner of Section 27; Thence N.89021'10"W.,coincident with the north line of said 5E1 f4,the South boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No.10,as shown in Book 118 of Plats,Pages 18069-18071,the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No.9,as shown in Book 116 of Plats,Pages 17641-17645 and the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No.S.as shown In Book 115 of Plats,Pages 17184-17193,Ada County Records,1789.66 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence leaving said north line,5.002117"W.,320.15 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 10.19 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 13.00 feet,through a central angle of 44055'36",subtended by a chord bearing S.22149'05"W.,9.93 feet to the beginning of a reverse curve to the Left; Thence 98.83 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 55.00 feet,through a central angle of 102115708",subtended by a chord bearing S.61111`40"E.,86.06 feet; Thence non tangent to said curve,S. 13°59`17"W.,114.69 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left; Thence 96.74 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 55.00 feet,through a central angle of 100046'28",subtended try a chord bearing S.37°48'14"W.,84.74 feet; Thence non-tangent to said curve,S.77024'56"W.,87.65 feet; Thence S.32130'06"E.,65.02 feet; Thence S.12035'04"E.,294.87 feet; Thence S.2903015"E.,633.75 feet to the south line of Parcel A,as shown on Record of Survey No. 12520,Ada County Records; Thence N.89114'29"W.,coincident with said south line,192.23 feet to the easterly boundary of Vicenza Subdivision as shown in Book 108 of Plats,Pages 15026-15028,Ada County Records and the beginning of a non- tangent curve to the right; Thence 109.90 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 555.00 feet,through a central angle of 11*20'44",subtended by a chord bearing N.33°221)4"E., 109.72 feet to the northeasterly corner of said Vicenza Subdivision; P:1202411 £MT1124014-N TEN MILE Ri7 TOPOISurveyVrawings4LegaI Descriptionsl124014 R-8 Zone to Centerline Vescription.docx Page 11 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 154 Thence N.47048'16"W.,oninckdent with the northerly boundary cf saki Vloenza Subdivision, 18.03 feet to the easterly right of way of N.San Vito Way and the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left; Thence leaving said northerly boundary and coincident with said right of way, 39.16 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 573,00 feet,through a central angle of 3054'55",subtended by a chard bearing S.37010'56'W.,39,15 feet to the centerline extended of W.Gondola Dr; Thence N.54037'59"W.,coincident with said centerline of W.Gondola Dr and the extension thereof, 211.53 Feet to the beginning of a curve to the left; Thence coincdent with said centerline, 149.14 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 300.00 Peet, through a central angle of 28°Z9'04",subtended by a chord bearing N.68115291"W.,147.61 feet to the extension of the westerly boundary of Vicenza Subdivision No.2 as shown In Book L10 of Plats,Pages 15670- 15673,Ada County Records, Thence non-tangent to said curve,N. 100241"E.,coincident with said westerly boundary and the extension thereof,238.56 feet; Thence coincident with the northerly boundary of said Vinoenza Subdivision No.2 the following six(6)courses and distances: Thence N,88057'19"W.,296.43 feet; Thence 5,5114'47"W., 91.17 feet; Thence S.18'4848"W., 107.19 feet; Thence N.67023'12"W.,129.19 Feet; Thence N.25042'39"E.,6.93 feet; Thence N.W17'45"W.,26.00 feet to the centerline of N.Balsena Way and the beginning of a non-tangent curve left; Thence coincident with said centerline,326,23 feet along the arc of saki curve,having a radius of 298.00 feet, through a central angle of 6204324',subtended by a chord bearing N.5°36'i7"W.,3 10.18 feet to the beglnning of a reverse curve to the right; Thence coincident with said centerline, 196.92 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 300.00 feet, through a central angle of 371136'35",subtended by a chord bearing N.18010'20"W.,193.41 feet; Thence N.0037'57"E.,coincident with said centerline,48.23 feet to the extension of the southerly line of Vicenza Subdivision No.3 as shown in Book 112 of Plats,Pages 16373-16375,Ada County Records; Thence along the southerly and easterly boundaries of said Vicenza Subdivision No.3 the following four(4) courses and distances: Thence S.89122'03"E.,46 5.11 feet; Thence N.5P31'57"E., 137.46 feet; Thence N.2r39'20"E., 136.69 feet; Thence N.003922"E.,123.49 feet to the northeast corner of said Vicenza Subdivision No. 3 and the southeast corner of Vicenza Lakes Subdivision as shown in Book 115 of Plats,Pages 17340-17342,Ada County Retards; PA202411 EM71124014-N TEN MILE RD TOPO%Survey�DrawingslLegal Descriptionsl124014 R-8 zone to Centerline ❑escrlption.docx raga 12 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 155 Thence continuing,N.VW-72"E.,onincident with the east line of said Vicenza Lakes Subdivision,305.69 feet to the north I ine DF said SE1 f 4 and the south boundary of said Bainbridge Subdivision No.8; Thence S.8912110"E.,coindderrt with said north line and said south boundary, 133.82 reet to the PDXNT Of BEGINNING_ $aid parcel contains 11.1$6 acresr mare or less. f LF wr. 57 ! f !'Tor P;1202411 EMT112401 4-N TEN MILE RD TOMSurveyVrawingslLegal Descript3"W24014 R-8 Zone to Centerline Dmcriptlmdocx Page 13 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 156 IV 21 12 _ k a F— v z cn an q In!n w x ae.X Z X t a l M � 3+ NAp*"M'!4MAr #:EmmIn im ° h*+ d M69tr'�YE _max i= I - - 47'x —[f=VDITNA WAY r A I I I{ N6.l1'y @Q 4 • O I ��Q R 1 U 4, S4V7J 7 W JI V" ---- K. TEN MILE ROAD PROP o,maonxx$xa4o�x� auox5n{"� 4I_` dd m,� +~ cn n4k kmm mm:tm###717e#m-q m City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 157 Q. R-15 Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map AftSam-oath Land Surveying, LLC d 1fT ] P; =8)398 S 104 F: {208)398-8105 2030 5_ Washin-�tnn Ave.,Emmett, ID 83G 17 R-15 Zone Description BASIS OF BEARINGS is S.89121'10"E.,between a Found aluminum cap marling the C1J4 corner of Section 27 and a found aluminum cap marking the E1J4 of Section 27,T. 4 N., R. 1 W., B.M. A parcel of land located 1n the SEI/4 of Section 27,Township 4 North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as fellows: C011111MElNCING at and aluminum cap marking the E1/4 corner of Section 27; Thence N.89121'14"W.,coincident with the north line of said SE1/4, a distance of 377.23 feet to the POINT OF BEGiINNING; Thence leaving said north line, S.0121'17"W.,53.05 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 102.49 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 420.50 feet,through a central angle of 13057'56", subtended by a chord bearing S.7624'15"W., 102.24 feet; Thence S.401119'35"E,,84.10 feet to the beginning of a non-tangetrt curve to the right; Thence 154.94 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 180.00 feet,through a central angle of 49019'08", subtended by a chord bearing S.25°40'51"W., 150.20 feet; Thence S.002117"W., 84.49 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 282.71 feet along the arc of said curve, havirpg a radius of 180.00 favor,through a central angle of 901100'00", subtended by a chord bearing S.45021'17"W.,254.56 feet; Thence N.89438'43"W., 76.50 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left; Thence 471.24 feet along the art of said curve, having a radius of 300.00 feet,through a central angle of 90000'00",subtended by a chord bearing S.45021'17"W.,424.26 feet; Thence S.002117"W., 246.12 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 188.94 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 18C.00 feet, through a central angle of 601108'26", subtended by a chord bearing S.301,2531"W., 180.38 feet; Thence S.60029'45"W., 285,55 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 92.58 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 350.00 feet,through a central angle of 1500919", subtended by a d-ord bearing S.61300425"W.,92.31 feet to the south line of Parcel A,as shown on Record of Survey No, 12520,Ada County Records; Thence N.89114'29"W., coincident with said south line,153.33 feet, Thence leaving said south line, N.29°30'15"W., 633.75 feet; PA202411 EMT1l24014-N TEN MI LE Rb TOP015uvvey0rawings�Legal 0escriptionsl124014 R-15 Zone Description.docx i-, . . . k1 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 158 Thence N. 12035'04"W,,294,87 feet; Thence N. 32130'06"W.,65.02 feet; Thence N. 77°24'560 E., 87.65 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the right; Thence 96.74 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 55.00 feet,,through a central angle of 100046'28", subtended by a chord bearing N.37a48'10"E.,84.74 feet; Thence non tangent to said curve,N. 13059'17"E., 114.69 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the right; Thence 98.83 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 5 5.00 feet,through a central angle of 102057'08",subtended by a chord bearing N.6111'40"W.,86.06 feet to the beginning of a reverse curve t❑the left; Thence 10,19 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 13.00 feet,through a central angle of 44155'36", subtended by a chord bearing N.22049'05"E.,9.93 feet; Thence N.0021'17"E.,320,15 feet to the north line of said SE1J4 and the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No.8,as shown in Book 115 of Plats,Pages 17189-17193,Ada County Records; Thence S.89021'10"E.,coincident with said north line and said south boundary and the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No.9,as shown in Book 116 of Plats,Pages 17641-17645 and the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No. 10, as sh❑wn in Book 118 of Plats,Pages 18069-18071,a distance of 1412.43 feet W the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 35,822 acres,more or less. P:120P411 EMT1124014-N TEN MILE RD TOP018urvey0rawings\Legal DescriptionsA24014 R-15 Zone Description.docx P 2 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 159 arx, 71 r P � .' �ly � IN � �/�Ih•1AS� �� L� _ � L �I I N, MENA RAY L 9 1 a4e,ir +# w y I CIF i� g �l 3W77 Le L7 � 3AR•217T W�ftzQP31,7T"4Y�W- sa�nirw mwsr N- TEN MILE ROAD' cz W PROP G �1AA N rCA T�rwYt"r:zYeZE:E m*r,m mmmYemlei;64#7:� 3P:1ElE * ^m� rl City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 60 R. L-O Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map AA& awtooth land 5tirveyinej, LLC P:{206 39$�5 r 04 F:(206)396-51 O5 - 2030 5-Washington Ave.,f Fnmctt, ID 53917 L-0 Zone Description UJMS OE BEARINGS is S.89021'10"E.,between a found aluminum cap marling the CV4 corner of Section 27 and a found aluminum cap marking the E1f4 9 Section 27,T,4 N„R.I W.,B.M. A parcel of land located+n the 5C114 of Section 27,Township 4 North, Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian, Ada County,Idaho,more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at and aluminum cap marking the E114 comer of Section 27; Thence S.002V17"W.,coincident with the east line of said SE114 and the centerline of N.Ten mile Road, 172.88 fmt; Thence leaving said east line and said centerline,N,89031343"W.,217,50 fleet to the beginning of a curve to the left; Thence 127.80 feet along the are of said curve, having a radius of 190.00 feet,through a central angle of 40140'52-,subteroded by a chord bearing S. 70MOr51"W.,125.14 feet; Thence non-tangent to said curve,N,4 ,519'35"W.,84.10 feet to tie beglnn1nq of a Pon-tangent curve to the left; Thence 102.49 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 420.50 feed,through a central angle of 13'57'56",subtended by a chord heafing N. 71120'15"E-, 102-24 feM Thence N.0121'17'E.,paralkei with said west fight of way,53.05 feet to said north line and the south boundary of Bainbridge Subdivision No. 10,as shown in Sook 11S of Pleats,Pages 18069-18071; Thence 5.89'22IV E.,coirKident with said north line and said 5iauth boundary,377.23 feet to the P+ Uff OF BEGINNINNG. Said parcel contalas 1.572 acres,more or less. 11574 1� �'F PEN P:32a240 EMY)124014-N TEN MILE RD TO PO Su rvey%DrawingslLegal❑escriptionsO24014 L-0Zone to Centerline Descriptlon.doax P.1 _+a I I City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 161 h inx h h hZ x;ofxx x z x'2a w J ,rE n AOV°-=E 4&19' 14.4 ?w' ' - k nl a s n.m m 4 a A �a �1� I pAl"2i7J'E i„� •� 5 PR'2l7T W ^� x I I I rn SG n Cj % 98M%rw254a2l --lT��-N. T@N MILE ROAD l I Y ��rntn FRf in Y�y`inx tx zxNi,. ;NNZA'Snx ` a u� x PH1111 , City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F162] S. GG Rezone Legal Description& Exhibit Map A&k Jawtooth Land surveying, LLC A?7 r'. (208)a98-5 1 Q-4 F: (2M.396-8105 f" 2030 5 Washington Ave.. Emmett, ID 536 17 C-C Zone Descripdan BASIS OF BEARINGS is S.891121'iV E., between a found aluminum cap marking the C114 carrier of Section 27 and a found aluminum cap marking the E1/4 of Section 27,T.4 N.,R. 1 W.,S.M. A parcel of land located In the 5E1{4 of Seftioa 27,Township 4 North,Range i West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,more particularly desutbed as follows: COMMENCING at and aluminum cap marking the E1 f4 caner of Section 27; Thence 5,0°21'17"W.,coincident with the east line of said SE1/4 and the centerline of N.Ten We Road, 17189 fleet to the POINT OF BEGINM]<t+fG; Thence continuing,5,01121'17"W.,ccinddent with said east line and said centerline,1333.59 feet to the ext2n5ian of the southerly line of Parcel A,a5 shown on Record of Survey No.12520,Ada County Records; Thence leaving said east line and said centedine,N.891114'29"W.,coincident with saJd extension of and said southerlly line of Parcel Ati,668.74 feet; Thence N_ 1°01'05"E.r mincldent with said southerly line of Parcel A,112.39 feet; Thence N.8905744'W.,coincident with sa id southerly lane of Parcel A,435,26 feet; Thence S.600291451 W.,coincident with said southerly line of Parcel A,31.00 feet tD the centerline of N. Vinoenza Way and the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the right; Thence 105.43 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 275.00 feet,through a central angle of 211;153'13",subtended by a chard bearing S. 18'3339"E., 104.79 feet to the extension of the southerly line of said Parcel A; Thence non-tangent to said curve, N.W1424"W.,colnddettt with the extension of and the southerly line of said Parcel A,aL85 feet to the begJnning of a non-tangent curve to the left; Thence leaving said southerly line,92.57 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 350.00 feet,through a central angle of 15°09'13",subtended by a chord tearing N-6810421"E.,92.30 feet; Thence N.6R12945"Ea,285,55 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left; Thence 186.94 feet along the are of said curve,having a radius of IM-00 feetr through a central angle of 60110828",subtended by a chord bearing N.30'2591,r E., 180.36 feet; Thence N.01121'17'E.,246.12 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 471.24 feet along the arc of said curve,having a radius of 300.00 feet,through a central angle of 90°00' ',subtended by a chord bearing N.45121'17"E.,424,26 feet; Thence S.89°38'43"E.r 76-50 feet to the beginning or a curve to the left; P:1202411 EMTI'124014-N1 TEN MILE RD TOPQ1SurveysDrawingsUgaI Dascfiptiona1124014 C G Zone to Centedine Nscriptlon.docx { jam I i City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 163 Thence 282.74 feet along the arc of said curve, having a radius of 180.00 feet,through a central angle of 901DW00',Subtended by a chord bearing N.45021'17"E„254.55 feet; Thence N. O121'17"E.,84.49 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; Thence 282.74 feet along the arc of said Curve, having a radius of 180.00 feet,through central angle of 94"WW",subtended by a chord bearing N.45021'170 E,r 254.55 feet; Thence S. 8903843"E., 217.50 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Sald parcel contains 22.90 acres,more or less. % lei O r} 4i-PEEA1 P,Q024U EMT112401d-N TEN MILE FAD T0P0%SurveylDrawings%LegaI Descripliansl124014 C-G Zone to Centerline oescriptlon,d ocx City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 164 w��w a'���o Q�q Sk LC�0 L�[? ----� -I-----�—• �--- - ��---�---�1-- �t3 ea WON �jq lj� f_c +J a f•! 11 4a lnxX�y,x Z; IYOJ 'Mt ef �l�ryy2 m f Y�4 �05.69' o �� � <� �$ z MOR't277-d m r, ` -1f_YIiTNA WAY 4, i I 8i -2 71 21 ! N N 111I1i n i 4�sB I Cj I Id ^_ik FQVW1rw2&M-7r N. TEN IKIL6 ROAD y C! 'PROP # � ti City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F165] VIII. ADDITIONAL NOTES & DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS,TABLES,AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days.Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel. Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0(i.e. excludes most HOA area,transitional development, government, and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2<5.0; R-4<2.0; R-8< 1.0; R-15 <0.5; R-40<0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones,may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates,usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries(TAZ's). B. Mixed Use Analysis Notes This data is derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Data considered for analysis are only those areas overlapping the overall Mixed Use boundary area. Mixed Use areas across arterial roadways are distinct, separate, and not considered as they do not meet the mixed use principles in the Comprehensive Plan(e.g.pedestrian safety, transportation efficiency, etc.). Mixed Use parcel areas may be greater or smaller than the future land use area designation boundary due parcel size,configuration,right-of-way, and other factors. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. C. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources, including sewer main lines, sewer trunksheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times,police crime reporting,pathway information,existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review,using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria(not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city(higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores,whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. D. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service(LOS).LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver's experience with a letter ranking from A to F.Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts 166 conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians, nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP).The IFYWP marker(yes/no) indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary, from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan(CIP).The CIP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years. City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts 167 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Vicinity Map Completing the Plan(Centered on Ten Mile Road)Square Mile Area Commercial Projects in Four One of Last Residential and “The Fifteen Minute City”e is developedcommercial phasbefore –minute walk -within a 15all accessible —and leisure work, —Essential services MU 7 DU/acre proposed15 DU/acre required-6Use:-%6Residential = 40.1 acres or 4Commercial = 47.5 acres or 54%the development areaResidential uses = up to 50% of Residential and CommercialC Requires Mix of - Proposed Zoning 15 = 22.54 Ac.–R •8 = 11.18 Ac.–R •G = 22.98 Ac.–C •O = 1.57 Ac.–L • Adero Site Plan Buffering UsesTransitioning and CommercialTen Mile and Existing Commercial along Right Sized to ResidentialResidential Adjacent of Collector RoadwayCompletion of ½ mile  Completing the Grid: Collector Roadway Ten Milecongestion at McMillan and This will help to alleviate and regional parksroute to shopping, schools Create a safe pedestrian Mile Collector Network-needed section of the MidAdero will complete a much  Completing the Grid: Pedestrian Connectivity Hero’s Park Amenities and Open Space 15.6%•6.28 Ac.•Adero Open Space:PathwaysRegional and Internal •Two Fenced Dog Parks •Three Pickleball Courts•Swing Set•Climbing Dome•Fenced Play Structures•(Only 8 Required)Points27 Amenity Commercial Mixed Plaza Provides Second•Collector Provides First Transition•Commercial:Residential Transition to •Use- Commercial Neighbor and City Meetings May 15, 2025May 6, 2025April 28, 2025March 10, 2025February 18, 2025February 4, 2025November 12, 2024September 24, 2024July 16, 2024City Meetings w/ Staff March 13, 2025October 2, 2024Bridgetower HOA Board MeetingsMarch 25, 2025October 16, 2024Neighborhood Meetings Conditions of Approval Ensures completion early in the project•phase nd Requesting completion be required before C/O in 2•Collector is at least $3.5m•Timing for Completion of Collector:• Conditions of Approval) side of the new collector roadway.”(commercialuse pathway and landscaping on the east -excluding only the ten (10) foot multiphase, W. Gondola W. Malta Drive shall be constructed in its entirety, secondfirst“Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for homes within the Proposed Language for Condition 1.v:• Summary Comprehensive Plan Conforming to the Current Planning the early 2000’sdates back to Original zoning •New Comprehensive PlanExisting Zoning Park Development Agreement-2011 DA Park TurnoverCreates Parcel to Allow 10.2 Ac. ParkExisting DA Requires  Northern Buffer and Pathway Road And Gondola Existing H.A.W.K. Signal At Ten Mile Western Buffer Lot Depth = 135’ Lot Width = 70’ Housing Mix Single and Two Story–70’ x 135’ Lots Single W/ Bonus–41’ x 100’ Lots 2 Story –-Housing Type Elementary School Locations .8) is 1.9 miles from Adero Park-Gem Prep Charter (KNOTE: Elementary School Enrollments Willow CreekHunterPleasant View Willow Creek0.8 miles54352019)-654 (20189Hunter0.8 miles49347319)-816 (2018Pleasant View0.8 miles68278465025)-784 (2024Elementary SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment per WASDCapacity Peak Enrollment Elementary Redistricting Redistrict LetterWest Ada Middle School Locations Middle School Enrollments Heritage2.5 miles104599719)-1346 (2018Sawtooth2 miles85682417)-1080 (2016Star Middle6.5 miles9541042100025)-954 (2024Middle SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment WASDCapacity per Peak Enrollment HeritageSawtoothStar High School Enrollments Meridian3.6 miles1757168720)-1959 (2019Rocky Mt.2 miles1841181820)-2446 (2019Owyhee4 miles176218271800High SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment WASDCapacity per Peak Enrollment MeridianRocky MountainOwyhee School 25’-24’WASD Website 4.21.2025Source: Enrollement West Ada School District or 2 Elementary Schools915Difference of Grade = 2439 st 1Grade = 3354 th 12As of 4.21.2025–Students Student by Grade– Projected School Population Fewer school age childrendemographic) = New economy (Smaller sized homes + Older buyer Buyer Demographics Students Per SchoolStudents Per Home Sub. Verado1788WASD66.153333 145 Lots5-KMiddleHighSub.Verado.12433.48WASD.46132.3270 LotsSPHTotal Parking Collector Roadway Phasing Housing Mix Housing Mix Housing Mix Surrounding Density product. family -sale singleMeridian in a for this area of housing diversity in much needed Adero is providing