HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-10 Regular
City Council Regular Meeting
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 6:00 PM
Minutes
ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Councilman John Overton
Councilwoman Anne Little Roberts
Councilman Brian Whitlock
Councilwoman Liz Strader
Mayor Robert E. Simison
ABSENT
Councilman Doug Taylor
Councilman Luke Cavener
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted
PROCLAMATIONS \[Action Item\]
1. Migraine & Headache Awareness Month
PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics
ACTION ITEMS
2. Public Hearing for Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068) by DevCo,
LLC, located near the NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Rd. Approved
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 approve made by Councilwoman Little Roberts, Seconded by Councilman Overton.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock
Voting Nay: Councilwoman Strader
3. Public Hearing for Stapleton No. 4 (H-2025-0024) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group,
located at 238 W. Norwich Ct. Approved
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0024
A. Request: Vacation of a three (3) foot easement for public utilities, pressure
irrigation, and lot drainage encumbering Lot 31, Block 3 of the Stapleton
Subdivision No. 4.
Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Strader, Seconded by Councilwoman Little
Roberts.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilwoman Strader
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
ADJOURNMENT 8:33 PM
Meridian City Council June 10, 2025.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6.00 p.m. Tuesday, June
10, 2025, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Liz Strader, John Overton, Anne Little Roberts and
Brian Whitlock.
Members Absent: Luke Cavener and Doug Taylor.
Other Present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Linda Ritter, Caleb Hood, Shawn
Harper, Steve Taulbee and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
_X_ Liz Strader _X_ Brian Whitlock
_X_Anne Little Roberts _X_ John Overton
Doug Taylor Luke Cavener
X Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Council, we will call this meeting to order. For the record is June 10th, 2025,
at 6.00 p.m. We will begin this evening's regular Council meeting with roll call
attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us
in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
Simison: It does not appear that our person doing the community invocation is here.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Simison: So, we will go ahead and move onto adoption of the agenda.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I move that we adopt the agenda as published.
Little Roberts: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 2 of 45
Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any
discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? And the agenda is
agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
PROCLAMATIONS [Action Item]
1. Migraine & Headache Awareness Month
Simison: So, first up is a proclamation for Migraine and Headache Awareness Month. I
will invite Laura to join me at the podium, along with anybody else and we will go ahead
and read this proclamation. So, Council, one of the things that's great about, you know,
having these meetings is an opportunity to educate people about some of the
challenges that many people in our community face in their day-to-day lives.
Sometimes it's diseases, sometimes it's other elements, but with that we will share this
proclamation and turn it over to people that really know more about it and can share
truly the impacts with our community. Whereas migraine and headache disorders affect
more than 40 million Americans, approximately one in four households, and whereas an
estimate four million Americans live with chronic migraine, experiencing 15 or more
days of migraine -- migraine pain per month with approximately 75 percent of those
affected being women, significantly impacting their personal, professional and family
lives. And whereas increased public awareness, improved access to care and support
for research are essential to reduce the burden of migraine and headache disorders and
to improve the lives of those affected and whereas the City of Meridian is committed to
recognizing the persons living with migraine disease deserve fair, equal, timely and
affordable access to new and innovative treatments to live their lives to their fullest
potential. Therefore, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim the week of June
2025 as Migraine and Headache Awareness Month in the City of Meridian and
encourage all citizens to come alongside those in our community who suffer from
migraine and headache diseases with support and increasing awareness, dated this
10th day of June 2025. With that I will turn this over to you and, then, we will do some
pictures afterwards.
Miller: Thank you, Mayor Simison, for issuing this proclamation again this year and
thank you to the City Council for allowing me to speak this evening. The support and
recognition is so important. It helps reduce the stigma surrounding migraine and
headache disorders. My name is Laura Miller. I'm a lifelong Idahoan. I was born and
rated raised in Boise and I have called Meridian home for the past nine years. I truly
love our community. I have lived with chronic migraine for 19 years. Migraine is not just
a bad headache, it is a complex, debilitating, neurological disorder. Migraine disrupts
every part of life. It can affect a person's ability to work, impact mental health and make
it difficult to be present with family and friends. More than 40 million Americans live with
migraine. Approximately one in four households. In Idaho that's an estimated 290,000
people and yet there are only two certified headache specialist neurologists in our state.
Headache disorders are drastically underdiagnosed and many suffer in silence. While
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 3 of 45
there has been recent advances in treatment we still need more research, more
providers and better access to effective care. That's why I continue to advocate for
progress. I have traveled to Washington DC to discuss migraine research, funding and
legislation with congressional offices. Right now 30,000 purple flags are on display on
the lawn of the National Mall representing the millions of Americans living with migraine
and headache disorders. It is a stunning installation presented by Alliance for
Headache Disorders Advocacy. I volunteer with the organization and I was honored to
serve on the committee that helped plan and organize the event. Seeing it come to life
through photos and videos has been incredibly powerful. I believe that we as a city can
support residents with migraine through simple, meaningful action. I would welcome the
opportunity to explore some possible options. Together we can turn action -- awareness
into action and improve the lives of people in our community. Thank you for your time
and support.
PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics
Simison: Mr. Clerk, anyone signed up on your public forum?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody signed up.
ACTION ITEMS
2. 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-157 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.
Simison: Okay. We will move on to our Action Items this evening. First item up is Item
2, a public hearing for Adero Mixed Use Neighborhood, H-2024-0068. We will open this
public hearing with staff comments.
Ritter: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. So, tonight we are here for a
development agreement modification, rezone and a preliminary plat for the Adero Mixed
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 4 of 45
Use Neighborhood. This site consists of 69.18 acres of land. Is currently zoned C-G, L-
O and C-C and is located near the northwest corner of North Ten Mile and McMillan
Road. So, the request is for a rezone of 11 .186 acres of land from R-4 and C-C to R-8
at 35.82 acres from the L-O, C-C and -- C-G zones to the R-15 zone. Reduce the L-O
to 1.572 acres of land and rezone 22.90 acres to the C-G zoning district and, then, also
we have a preliminary plat that will be consisting of 270 residential lots, 44 commercial
lots, four office lots, 31 common lots, two common drives and one park and, again,
these will be zoned R-8 -- they are requesting zone R-8, R-15, L-O and C-G. They are
also requesting a development agreement modification to create two new development
agreements, one for the residential and one for the commercial. So, this subject
property was part of a larger annexation that was completed in 2005. It encompassed
approximately 312.67 acres of land that was previously zoned RUT in Ada county and
as part of this annexation the applicant proposed a mix of zoning designations. C-G, L-
O and R-4. The zoning mix was intended to support a balanced community with
commercial office and residential land uses. So, the Adero Mixed Use Neighborhood,
consisting of the 69.18 acres, the property will be developed as a mixed use
development with single family and office and commercial. Again, we have the
residential, which is on this side. The commercial, the office and, then, also the park
back here. This is the existing Bridgetower Park. It was originally preliminary platted
under the development agreement that required the dedication of a 10.2 acre park. So,
however, the majority of the park that was never formally dedicated to the Bridgetower
West Homeowners Association and the prior approvals for the neighborhood have since
expired. The Adero 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 owners to record a final
plat that establishes the properly sized park parcel, therefore, fulfilling the original
development agreement, enabling the parcel to be dedicated to the HOA. This park will
be accessible to the property owners. It will not be accessible to the property owners
within the Adero mixed use parks neighborhood as they have their own amenities. This
is a concept plan and landscape plan for the Adero Park Mixed Use Neighborhood.
This is their open space. This is the pedestrian connectivity. As you can see there are
lots of connections throughout this development for pedestrian access. These are the
amenities for this development. These are the elevations that are being proposed for
the development. I want to go back to the layout of the plat. So, on the commercial
side here -- so, a traffic impact study was submitted for the residential side, but it was
not submitted for the commercial portion of the property. So, based on the staff report
from ACHD there will need to be a traffic impact study done on this commercial side
when commercial development comes in or the final plat and the applicant is also
asking for a waiver for a right-in, right-out onto Ten Mile, but that cannot be approved
without the TIS report, so they will need to provide that TIS -- the traffic impact study to
determine if that right-in, right-out is warranted and they would -- that traffic study will
also determine if -- with the commercial portion if a traffic signal will -- they will be
looking to determine whether or not a traffic signal will be warranted and also the
applicant will be asking for a waiver to add additional access points along the -- the new
collector here. Right now staff is saying that additional access points along the collector
are not allowed unless approved by Council or is warranted by the traffic impact study.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 5 of 45
So, this new collector road is to be developed as a complete street with landscaping,
sidewalk, travel lanes, curb-gutter for both sides. At this time what the applicant is
proposing is like a ten foot multi-use pathway on both sides of the new collector. They
are requesting to build this in phases. If the residential side goes in first the collector
will be built. You will have the ten -- the ten foot pathway on the residential side,
landscaping, travel lanes, curb-gutter, but we will not have the pathway on the
commercial side or the landscaping at this time until that develops. After going to the
city the Planning Commission staff and the applicant have been working on some
conditions for this development here and at the Planning Commission meeting staff had
made some recommendation and modification to some of the conditions that were
recommended by the City Council -- I mean by the Planning Commission and we had
some outstanding conditions and issues that we were still working on with the applicant
for the City Council's consideration. These are the conditions that we -- are before the
City Council to consider. Condition 1-G, we worked with the applicant and we revised
this and it was based on the businesses that would be along the new collector road.
We had it restricted from 6.00 a.m. to 11.00 p.m., but we added that the extended hours
of operation may be requested through a conditional use permit based on what our
code says. And, then, 1-P, that is the additional driveway access from the new collector
road that will have to be approved by Council and ACHD and it's based on the updated
traffic impact study and, then, the last one was the new collector road, how it will be built
and basically we were saying that in working with the applicant -- our main concern was
that was getting the people down south to the businesses that are there without having
them going back out onto the arterial roads and so the first portion will be from Ten Mile
and it goes all the way to then COA, that gets the people from this subdivision into the
businesses that are south here and, then, the second portion is here and we are
requesting that that portion be in prior to the applicant receiving the occupancy for any
of the buildings within phase two. So, there were several people who commented on
this project at the Planning Commission hearing. The concerns basically were the
increased traffic, too much density, safety concerns for individuals wanting to make a
left turn onto Ten Mile from the new collector road without a traffic signal. Safety
concerns with the increased traffic, overcrowding of schools in the area, proposed
development not being consistent with the neighborhood, R-8 versus R-15. Since, then,
we did receive one additional comment and it was from Sean Freeman. He is in
opposition to the proposed development. Opposes the rezoning from R-4 to R-8. The
streets are not equipped to handle the influx of vehicles. The increased density will lead
to overcrowding, strain on local resources, such as schools, utilities, and a decline in the
peaceful environment that makes this area a desirable place to live. I must say staff did
work with the applicant. We had numerous meetings regarding this application. We
wanted to make sure that we were both on the same page before we came before City
Council based on the conditions that we had proposed and I understand that with the
commercial portion of this they don't exactly know what was going in there, but we did
put some conditions on there to limit what happens on that side. We wanted to make it
where when they did come in to develop -- a lot of this is going to be driven by the
updated TIS, so -- but we did want to put some conditions there for this, so that we
didn't have to come back and do a new development agreement for that commercial
portion that we already had some things in place for when this develops. I appreciate
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 6 of 45
the applicant working with staff. It was long, but we -- in the end we all came to the
same decision as far as the conditions for this and so with that at this time I will take any
questions that you may have.
Simison: Thank you, Linda. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Then would the
applicant like to come forward.
Clark: Hey, everybody. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise, representing the
applicant. And as Linda is pulling that up I also want to echo Linda's comments. I think
we might have set a record in terms of numbers of meetings to try to get all of this
sorted out and a lot of that was -- you know, we had our arm wrestling sessions over a
number of these conditions, but I think we got to a really good place on all of them and,
as Linda said as well, I think what this does is -- one of the challenges that I think you
guys are aware of in -- in Meridian is that whenever we do a commercial project we
have this kind of ongoing, you know, series of development agreement modifications
that end up coming in with it and I think we have done a good job on this one of setting
it up for the future with a number of conditions that control how it's going to go, but
enough to make it so that it's marketable, ready to go and it's not going to be unduly
limited in the future. So -- you guys having any luck over there? Got it? Okay. Thank
you. So, you guys are familiar with the area. We have got Chinden on the north,
McMillan on the south, Ten Mile on the east. I think one thing that's kind of interesting
about this that I would point out is that there is this four square mile area that surrounds
this project and this is truly one of the last pieces to develop. The plan has come
together. The plan is being finished out. About all you have got left right now is some
MDR down there on the very south -- southwest corner as you can see. That blue is
non-residential and any of those other gaps are either parks or in a few instances some
-- some county lots that may or may not develop, but this is really one of the last pieces
for this area. Maybe it will go. There we go. And as you know the -- the comp plan
speaks to this 15 minute city concept and that's one of the things that we really like
about this parcel is that part of what it does is try to complete the pathways and
complete that mid-mile collector, so that this new project and include -- and as well as
some of the existing projects are able to access a lot of those services and the
amenities that are nearby. You have got the Keith Bird Legacy Park just -- just north of
us. You have got a connection to Heroes Park. So, we are pretty excited about how it
fits in with a lot of these existing services. Another point is that this is not an
annexation. This is property that received a zone quite a while ago under a prior comp
plan designation. So, the -- the new comp plan designation is largely the mixed use
commercial. What we have tried to do is look at that little node and essentially try to
right size the commercial. So, you have got the -- about 23 -- or 22 acres of commercial
that's on our east side that we think allows for a good viable commercial product. You
have got the residential that we are proposing on the west side and that as you guys
know, under the mixed use designation is -- the band is between six to 15 dwelling units
and we are proposing it at seven, so trying to stay on the lower end of that. But one
thing that's pretty cool for me on this one is -- as you guys know the development group
that I'm working with on this we are usually residential -- just residential only and this is
one opportunity that we have been able to bring in that kind of true mixed use project all
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 7 of 45
at once. The zoning -- you can see that we have tried to transition our zoning so we
have the R-8 on the west against the existing Bridgetower lots. We have the R-15 in
the middle and, then, that leads to the C-G on the east and the L-O on the north and
you can see the acreage. With regard to the site plan, you know, one of the really
important things about this is trying to get that mid-mile collector done. It's a really
important piece to be able to help address some of the traffic issues in that area, get
people off of McMillan, not have to make that left turn to get to Ten Mile. Another nice
thing about it is it serves a dual purpose in that it helps with that transitioning between
our commercial and our residential. So, you have got the nice ten foot pathways on
each side leading into a plaza area that I will show you here in just a second. And, then,
it provides that -- that transition and buffer that you need between the commercial and
the residential. And, again, this is a little bit more about that concept of completing the
grid, completing the picture, so you can see that the mid-mile collector will, you know,
be connected as a result of all of this and it will help in our view alleviate that congestion
down at McMillan and Ten Mile. A nice part about this as well as with that pedestrian
connectivity you are going to be able to take either of those ten -- those regional
pathways you can go up to Heroes Park. There is already a cross -- crossing signal
right there. There is not a -- currently a warrant for the traffic signal there. That was
one of the things that Linda mentioned would be studied with the TIS for the commercial
area. We are fully anticipating that that would create a warrant for a traffic signal, but
right now as you know how that works with ACHD. Until there is a warrant there won't
be a signal. So, it's -- it's really traffic driven. As is typical for this developer we went
way above on the amenity points, play structures, climbing domes, pickleball courts and
dog parks. This was -- this is the plaza that I mentioned that helped transition from the
-- the residential to the commercial areas and that commercial area -- this is a number
of concept plans that we had provided to staff. Again without a user it's hard to lock that
down. So, what we ended up doing was the bubble plan concept and, then, the number
of conditions of approval that relate to the commercial area to kind of set that up for
when it actually goes. We had -- have had a number of neighbor and city meetings.
Again, really thank Linda and Bill for their patience. Like I said I think this might be a
record and you can see the record there on the right side, including, you know, our final
call this afternoon to try to lock down the last of these conditions. And, you know, the
one condition that we were going to talk about was condition 1-U talking about the
collector. We actually are in agreement with the language that Linda gave us, so we
don't need to revise that. So, I'm going to skip that slide altogether. So, just to confirm
we are in agreement with 1-G, 1-P and 1-U as Linda has mentioned and -- but I do want
to say that that collector -- I kind of want to give -- give Linda credit for pushing on that,
because it's important for it to connect. I also want to give my client some credit,
because that's, you know, basically a four million dollar price tag that's going very early
in the project and so that's -- that's a lot of collector to build in your first two phases and
so for them to commit to that I think is a -- is also a really big deal. So, again, we are in
agreement with the changes and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 8 of 45
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: Just a real quick one. I know sometimes when we hear R-15 we think we are
talking much higher density, but did I hear you say that overall this project is running
about seven dwelling units per acre?
Clark: That's correct. Yeah.
Overton: Technically it would even fit under an R-8.
Clark: Correct. It's more of a dimensional question as to why it's at R-15. Thank you.
Yep. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Just a couple of questions. I wanted to check timing on the TIS I guess from --
from what you have -- if you have heard, kind of what are you thinking on that?
Clark: Yeah. And, Council Member Strader, in part -- I guess one thing to emphasize is
it is one application, but it's two developers. So, I don't have control over those sorts of
things. We -- I would just say that it will happen when there is a user and there is a
conditional -- excuse me -- a condition of approval. It's 1-C that confirms that that will
happen prior to submitting plans or a final plat that contains the commercial lots and it's
going to be important. The -- you know, to get a -- you know, kind of your larger
commercial user in there you are going to need to prove up that right-in, right-out and --
and understand that and have that, you know, fully approved, so -- so, I guess I can't
say exactly when, but I do know that -- I do know the sequencing within the overall
project.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. I just have a few more. So, the park -- I was just curious to
understand a little bit of background about what happened before, what -- this just
seems so unusual. Why did this park not get dedicated to the Bridgetower HOA? Help
me understand a little bit of the background on how and why that happened. And, then,
please, talk to me about -- I think you all mentioned that the Adero Subdivision wouldn't
have access to the park. I hope I didn't catch that wrong. It just seems like you have a
lot of amenities in the middle of this development, but what a shame to have this
gigantic park that can't be used by everyone who surrounds it. So, help me understand
all that.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 9 of 45
Clark: Yeah. Council Member -- Member Strader. Thank you. So, I don't have all of
the history. Again, different -- different party; right? As I understand it that park area
was never platted and that that plat expired. The -- the development agreement from
back at that time indicated that there would be a 10.2 acre park. So, that's the guidance
that we have. There is more green space than the 10.2 acres out there, but it's kind of
not that formal in other words. The development agreement -- the pond is included, but
there is -- it is a 10.2 acre park. The -- our plan and what we are proposing that will
actually help to facilitate the conclusion of this long saga is that we would -- that would
be a platted lot at this point as part of this preliminary plat and that would facilitate
transfer of the 10.2 acre park to the Bridgetower HOA. With regard to the uses, we are
not being -- I don't know if the right word is trying to be presumptive to say that we
would be able to use somebody else's facility. So, we have proposed to have our folks
use only their -- their own amenities and not have access to this -- to this other park.
That park is theirs. We are not proposing to be able to have access to it. If there was
an agreement between the two HOAs in the future that would be wonderful, but as we
are setting it up right now we are not -- we are not presupposing that our residents
would have any access to it.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. That's helpful just to sort of understand the background of how --
how we got to where we are at and, then, just wanted to check will this be walkable from
the residential component to Pleasant View Elementary within phase one or when --
when will that be possible?
Clark: Yeah. It would -- Council Member Strader, so it would not be in phase one, it
would be prime -- it would be essentially when phase two is complete -- with that phase
two condition. So, you can see the resident -- excuse me -- the regional pathways here
along Gondola, those lead past and into the sidewalks that head over to Pleasant View
from right there. So, it's down there on the southwest.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: And, then, could you just get me up to speed on your conversations with the
West Ada School District? Have they confirmed a plan to bus the students that would
be in this development or how -- how will this work? And what's your timing I think on
your phase two versus phase one, again, not holding you to it exactly, because things
happen, but I just want to get a general sense. It seems very inefficient to be bussing
kids that are this close into the school.
Clark: Yeah. So, Council Member Strader, as you know there is -- when we get these
West Ada letters what they will do is they will speak to the kind of architectural capacity
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 10 of 45
and, then, they will say as we reach that capacity we are going to move boundaries, we
are going to bus, we are going to use portables and, then, we are going to build
schools. That's the -- that's the strategy. At this point they are actually pretty far along
in terms of those strategies. Oftentimes when we do these projects we are anticipating
that they will take some of those steps in the future. At this point they have already
started to take those steps. So, they have already realigned the Hunter Elementary
enrollment area and put a cap on. They are going to be meeting again this fall to
evaluate those boundaries and, then, they will continue to take those iterative steps as
they go. In the kind of larger area Star -- there is a new elementary school in Star that
will be open next year that we anticipate will have some ripple effects in terms of how
the boundaries are allocated as you are coming from that direction as well. There is
also elementary school sites, including the one over at Owyhee High School. So, there
is -- they have got a number of these pieces in place, but they have already started the
boundary discussion.
Strader: Okay. That's it for me for now. Thank you.
Simison: Council, additional questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Clerk, do we
have anyone signed up on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody marked they wanted to speak.
Simison: Okay. It's okay. Everyone gets an opportunity, so don't worry. If you would
like to speak, since the sheet doesn't indicate that, please, go ahead and come forward
at this time and if you are online use the raise your hand feature. Good evening. State
your name and address for the record. Be recognized for three minutes.
Fritschle: Good evening. My name is Patricia Fritschle and I'm at --
Simison: Can you get the mic close, so --
Fritschle: -- 5524 North Botticelli. I'm really upset that we are here again and I have
several questions, because when we were at the last meeting, which I'm very familiar
that they -- planning these two over here are very in favor of this project. We were here
in 2022, I believe that's when it was, when a different developer was coming and trying
to develop that same space with a very similar concept, with the same amount of
density, which the City Council denied it due to the density. We are not disputing the
fact that that's going to be developed. We knew buying it was going to be developed.
Our understanding of that development -- that density was going to be 150 to 170 with
commercial, not this 35 by 100 feet lot, which -- like how is that even possible? Like I
understand that you guys claim that there is a need for housing, but if you look at what
is available in housing, apartments, townhomes, all the mixed use, you have Costco,
Walmart right there, an apartment building that's already going in. McMillan is never
going to be expanded on until who knows when because of the irrigation. Ten Mile is
already a nightmare to try and drive down. Nobody wants to spend their life driving in
traffic and I don't know how the school district is not a part of the last meeting when we
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 11 of 45
are here, nor transportation department. I don't think an actual transportation evaluation
has actually been done in the last -- at least ten, 15 years. I think the last one that --
when we were here in 2022 said something like 2018. 1 just -- I don't understand. I'm
not here to dispute the fact that it's going to be developed. I know it's going to be
developed, but the density is a big problem. I tried to leave to go to an appointment
literally across the street on Ten Mile and it took me 45 minutes to get out of
Bridgetower West and get across the street on Ten Mile and McMillan. It was a physical
therapy appointment right across the street at Ten Mile and McMillan. It should not take
that long and the schools, half of our subdivision is already being bused to a different
community, so how are you sitting here saying that they are already in the planning
when the last time we were here for Planning and Zoning they said that they haven't
been in communication with them or the transportation department. So, how do you
have a proper approval for anything when not everybody is being included or
communicated with? I appreciate the time to speak to you guys today and voice my
frustrations. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Is there anybody else present that
would like to provide testimony on this item, either online or in the room? If you are
online use the raise your hand feature, please. Good evening.
Boyle: Good evening. My name is Richard Boyle. I live at 5430 North Botticelli. I back
up to the proposed -- what they are building. My biggest issue I have -- and I have
heard this throughout the subdivision, although I can't speak for everyone, what is left of
that park once they develop what they are going to develop, the rest of the park is not
really usable. You have a very large, huge water retention pond. You have got the pool
and the rest of it is rolling hills. You can't play ball. You can't -- I mean Easter egg hunts
are great. Beyond that that's about all I have ever seen that used for. The area where
they are -- that they are removing and this is probably the biggest frustration I have, as
well as a lot of people in the subdivision. It was sold to us as here is your park, here is
your pool, everything's great and, then, we find out, oh, we overbuilt that. Well, we have
been paying to maintain it all these years. We overbuilt that. It was never meant to be
a park. Well, it's part of the reason I bought the lot I'm on. Paid a premium for it -- for
that lot, because it backed up to the park. I'm not going to have a park. They have
been generous enough to give me a slight sliver behind me, a little -- a little I guess fig
leaf, whatever to -- olive branch for, you know, putting up with what they are doing. I
appreciate that, but I feel it's very unfair the way the previous developer has handled
this. I can promise you nobody in the subdivision knew the park was overbuilt and that
a good portion of it -- the part where they play soccer -- kids out playing ball, whatnot, is
not going to be there any longer. So, the retention pond takes up a good portion of
what's going to be left. The part to the east of the retention pond will not be large
enough really for anything for anybody to play on there, there just isn't enough room
there, at least what they had staked out and, again, to the west of the retention pond is
all rolling hills. So, you can't play soccer, you can't be play baseball, you really can't do
a whole lot on it, so -- anyway, I guess that's all I have for tonight. Oh. The schools.
They are already overbooked in that area. It doesn't make sense to me that they are
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 12 of 45
taking kids across the street and bussing them miles away. So, anyway, thanks for your
time.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I'm sorry, sir. If you don't mind. I just --
Simison: Got a question for you.
Boyle: Sure.
Strader: Yeah. Thank you. So, I hear you about your frustrations with the park. What
I'm really struggling with is it seems like the failure for that to happen properly was a
totally different developer and so now this --
Boyle: Yeah. They are kind of stuck holding the bag.
Strader: Yeah. And what I'm trying to figure out is like if this -- if this development didn't
occur I don't think there is a mechanism that's going to grant your HOA this park. So,
I'm just curious like from your perspective, taking everything into account, would you
rather see this move forward or do your concerns with the park being maybe not as
usable as it could have been, kind of make you not support the application? I just kind
of want to understand that dynamic, because we can't, unfortunately, go back in time
and fix this failure of a transfer of property that should have occurred in the past, so --
Boyle: And that's something I think a lot of us don't understand. Why did it happen and
how did it happen.
Strader: Right.
Boyle: Am I thrilled about having more housing and density that they are proposing
versus what was already plotted or proposed and turned down prior? I would take what
was proposed -- proposed prior over the density that they are proposing now, without a
doubt. To my knowledge what was proposed earlier never removed the park area.
Now, how to get that park from the original developer into the HOA? I don't know. I
don't know the answers to that. It's way beyond my -- my pay grade to figure out. Or
how did we ever even get here honestly?
Strader: Yeah. Thank you. That's helpful. I just kind of wanted to understand your
perspective just in light of where we are at now. We can't change that and just
dialoguing here, but, you know, this is one of those things -- like at the end of the day,
as a City Council member, we have to have faith that the people who promise they are
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 13 of 45
going to do things will do them. We don't really monitor like the transfer of private
property. You know, it's not our --
Boyle: I don't understand how that happened that way. I mean --
Strader: I don't.
Boyle: -- does it make any sense?
Strader: It doesn't really make sense to me, to be honest.
Boyle: I guess it was our understanding that the prior developer hung on to one lot in
Bridgetower West, so they had control of the HOA I guess, which, as far as I knew, it
was all -- you know, he owned the green space, he owns that one last lot fenced off all
nicely. Nothing being done on it. And why you would even want to is beyond me. I
mean why wouldn't you want to finish up the subdivision, turn it over and move on? It's
beyond my comprehension. I don't understand how we got here, so -- and I don't
oppose what they are doing, I just oppose the density of it all. The traffic is horrible. I
can tell you leaving tonight it took me ten minutes to get out of the subdivision to turn
left onto McMillan and that's not an exaggeration. It was -- I guess it was a little over
nine minutes that I sat there, cars lined up behind me, cars, you know, east and west
going down McMillan to get out, because it's -- 5.00 o'clock is horrible and it's the same
way in the morning, so --just there isn't infrastructure to handle it.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Women Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I live off McMillan Road. Sorry. I have got a little cold. I live off
McMillan Road. I understand your frustration. You know, one of the things I'm
struggling with is them putting the road in, the collector road, will eventually help; right?
Once there is a new TIS and the commercial comes in, if there is a light put in there and
we have got this collector that connects all the way through, that's going to actually help
alleviate some of the issues. But it's the painful part of from -- getting from today until
that point that's really tough.
Boyle: Is there a guarantee that that collector will be approved to get on to --
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Boyle: -- Ten Mile?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Well, so the -- my understanding from the applicant's presentation is they are
going to build the collector road most of the way, so at least connect south to that
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 14 of 45
commercial property. Then in their second phase they would connect fully all the way
through. But I don't think a light would come in until that TIS -- the traffic study for the
commercial piece is done. That's my understanding. But I don't want to speak for
anyone else.
Boyle: That would be an awful close light to the next one up, which is right there.
Strader: I think ACHD has a bunch of rules about how they do that.
Boyle: It's probably less than an eighth of a mile tops and I bet it's not even that
honestly, from -- from where that collector would come onto Ten Mile to that next road
north, that next light north that goes in south of Costco.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think we could ask the applicant to address that specifically, because they
understand the rules about how close an intersection could be to another one under
ACHD's rules. So, I don't want to take anymore of your time, but I just wanted to
understand a little more.
Boyle: I think it could happen, but a light I would be -- I would be very hesitant to think
that ACHD would actually allow a light that close together, but I don't know the rules.
Strader: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Boyle: You bet. Anybody else?
Simison: All right. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to provide -- come
on up.
Little Roberts: As he is approaching we do have someone online from ACHD,
Simison: Yes. If the developers can't answer we have got a phone a friend.
Wycoff: My name is John Wycoff. 5099 North Bolsena. Mr. Mayor and Council
Members, thank you for having me and letting me speak here. I can say that I am here
to peacefully protest what is occurring in this area. The people that said that they spoke
with us at -- in the -- for this development as part of the Bridgetower West, we were told
that the homes that would be going in there would be going to people that are more
senior in their years, new home buyers or people in transition taking on this -- and
wouldn't even have a park. Now, we are finding out -- I think if you went back you would
find out now there is -- there is a park going in, which mean there is going to be children
going in and those children will not be going to the school that's going to be down the
street from them. Yeah. The park, when I bought our house, when I was laughed at
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 15 of 45
here in one of the meetings, because I said, oh, you didn't think there was going to be
growth. Well, behind my house was a big nice open five acre lot, one house on it. It
was beautiful. Within less than a year the house ended up being gone and all the
houses are now behind it, except for one property, which is right behind my property,
which is the developer. So, the developer -- you are saying you think that the developer
is no longer part of this whole thing? No, he is part of it. He owns the HOA. The HOA
is his. It's not ours, although we are supposed to have our own HOA, but the people
that are part of the HOA board are really chosen by him. I want to be part of it. My job
is I'm an accountant. I want to be an auditor. I want to be able to go through those
contracts, look and see what do we have at risk as being an HOA person. So, there is
one thing. He also owned that land and so there is this agreement. He also owned the
land where the apartments are. The unique thing is it's an LLC. One name on it. You
can also go -- become part of another LLC and never be seen. So, somehow he is tied
in, because he is selling his properties here. This HOA. Which I thought was all ours. I
mean we have taken care of all the trees along the back, all of the grass, which leads to
a big question. Well, one, the school. The school is going to get overcrowded as it is
already. Two. The lake. We have a system of watering that is pitiful. So, is City of
Meridian going to be providing water for us when we lose our water rights? Is -- is -- is
-- is Bridgetower West going to continue to get water from McCollum waterway, which is
going from Ten Mile through that -- this vacant land. Will we get it. Water rights are
important. Otherwise we should get that. It's filling up our lake. If you notice there is --
should -- should I stopped now?
Simison: If you can wrap up and some -- Council may have a question.
Wycoff: For me as a citizen, resident of that area, where is our water rights coming
from? Are we losing our water rights? Because it looks like -- how are they going to put
that pipe underneath all those homes to fill up our lake and, then, we have a system of
water that is so pitifully horrible. They didn't even put a pit for the water to fill into, so
every year we burn out our pumps for our water system. Meridian will have to take over
our -- our water and, then, that means increased water pressures. It's -- this is -- it's --
it's becoming a problem in that area really bad and I just would hope you would really
think of that before you move on with this project. So, any questions?
Simison: Can you provide a little bit more feedback on what pumps are being burned
out where?
Wycoff: Yeah. The -- the pump that's on Ten Mile south of McMillan coming from
Settlers Park and I have called Settlers Park about that and they said when they
originally installed the pump house for us they were directed by Settlers Park -- Settlers
told the developer --
Simison: That was the irrigation district?
Wycoff: The irrigation issue. There -- the pump is burning out. Oh. And, then, the
pump is supposed to be taking water from over at the lake and pulling it over to help
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 16 of 45
with the watering to, then, get -- get all of the properties. So, you know, me, I came
from California. Water problems down there are pretty major and I'm just hoping that
we don't do a California up here in Meridian, so --
Simison: Okay. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, I had heard rumors about HOA issues in your neighborhood, kind of just --
I think maybe one thing -- if the applicant wants to discuss maybe specifically their water
rights and their plan for irrigation and how that might or might not impact you, I think I'm
asking -- oh, I'm asking them and I'm just previewing for them, I would like to hear about
that. Taking a big step back, I don't know how your HOA issues could -- could be fixed
by us; right? It seems like you -- that to me is like maybe a private action by your
homeowners against that HOA needs to occur. So, I don't want to get into the middle of
that, but if you kind of look at -- at all of this, do you feel like this helps improve the
situation or do you feel like it doesn't? Like it -- because I'm -- because it kind of solves
a couple issues. It hands your HOA ownership of a park that you were supposed to
have in the first place. It builds a collector road that -- I think in the long term would help
with the traffic flow, but in the short term this will probably get worse. I'm just curious
how you are looking at this overall?
Wycoff: I'm over -- looking at overall as, wow, I'm going to be really crammed in that
area. I was -- there was one year where -- or, you know, I have spoken up probably at
several meetings here and one of the things they stated is the ability for people to get
from Ten Mile over to Black Cat and McMillan and that the speeds would be reduced in
-- in the area and I'm coming from California, you drive fast and even if you think you
abide by the law you are moving fast through areas and I looked at -- I look at that nice
windy road, oh, man, that's going to be a fun place for some young kid to shoot on
through. So, you know, a lot of wiggles and waggles and going back and forth. So, it's
going to speed up the process. People are still going to drive fast trying to cut -- cut
down the time. As far as the HOA ownership, that -- the HOA developer owns one lot,
controls everybody in the whole depart -- you know, in the whole area. Five hundred
and one homes -- or 501 lots and there is 500 that have homes on them, except for one.
So, he has the potential to speak for everybody in the HOA, which he is already doing
right now, because he is selling off that portion of our park to this developer. What's
going to happen -- the next thing that we get to face, when we get to see, oh, our water
-- no, we are not going to get to fill up that water, we are going to have to pull from
someplace else. So, that's all I'm making sure. Are you looking out for us, the owners
of Bridgetower West homes for our water, because if we have to keep on -- under our
agreement we have to keep our yards looking green or else we are going to get liens on
our property. That's going to be a lot of water for my lot, which is almost, what, 12,000
-- 12,000 square feet, so -- that's all. It hope you really look at that.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 17 of 45
Strader: Okay. Thank you.
Wycoff: If not the price of the homes are going to be dropping, because people are not
going to want to live in a home -- in an area where it's too -- you know, one, too
expensive for the water, so --
Strader: Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
Wycoff: Anybody else? All right.
Simison: Anybody else would like to -- come on forward.
Elam: Hello. My name is Paul Elam. I live at 5127 North Asissi Avenue there in
Meridian in Bridgetower West as well. I guess to me the saddest thing is that our
community no longer has any faith in the City Council at all. We -- we were here a little
over two years ago I think and at that time for that -- for the fight against the apartments
that went in, I think the -- at that time the only person who was here was, you, the
Mayor, as well as Council Woman Strader and I think everybody else is newer since
then, if I remember correctly and we had this whole room packed. We had the room full.
We had I think about a hundred people online. Chris could definitely check the records
and look that up and there were a lot of reasons stated on why we had to approve that
property on your behalf. I remember Council Woman Strader said specifically that I will
hesitate before I approve anything else that will impact McMillan. My daughter calls it
murder McMillan because of all the horrible accidents that happen on McMillan near the
Walmart and going up to where the apartments were approved and the apartments
haven't even been built yet. So, imagine how bad the traffic's going to get on McMillan
when the apartments are built. Right now it's already a nightmare, as John and the
other people stated. So, it's sad to me, because this room would be full again, but they
have no faith that you are even listening; right? So, that's the bottom line is that the
citizens that live here and they are paying our taxes here already, they don't think you
listen and you specifically said you were going to hesitate in approving anything on
McMillan, but these -- these communities that they want to build, they are going to spill
out on McMillan, they are going to spill out on Gondola going in front of Pleasant View
Elementary. Eventually there probably will be another road connected, but it's already a
nightmare. I mean I don't know how often you guys drive going by Walmart and Ten
Mile down to Costco, but it's already insanely busy and I would encourage you all before
you make this approval to go and drive that during rush hour time or wait until the fall
when there is students going down to Owyhee on McMillan and see what it's like. Right
now there is tons of construction on Ustick. It's going to only get worse as more of
these areas fill up and 1, like many of them, believe there is going to be a development
there eventually. Many of us were lied to by the developer Mike McCollum and told
different things about the way it was going to be constructed. Nobody ever knew that
he was going to crawl back a large part of that beautiful park to give to this
development. Well, I will just have to bite the bullet I guess if you guys approve it, but
we are tired -- we are tired of coming here. That's why there is hardly anybody here
tonight and we just don't believe that you will even listen to us anymore and we think the
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 18 of 45
developers have your pockets and more often than not that they will fund your
campaigns and -- and that's how they get so many things approved. The gentleman
right here behind me that was in the black outfit, I remember being here not too long
ago for another meeting and his development company was denied and that's because
there is so much density in the small development he was going to build that barely any
cars could come and go either way. So, that was one time for a small community farther
out of -- in Meridian that it was denied. But this is a major change with already
apartments approved that are 234 plus units that's going to go right there behind
Walmart and if you approve this too, well, the news we know is that you will never live
there, because you would never want to deal with it and if you wouldn't want to deal with
it for yourself you shouldn't want us to have to deal with it either. That's all I have to say.
Good night.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I don't have a question, I just have a comment, which is that I am very hesitant
to approve new annexations off of McMillan Road. I have been very vocal about that,
because of the challenges on McMillan Road and the fact that it cannot be widened.
What I'm struggling with here is that I do think this collector road will eventually help with
the traffic situation, but you are definitely in a really tough situation. I also just want to
say for the record, because I think it might be good for you to hear, I don't take political
contributions from developers. I never have and I think it's important for you to know
that. I also work with my colleagues and many of them do, but at least from what I see
they have a lot of tough conversations and make difficult decisions all the time based on
what's in the best interest of the City of Meridian. So, I will respectfully disagree. I think
you have a city council that listens to you very actively and struggles to uphold private
property rights, which we are a state that has very strong private property rights, but
balancing that with the interests of the city. Thank you.
Simison: Is there anything else? Okay. Is there anybody else who hasn't spoken yet
that would like to -- let me go to anybody who hasn't spoken yet to see if they would like
to provide testimony on this item.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there is someone online.
Simison: Okay. If we can go to Marcy.
Sutcliffe: Hello. Marcy Sutcliffe. 4085 West Ravenna Street in the Bridgetower West
north area and I have lived in this subdivision for five years and, first of all, I want to say
that I had many notes as I have listened to the developer's proposal and I was at the
last meeting in person and like many others in this area I know this area is going to be
developed. It's not a matter of if, but it's a matter of what and speaking for Council
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 19 of 45
Woman Strader, I appreciate you are really the only one that's speaking up and giving
any honest feedback and concern, but the connector road that they are proposing, it
would be great if that were going in just to alleviate current traffic conditions, not to
mention what these 500 plus extra units are going to be. So, that's not really in -- in my
honest opinion going to alleviate what these new developments are going to contribute
to the traffic congestion in this area. So, that being said, I do appreciate everyone and
especially the last gentleman who spoke very concisely and, you know, hit all the points.
It really is a matter of the density and some of the ancillary proposals or conditions of
this project. For instance, this connector road, you know, it's -- it's not going to solve all
the problems and I live in an area right off Gondola in the middle of the subdivision and
already we have youngsters who are going down Gondola, squealing their tires, making
burn marks. It's -- it's really going to be an issue when we have that additional traffic
coming through and, you know, the Bereza Subdivision that is proposed down the road
on McMillan all of these are going to contribute to people wanting to go through these
arterial inner -- you know, subdivision streets to get to where they want to be and the
congestion is already horrible. I can't even imagine what it's going to be at the point in
time when these developments come to fruition. So, you know, I'm not going to beat a
dead horse. I understand there is development. I come from a construction lending
background and I -- I applaud that, but it has to be done appropriately and with
oversight and I think that some of the conditions of this proposal don't really meet the
objectives of this area, because that connector road is not going to solve all the
problems. So, having said that I will just finish with saying that it's not anything that the
Council can correct or help us with, but this developer is -- what he has done to us has
been criminal and I don't understand how somebody can get away with this and the --
you know, the HOA board of the state of Idaho doesn't have any -- doesn't seem to have
any conditions over him and he has -- he has continued to hold that lot so that he can
have leverage over us. He has continued to over the years have landscaping
companies that are friends of his that did a very terrible job. He paid them more than
what was market rate and we have been the ones to suffer the consequences. So, I
just say that because that's where a lot of our frustration is coming from in addition to
this density issue and the congestion that's going to be contributed by this proposal.
You know, this isn't a standalone development.
Simison: Marcy, your time has expired. If you can wrap up.
Sutcliffe: Okay. Okay. Sure. You know, it's -- it's not a standalone. We have the
Bridgetower apartments that are approved. We have other subdivisions down the road.
The congestion is going to be astronomical. So, having said that I appreciate your time.
I appreciate the ability to speak and look forward to, you know, a good outcome.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Next go to Bobbie Jo online.
Beck: Hi. This is Bobbie Beck. I live at 4187 West Philomena Drive. I'm in the
Bridgetower West Subdivision as well and I just wanted to bring up the consideration
about the overcrowding of the local schools. Pleasant View Elementary is currently
within the boundaries of Bridgetower West and it is sitting, as of February, at a 202
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 20 of 45
percent capacity going into the 2027 elementary school year. So, a year from now
based on the projections of current developments that are already approved. This
school is -- the school zones are changing temporarily for this next school year. It is
splitting our community in half where they are sending half of the elementary kids that
are half of our subdivision to another school that's outside of our subdivision, outside of
our neighborhood and so that's what this kind of -- having a kid who is in the elementary
schools, I think it's really important to take into consideration what all of these
developments are doing to the schools. They -- 202 percent capacity for an elementary
school. That is -- I mean that's just insane and that is -- that is a report as of February
of 2025 put out by West Ada. So, I just -- I just want to bring that up, so that you guys
are taking that into consideration when you are making this decision. Our kids matter.
Simison: Thank you very much. Council, any questions? Is there anybody else first
who hasn't spoken yet that would like to come forward at this time or online use the
raise your hand feature. Okay. Would the lady who would like to make another
comment like to come forward? Okay. We can't get it on the record, so you either need
to come up or understand that you may not remember what it was referencing and I
appreciate that, so -- all right. If there is no one else seeking to testify, ask the applicant
to, please, come close.
Clark: Hey, everybody. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise. So, a couple -- I
will start with a couple of the questions that came up. One was the question of the
spacing for the light over on Ten Mile. We have reviewed that with ACHD. The spacing
would not preclude that traffic light. It really is just a question of the warrant and, as we
mentioned, when that traffic study is done, once those uses are identified, then, that's
when that would be evaluated once again. With regard to water, this is a -- you know, a
familiar one that the Council has heard me talk about way too many times. I -- we --
when we develop cannot interrupt the delivery of water rights for our neighbors. Water
rights run with the ground. Those water rights will be allocated. To the extent that they
are coming from the south we wouldn't have anything to do with that, because we don't
have any of that property to the south. The property -- to the extent that there is
delivery from our side, it's currently in ditches and so we would be tiling that. So, in fact,
the delivery would be more efficient as a result of all this and we will not be boxing them
out from -- from their water. I think -- maybe the last thing and maybe the thing that
maybe has the most impact here -- as I mentioned before, this -- you know, this -- we do
believe that this provides kind of the completion of the puzzle. It completes the grid. It
provides that mid-mile collector. It's in-fill in a very real sense. But another element of
this that I think is important is that when we look at how folks are going to use their
property, there is kind of these different phases of how we make these decisions. The
first phase is when we do the comprehensive planning and that is really when people
come into the room, raise their hand and it's that more kind of political process. We set
that policy and, then, decide how things are going to be decided moving forward. From
there we, then, have a pattern that's in place and that tells property owners what they
can do with their property. It tells neighbors what they should expect with their -- for
their -- for their neighbors to do with their property and what people can do with their
own. So, in this case I just think it's important to emphasize that this property has been
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 21 of 45
comp planned mixed use commercial. We have chosen to put the density on the very
low end of mixed use commercial, but still stay within what the city has planned for here.
And as I understand it, that prior application didn't -- that has been referenced a few
times, did not make it to Council. It was withdrawn and it was withdrawn in part
because it didn't have enough density and so there was a recommendation for denial,
because it didn't match the Comprehensive Plan. So, what we are hoping to just
emphasize here and maybe give the Council a little support is -- is that there is a plan.
The plan is mixed use commercial. We have proposed single family residential, not
multi-family, on this property at the very low end of the density and we would ask for
your approval on it. So, any other questions I'm happy to -- to respond to?
Simison: Thank you. Council, questions -- additional questions for the applicant? You
may get a break for a minute, but I wouldn't go very far.
Clark: Okay.
Simison: My guess is we are not done having questions, but --
Clark: Okay. I will stand by and so go sit down and stand by, though, I'm assuming;
right?
Simison: I would think so. For the moment, yeah.
Clark: Okay. I will. Thanks.
Strader: Mr. Mayor? Sorry, Hethe.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Already got one for you. So, if I'm looking at your application and it says it's
been approved by the Bridgetower HOA -- or is being supported by the Bridgetower
HOA, is that referring to this one individual that's controlling the Bridgetower HOA
board? I just kind of want to get clear on that, because usually when I see an HOA has
approved something -- that's okay, we don't need commentary from the back yet at this
point. What does that mean? Help me understand that.
Clark: Check one. I would just want to make sure I give you a very precise answer on
this.
Simison: And just for process, technically the -- we are into the final point where there
won't be additional comments, unless Council wants additional comments, because the
developer does have the right to complete the -- complete it and we won't go back and
forth, unless we reopen the conversation.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 22 of 45
Clark: And, Council Member Strader, I just wanted to check, because I didn't recall that
being an affirmative statement that the Bridgetower HOA approved it. So, is that
something that you are referencing in the application or --
Strader: Yeah. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I believe so. I think I -- I believe I heard Linda also reference that in her initial
presentation, but maybe I have that wrong. Okay. So, is anyone representing that the
Bridgetower HOA board is supportive of this application today?
Clark: Not that I'm aware of, Councilman.
Strader: Okay. Interesting. Thank you. That's helpful.
Clark: Okay. And I mean I'm happy to answer any follow-up questions on that.
Obviously, it's an independent application --
Strader: Yeah.
Clark: -- and, you know, one of the benefits, as we mentioned before, is we can provide
that preliminary plat to get them their park.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: We all understand that, but I just wanted to understand what you are
representing that the Bridgetower HOA board has or has not done. So, that's helpful.
Thank you.
Ritter: Mayor?
Simison: Yes, Linda.
Ritter: Just for clarification on the city side. The only thing that I mentioned was the
park -- that they will be deeding back to the HOA. So, no, nothing about their approval
or recommended approval of any part of this application.
Strader: Thank you, Linda.
Simison: Well, let us see if we -- if the Council would like to take additional comments
once we get through this process. And -- yeah. And, again, we are -- the -- these are
quasi-judicial. They have a process that has to be followed, so my job is to make sure
the process is followed for everyone involved. Is the -- this is the final comments for the
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 23 of 45
developer. If Council wants to take additional comments we will do that afterwards and,
then, give them another opportunity after that, but --
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Hethe, what is the current size of the park that will be 10.2
acres that is turned over to them? Am I understanding that correct that those are two
different sizes?
Clark: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Little Roberts, that's correct, yes. So, on the area
kind of on the east side of the park there is some additional green space, some
cottonwoods, that -- you know, those types of trees that are over there. It's our
understanding that that was kind of a holding element, but the -- I don't have a specific
acreage number for you, but we were careful to go with the 10.2, because we wanted to
make sure it was consistent with the development agreement.
Little Roberts: Okay. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Just want to be clear about the park and make sure everyone has
expectations that are appropriate. I heard a lot of discussion about rolling hills, usable
space, you -- your application would turn over control of the park to the HOA board as it
is today; correct?
Clark: That's correct, Council Member Strader.
Strader: Okay. And does not include any type of improvements of a park?
Clark: All of the existing improvements.
Strader: Sure. But there is nothing changing in its condition. Okay.
Simison: Ma'am, again, I understand, but we are here to have a conversation with the
developer right now -- or the applicant.
Clark: Yeah. Mr. Conger was just reminding me that there will be -- when we do that
collector that it will feed into that southern portion of the park. That regional pathway
will come in and interface with it, but that's really the only place that we are touching the
landscaping, other than the cutting it up -- cutting it off to -- to be -- allow it to be
conveyed.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 24 of 45
Simison: Council, do you have any more questions for the applicant right now and/or
would you like to hear from the community again on this topic? Okay. Then take a seat.
We have two people -- one -- three. You guys all fight amongst yourselves, but I'm
going to ask you to keep it -- keep it to anything new or -- new that you have heard, not
reiterating the same points that we have already listened to, if there is clarifying
questions, comments that are relevant. And state your name and address for the
record.
Boyle: Richard Boyle. 5430 North Botticelli Avenue. They are going to turn it over to
the HOA, but the residents don't have an HOA. It still belongs to -- I forget the
gentleman's name. The developer. So, they are taking it from him and they are going
to give it back to him. I don't see a benefit there and if you look at your map, as you can
see that dark green spot, that is our pond. Yep. Everything to the left is rolling hills.
That area all over there is all rolling hills. There is a small basketball court just -- right
there. And everything to the right that's the pool. That darker green shade right there,
that is the part that will all be gone. From there straight up it will leave a strip maybe 50
feet wide between the retention pond and the new subdivision. So, I guess my biggest
concern is -- give it back to the HOA, but we can't have one yet, because our developer
won't turn it over to us. So, I'm not sure how we go about that, but that might be
another fight for another day obviously. This developer, as someone said, has really
-- really done us dirty I feel, but that's, again, another issue. Thank you again for your
time.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any follow-up questions? Okay. All right.
Wycoff: John Wycoff. 5099 North Bolsena Avenue and earlier in his comment when he
was up here, the developer, on this area, stated kind of like, well, we might get access
to the park. Any of you remember sharing that at all? He said there might be an
agreement where they would have access to the park and be able to -- no? I guess I --
maybe I'm hearing things, but that's what he was saying and that is because Mike
McCollum is going to work something out for his benefit. He is the one person and only
person that's going to get the vote any change to our park here that we have thought we
have had access to. So, that's one important to understand. One person is going to get
to dictate what 500 people in the community are going to have to live with. Not you, but
five -- you know, that one person. So -- and the other thing he said that the water right
that we have that comes from the -- McMillan halfway -- that green stripe going all the
way across over towards the park, that is McCollum waterway. I think he just said they
are going to tile it. Is that what he was saying? Is it going to be tiled?
Simison: Yes.
Wycoff: Because as I look at it's going underneath a whole bunch of homes. So, it's not
going to be tiled, unless he is talking a big tube. But, then, there is a potential for you
know, usually within the cities if there is water access for people it's going in at the back
of people's homes, underlying -- underlying their fences. So, I just -- my -- that's my
question. Where is this water line going to be going so that we can have access to our
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 25 of 45
water, which we should be filling our lake with? So, that's all I wanted to ask. Make
sure you are -- Mike is going to get to control McCollum waterway that -- McCollum --
call it.
Simison: However, we will let the developer respond to that, but there is -- water law is
deep in Idaho. Water is protected. Access is going to be received. I don't want to be
the legal attorney to tell you that your water will be protected. You have my personal
guarantee, whether that's of value to you or not. Your water will be delivered from the
irrigation.
Wycoff: Okay. Just want to make sure of that, because that's a big thing. I mean --
Simison: Water law is king and irrigation districts do not look kindly on people who don't
deliver the water to where it needs to go.
Wycoff: But we don't really even have access, because we don't have the HOA. This is
HOA's water and he does control -- being McCollum, owner of the HOA, not -- you
know, of that one property -- the one property controlling 501 properties that's -- okay.
Thank you very much.
Simison: Thank you. Madam, come forward.
Fritschle: Hi -- hi again. My name is Patricia Fritschle and I apologize for any outburst
that I might have had. I get really upset with lies. I'm just going to say it. Lies. I
believe, Ms. Strader, you had asked if our park -- from what you are seeing was going to
be touched and if -- you are going to have all the information. It is going to be greatly
reduced. Not only that, but we have a tree line to the back of that park that goes up to
that field. All of those trees have been expressed by the developer that they will be
removed. Not replanted, but just removed. So, they not only are going to take away a
huge portion of that green space, but they are also taking away trees that we have been
maintaining and caring for since the inception of that space and so I just think if you
guys are going to have the information you should have the actual information and if
they are not going to change our park and that space is no longer an issue, because it's
going to stay whole, I don't think that's the case, because you can see the outline of the
houses, but all of that space is going to be gone, which is part of our park, as well as
those trees. So, thank you. And, again, I apologize. I don't mean to be disrespectful. I
just -- appreciate it. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Parsons: Mayor, Council, as the developer comes back up -- or the applicant comes
back up to testify again, I just wanted to go on the record and say that the -- the park will
shrink. The current configuration the park is actually larger than what's required in the
development agreement and the developer did that on his own dime to make it bigger.
So, I was able to quickly map out the acreage of the park as it's currently constructed
and its about 13.3 acres and the DA only requires 10.2. So, that area is going to shrink
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 26 of 45
back down to what was approved in the development agreement for that subdivision,
which is, again, 10.2 acres.
Simison: So, Bill, do you happen know -- is -- so, is the acreage of the park currently on
-- in a lot or is it on someone else's property and --
Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, it is on the developer's own property. It's an
S parcel. So, it's just a parcel of land. Would love to give you a history lesson on the
property if you want. I was -- I have been part of all of it, so -- I have touched it from tip
to toe, so -- originally this property -- as Linda mentioned this property did annex into the
city and develop -- had a preliminary plat approved back in 2005. That previous
developer allowed that -- that project to expire. They never started the process with us
and so in -- when the economy had changed back in '08, '09, this particular current
developer Mike McCollum bought the property from Frank Vareal and he came back
and he is like I want to do exactly what we got approved in 2005 and so that's why when
you look at Bridgetower West and Bridgetower East or Volterra North or Volterra South,
whatever you want to call the project, there is a north portion and a southern portion and
each property had its own park. The southern portion had a 3.2 acre park, or 3.6 acre
park. This site had the 10.2 acre park. The pond was always part of that, along with the
clubhouse and the pool that currently sits on that park. What happened was Mike --
when he was building out the -- the multiple phases, the DA specified the timing for the
completion of the park and it was 495th lot if I remember correctly, somewhere in that
neighborhood and if I'm not mistaken Volterra North's plat was upwards almost 700 lots.
That -- that subdivision was 600 plus lots. So, you can see the developer was able to
go a long way into the development before the park was constructed. But Mike, in his
wisdom of building the subdivision, came to the city and said I want to build the park
before I subdivide it, because I think that's an important amenity and so he built all of
Gondola, the road -- the collector road that fed the whole development. He built a
clubhouse. He built the park before it was even required in the DA. He did that on his
own dime to do that. Now, for whatever reason why he has never turned it over I can't
speak to that. I meet with Mike on a regular basis and I know he still controls a lot of
land in our community, but what I can tell you is his heart was in the right place when he
put in those amenities and I don't know why he overbuilt the park to 13 acres, but he did
that because he wanted to make sure that those homeowners had someplace to
recreate. So, now back in 2022 Hethe is correct, Mike did bring forward another
application and it went to Planning and Zoning Commission and they had recommended
denial, because at the -- at that time it wasn't a density concern, it was mostly -- we
were losing some of the employment that we thought we would -- would get here,
because keep in mind when this area was changed and under the current development
agreement there was a hospital plan for this and with that hospital comes all of the
medical uses that come with it. So, again, the city envisioned an employment center
almost like a Silverstone on this particular corner and that's not -- and now it's been --
since 2008, since that plan's in place and now we are at 2000 -- or 2025 and it has not
happened and the hospital is not happening. So, Mike is now partnering with this
developer and trying to make sure -- to size it right, meet the current mixed use
standards, provide that mix of office, commercial, services and additional residential as
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 27 of 45
part of that overall mixed use development. And so I'm sorry we are getting kind of in
the weeds of what's transpired on the other property and I know we are just because of
the fact that they are trying to make it right. We are trying to get the park platted, so that
we can finally turn it over to the HOA and give them control of their neighborhood.
That's really the key component here is that is the end goal with this subdivision. I have
asked the applicant the same question, how do you see that working? Because I'm
concerned and they said we are going to plat the park and as soon as the park is
platted it's getting turned over to the HOA. It's part of a common lot. And I said, okay,
let's make sure that that happens, because we have got to get this issue cleared up.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I appreciate the context. I guess I would just caution you not to make
assumptions about the motivation of a different applicant, like whether their heart is in
the right place or not, because from what -- I'm not feeling that their heart was in the
right place right now personally. We can't fix the situation. But all due respect like what
I'm hearing is the park will be turned over to an HOA board that's controlled by one
single developer. So, I'm not getting that same comfort level from that. I just want to
share that feedback. I -- we can't litigate or fix their HOA board. That is going to be I
think a civil issue that needs to be dealt with, but I guess that's all I would say is let's --
let's just not make any assumptions about people's motivations or what they will or won't
do at this point.
Parsons: Yeah. Council Woman Strader, I agree with you. I was just trying to imply
that the amenities went in sooner rather than later, which was a good thing for that
community and for the city.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Can we go to -- so this is a follow up directly -- can we go to Marcy who also
wanted to make some additional comments online.
Johnson: Marcy, you should be able to speak now.
Sutcliffe: Sorry about that. Marcy Sutcliffe. 4085 West Ravenna Street. And I just
have a point of clarification. I may be incorrect, but it's been stated that the new
proposed subdivision will not have any access to our park, but if I'm not mistaken it
appears that at the northwest corner of this subdivision where it enters into our -- it
looks like there is a pedestrian access and that it's part of the flow for traffic -- or not --
not car traffic, but actual pedestrian or residential traffic from the proposed subdivision
into our park area. So, I just would like clarification on that as to whether or not I'm
misunderstanding that.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 28 of 45
Simison: Well, we can have the applicant clarify that comment when it's -- when we are
there. Mr. Overton.
Overton: Mr. Mayor, I just -- Bill, I wanted to thank you for giving us a little bit more of
the history understanding this. It's not common that we run into a situation that has this
much history that's caused this much frustration over the years. I just want to thank you
both for what you presented and understanding to the folks that are here. We are not
debating that this has been handled well by the original developer or the second
developer. We are talking about tonight's development and that's what we need to keep
our focus on today, because that's what we are here to decide and the history that you
gave us is extremely important in trying to make sure that we make the right decision
tonight and I appreciate it.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: If we have ACHD on the phone before the applicant wraps, I would love to
hear from them just to get their perspective on timing for the TIS, the likelihood of a
signal eventually being put in here and some more of that -- just some context from
them.
Johnson: Rebecca, you should be able to unmute.
Strader: ACHD are you out there?
Simison: There -- she -- they are trying. The microphone goes on and off, but --
Johnson: Rebecca, you have control to unmute. I can't do anything from this end.
Simison: You maybe see about if she can call in. It's been a long time since we had a
phone call. But that might be a way to -- if we are having troubles with technology. So,
while we are waiting I'm going to throw out a really bad idea to both maybe the
neighbors, maybe the developer, but I will let you discuss it and maybe our
departments. Do we have -- oh, our parks director is on. Could you turn the park over
to the city to make it a public park? It meets size -- size guidelines for a public park, but
that impacts the HOA as well for it to become public. Food for thought. Bad idea? I
don't know who makes those determinations on how it's deeded to whom and where
and how that works with development components, but to just put it out there in some
context if there is a dialog around that or not.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 29 of 45
Strader: I will just chime in. That would sort of solve this concern about it going to an
HOA board controlled by one person. So, it's creative. That's a creative solution worth
talking about. Trying to decide if that would help.
Simison: Rebecca, you are unmuted. Are you able to speak? I -- I don't know if we are
going to get ACHD this one.
Johnson: We got her now.
Phillips: Can you guys hear me?
Simison: There we are.
Phillips: Oh, my gosh. All right. Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor, Madam -- or Council
Members. Rebecca Phillips here from ACHD. So, you know, basically, on this one the
-- the traffic impact study that has been submitted really just recommends the applicant
extend the northbound right turn lane 175 feet beyond the existing 450 foot striped right
turn lane at the US 26 -- 20-26 Chinden Boulevard and Ten Mile Road. So,
unfortunately, because we don't have that second traffic impact study on what that
commercial -- that 44 commercial lot is going to -- how it's going to affect that area, we
just can't -- we are just not able to make any presumptions at this time. However, I will
note that it is not prohibited that we have two mid-mile stop lights. That's not something
that's going to be prohibited. Of course, it's going to need to meet warrants, but that is
something that will definitely come out of that traffic impact study and, you know, I guess
that's where we kind of stand at this moment.
Simison: Thank you. Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you so much, Rebecca. Just help me
understand what the requirements would be to put in a light that would control traffic?
Phillips: Yeah. And I'm not actually the best person to ask that question. I'm a
transportation planner, so that usually comes from like our traffic engineer department
and, you know, I'm not actually sure what those -- those matrix are as to what they are
looking for. I'm certainly happy to get that information and report back to you guys if -- if
that's something that you would like me to do I'm happy to do that.
Simison: Mr. Hood, do you know off the top of your head what the current warrants
are? Okay. Any further questions for Rebecca at this time? And would the applicant
like to come forward.
Conger: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, Jim Conger, 4824 West Fairview Avenue. I
thought I would come up instead of Hethe, because most of these items now are really
down to developer questions and the existing developer, who I have had a hundred
percent of the contact with as far as my team goes. So, I will hit through a couple things
and save the HOA and the park turnover for last. The TIS -- I think, Mr. Mayor and
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 30 of 45
Council Member Strader, if I may address -- is -- I don't think we did a good job of
saying the TIS was done for the submittal, it just didn't have any of the commercial,
which I think you understood. So, the TIS right now that was done at full build out of
residential doesn't hit the warrants for a traffic signal. As you heard ACHD, the -- the
TIS that we submitted did trigger some warrants of extending the turn lane and that's
actually on Ten Mile into this collector road. So, TIS was done. I think it is standard
course of business when the final -- first final plat of the commercial comes in and its
uses, it will follow, rightfully, so with a TIS involved with that. Residential RTIS will just
carry on through our final plat phases. As far as matrix, we do know a bit and you
probably don't care of our developer opinion instead ACHD's would be better, but one of
the majority matrix of that is really the traffic on the major arterial -- in this case Ten Mile.
It -- there is influence in -- when we do these studies of merit of what's coming into Ten
Mile, but a bulk of what -- what covers the -- finally hitting a merit is the traffic at Ten Mile
and just Ten Mile is not in a position to hit that merit yet. I think what neighbors and
what we have seen -- and several of you Council Members were here when we did
Stapleton out on the Meridian-Kuna Highway at Amity. We didn't hit merits there either,
but we actually -- and what will happen here is we get the benefit of the traffic signal
that's not very far away in that particular case and it will be the same here. When that
turns red there really isn't any new traffic coming onto the road, so this intersection by
right is going to have a de facto benefit of that -- of that traffic signal and we have
proved that out over and over again at Stapleton. It's when -- I'm there a hundred times
a year; right? And it's -- and that's what ends up happening. Moving to the irrigation
pipe. Obviously we have -- I mean state of Idaho has code that we have got to provide
-- and we will tile. I prefer to say the word pipe, because everybody knows what pipe
means and it's more efficient than an open ditch. What never happens in land
development and is not the requirement is it doesn't go in the exact same location the
ditch is in today. Those are relocatable per state -- state code and we do have our
buffer, which is the buffer on our north boundary that we put that amazing walk path in
that gets to Heroes Park. The piping is also up in there. It is not in yards and it's not
under houses, of course. So, it is being relocated. Their irrigation system will have
better delivery than it is today and as much as we all love farmers, when we have a
farmer upstream of delivery -- I mean I fight it every day, the farmer doesn't really care
about the rules as -- their water delivery will get better. Southwest corner. Some
discussion of -- we shouldn't access and certainly, Mr. Mayor, and Council Member
Strader, we -- we have made the commitment to every -- all of our neighborhood
meetings was we don't want your people in our park. That is the age old -- we had that
at Verrado. I mean it just kind of the age old problem. We don't -- we have got a little
more of your mindset, that it is probably not all that healthy to have that complete divide
of line. We said, hey, we will propose no pathways. So, that corner that looks like a
pathway is actually a sewer and a water easement. That's the only way to get sewer
into the neighborhood. It does -- our sewer does not go to the north and we proposed
and you currently had a project in front of you, there is no sidewalk in that path. In
theory there probably should be, but there is no sidewalk, because we tried to hit as
many things as we could with the executive board and in neighborhood meetings. So,
hopefully, that answers that. Now, on the park turnover, the gentleman is absolutely
correct, you can go -- you know, our responsible charge -- because it's on the residential
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 31 of 45
side -- I -- in our sale I didn't have to ask very hard, but we knew this was going to be a
number one item. So, we put this park in our preliminary plat, this park area, and it is
currently owned by two different developers. Both developers have common interest of
the mic -- maybe you have heard, but -- so, nothing can be simple as one. We have got
-- it's got to be on top of two different land ownerships of course. But that's not an issue.
It's in our preliminary plat. We are going to do -- we, as in Conger Group, is going to do
a stand-alone plat that is just the park area and that can get through the system fairly
expeditious I would assume between your staff and our staff. That is not going to be in
control of the other developer. I have to get his signature on the plat -- on that final plat
and I have had numerous meetings with this developer and there is no desire not to turn
that over. So, we -- the method is the final plat gets going immediately, which probably
will mess up our phase one, phase two plat numbering of other conditions, so I think if
everybody knows that the plat goes first for the park, it will just change our conditions to
phase two and phase three. Point of that being -- and the gentleman had an excellent
point and I already know this answer -- is, hey, that's great. Now, the park is in a legal
parcel which we have got to get it to a legal parcel. I have the commitment of our seller,
which is the previous developer, that this HOA will be turned over. I mean I'm not
running a final -- a preliminary and, then, final plat to just have it. He had -- and I'm not
defending anybody. Developers typically keep -- when they have additional phases, the
HOAs don't get turned over, because it becomes a little bit difficult for a developer for
sure. So, I get the principle. What's not right for these neighbors is that that's just gone
abnormally in an odd long time and that's -- that's -- we haven't seen a lot of that. But,
to be honest, I have been in front of you before with some 2008 properties. It's just
been a long time since I have been in front of you with a 2008 greatest recession in
history of property. So, we do know there is a couple dirty items that need cleaned.
They will get cleaned and they will get cleaned by Conger Group and -- and signed by
the other developer. So, that I'm guaranteeing. So, the HOA will get turned over. I
think with that, unless you have further questions, I think I wrote down -- I mean you
needed Hethe to come back up and re-educate what an amazing --
Simison: I think Council Woman Strader wants you.
Strader: Yep. I do. Thank you, Mr. Conger. Help me understand your comment. You
just said the HOA will be turned over. What do you mean by that?
Conger: Excellent. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader. So, the homeowners
association, which is a legal entity, they are correct -- is still controlled -- I'm going to say
mostly and I haven't read a bunch of documents, so I'm not -- and I'm not going to play
attorney. That is still controlled by the Mike McCollum that they are saying, the previous
developer. So, I think all that's factual. So, for -- for the turnover it's -- it's normal.
When we get to the end of our developments -- and we do probably one a year -- you --
you -- you create -- the entities change to new board members. So, you have a
meeting. You have engaged folks like the folks that are here that are engaged. They --
so, we have to have a board of directors meeting. We -- I mean there are two or three
pretty legal steps. We have a professional HOA management company every time run
us through the steps. Our board members, which are usually my employees and things
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 32 of 45
of that nature when it's ours, are all at this meeting and, you know, we are only as good
as our last neighborhood, so we want pretty successful turnovers. So, this -- I mean as
far as the method of this goes it will be identical to every -- you know, we do one a year
when we are at a final phase. So, it will be turned over to the HOA and there will be
new board members that are running the -- the HOA. Now --
Strader: Mr. Mayor. Are you talking about the HOA associated with this property or are
you referring to their HOA? Are you referring to turning over this plat to their HOA
board? Do you have reason to believe that will be turned over to them? Is that what
you are saying? I'm confused about which HOA board you are referring to.
Conger: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I'm embarrassed. I thought we were only
talking about their HOA. I should have clarified.
Strader: That's okay. I just want to understand.
Conger: We -- Conger Group is going to do a one lot final plat. Our preliminary plat
needs to get approved. Then Conger Group is going to do a one lot plat that's just their
park area that, then, once that become -- and you probably know how long a plat takes.
I mean it takes eight months to run a -- it's got to come in front of the Council. We got to
do a bunch of work. I got to go to Central District Health. I got to go to the City of
Meridian. Got to go to Ada County Highway District. And I got to go to Ada county. So,
in eight months'ish I will get a recorded plat that now has a parcel and a lot number that
is able to be -- get deeded. So, it will get deeded over to the HOA. That's step one.
Step two is to have this meeting and convert and turn over the HOA itself -- forget about
the park. It's already part of the HOA. But the gentleman is right, it's great, give it to the
HOA, but if the HOA didn't get turned over it's still not turned over. Our seller has -- and
I'm speaking for him and I'm very comfortable doing it. Our seller has no desire to keep
this HOA. He was keeping this HOA until the property adjacent to it -- his original intent
was to keep putting these under the same HOA. Our first requirement, when I was
buying the residential portion of this, is, hey, we need a split of HOAs and so this HOA
will get turned over as soon as that park gets through its final plat recordation and, then,
it probably takes two or three weeks after that.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Do you think you have a good enough relationship with the seller that you
could get a letter from them that the city could be a party to that would memorialize this
understanding that upon the final plat being delivered to him, if it hasn't already
happened, that he will turn the HOA over to these homeowners? Do you think that
that's something that you could -- I understand that's not your responsibility, but is that
something you could do?
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 33 of 45
Conger: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader, I feel we are part of this project now, so I
do feel it is part of my responsibility. I think I can get something in writing. I don't have
something in writing. I have handshake agreements and faces. I mean everybody
knows -- as one gentleman said, why does he still want it? Well, he still wants it
because he has got land that's adjacent to it and it doesn't have a legal parcel here. He
couldn't get rid of it tomorrow if he wanted to. It's sitting currently on 45 acres and three
acres; right? I said it was two parcels. So, currently it's on about 50 acres of land and
it's not parceled out. So, could I get something in writing? I think so.
Strader: Okay.
Conger: Will I get it to the finish line? I know so.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I -- where I'm going with it is I have been hearing about issues with this
HOA board and rumors about it for a long time. It's not in my district, but it's right next to
my district and you have got like 500 really ticked off people that are just completely I
think at their wit's end with not having control of their HOA board. This is a tough
application. You know, it's already been annexed into the city. You know, I
acknowledge that. It's an increase in density. The traffic situation is really tough. I
would feel much better about this if I thought we could get a resolution and a light at the
end of the tunnel for these folks on their HOA board being turned over to them, an end
date to that, you know, whether that's at the time that the park gets turned over --
hopefully before; right? But if not before maybe at that point. I'm just trying to think
creatively about how to -- how to turn this into a win-win.
Simison: And to kind of piggyback off of that, you know, I don't want to litigate this up
here, but is this the last piece of parcel? When he sells it does he actually have any
interest in the board or are there other parcels that he still controls that he would be able
to -- that's why I'm like at what point in time when this is sold does he even have any
authority or not. Was it in -- are you now a member of the HOA, because you own the
parcel?
Conger: Mr. --
Simison: Temporarily. And that's why I'm like, you know --
Conger: For sure.
Simison: -- trying to follow bouncing balls.
Conger: No. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the raw land is not part of the HOA,
so I do not have any portion of it and he does, as we said, still owns the one residential
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 34 of 45
lot within the confines of those plats. That is what he is. And, again, probably like about
any --
Simison: That at least answers my question that this park is not the linchpin unless he
wants it to be a linchpin.
Conger: Yeah. Now, in fairness, by de facto, I think we all know the state code just
changed and -- with HOAs, so there will be -- I mean if nothing happened -- I don't know
if Mr. Nary will correct me if I'm wrong, but if -- if he were to do nothing, which that will
not happen or I won't be able to move forward, the state -- new state code is, you know,
once you get to 95 percent built out you are not able to keep one last lot. So, he would
trigger under the new state code that's going to --
Simison: Does he trigger or is he grandfathered under the existing law? I don't know
the answer to that one.
Conger: I don't know that answer either, Mr. Mayor. I didn't read a grandfather clause
and I did read parts of it, but --
Simison: It's the state legislature, so I'm not going to pretend to know and understand.
Council, additional comments, questions, for the developer?
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Conger, thank you. Had mention of trees that will be
coming down with the three acres -- or approximately three acres being split off. Is
there any opportunity to give them kind of a finished product between the park and your
new homes being built?
Conger: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Roberts, we have worked hard with the
executive committee. A majority of the trees -- again, they were just trash trees, that
were going to grow big to give him some vertical elevation cottonwood. So, we have
had our arborist go through every tree in question and our landscaper, who would be --
do the relocation. We do a lot of relocations. Out of -- out of the -- I mean all the
cottonwoods and the trash trees, no one will relocate and nor do we want to. There are
a handful of -- of good trees that we are going to relocate. We have already given this
to the executive board. I really want to be careful what they are, because they probably
are just an executive board of the HOA for the previous developer, along with 20 -- 15
new trees. I mean -- so, we have already done that behind the scenes with the
executive committee for sure. So, that -- that -- and that's been discussed I think in one
of the HOA meetings, too, but --
Little Roberts: Great. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 35 of 45
Whitlock: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Whitlock.
Whitlock: Mr. Conger, maybe just a statement of where my head is and what I'm
thinking and then -- then a question. I'm a believer that the Comprehensive Plan means
something and when we have that plan out there you should have some expectations
as a developer of what you can or can't do relative to a parcel or a property that you
purchase. So, that's my first statement. My second statement is I love the concept of
the 15 minute city and I think if there is any place in Meridian where you can walk and
access schools, shopping, the amenities and I appreciate the points on the amenities
that you have in -- in this development. I think -- I think you have hit the nail on the
head when it comes to the 15 minute city and locating these homes and this commercial
development in this part of the city. So, I applaud you for that. I'm still sitting here kind
of struggling with Mr. Clark's statement of maybe setting a record for the number of
meetings that you have had to have with the city to work through all of that. I don't know
if it's a matter of a square peg in a round hole or why we had to have a record number
of meetings. I hear the neighbors and I hear the concerns. Most of those are centered
outside of what you are trying to do. They are centered with the relationship with the
current controller of the homeowners association. But, again, I'm just -- I'm wondering
the number of meetings, the number of issues that you have had to resolve. Tonight as
I read through the record and -- and came to this meeting there were still some
conditions that had not been fully agreed to and Mr. Clark's testimony tonight was phone
calls today -- as late as today and in his testimony he said he had agreed to those final
conditions 1-G, 1-P and 1-U and -- and so, again, the project could move forward. But
can you just give me some comfort? Have -- have you rounded the edges on that
square peg to the point where this does fit?
Conger: No. Excellent question, Mr. Mayor, Council Member Whitlock. I think it's not --
not this round -- round hole-square peg scenario, it's this is a mixed use project. In all
reality it's two projects in one. So, we have taken a very complex commercial project,
we have brought in a mediumly complex residential project and had to come to some
agreement. So, I don't believe it's trying to -- trying to fit a spot. I mean we have
worked through -- and I mean let's just focus on the residential for one second. I think
we have debated over two items in eight months. I mean there wasn't much; right? So,
they -- we came in, we have been very blessed by this council to come in on the lower
end of the comp plan when we have these -- this is an aggressive comp plan here. I
think neighbors don't quite understand what can be done here or what should be done
by the comp plan. We have been very lucky to come to Council and come in on the
short end of density. I don't want to get myself into a denial, but we are at seven units
and comp plan wants to split the difference and be at 12; right? I mean -- so, we
thought we would have that luxury of bringing in the low density, the single family for
sale. We are as close to a max. We are not the same lot sizes, but we couldn't get less
or we won't meet the comp plan. So, that really wasn't a lot of debate. We put a
beautiful buffer on the north boundary. That's why we didn't have to worry about lot
sizes. That's the other regional path that no -- everybody should be going oohing and
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 36 of 45
ahhing over, because that goes right to Heroes Park for both neighborhoods. We don't
care which neighborhood walks on that pathway. Our people -- our HOA will maintain it.
So, from a residential standpoint no problem. Now, we come to the commercial and,
again, Hethe had mentioned this collector road is -- is an amazing tool for finishing off
really four square miles, but let's call it two square miles to be safe. But it's also an
amazing buffer between the two. So, our uses -- so, we had to get that right. We like
the circuitous, because we think it will also be a little bit of traffic mitigation as well. But
it was to get the commercial to the right size of what we thought. So, the commercial in
-- in unfortunate wisdom of a previous developer in '05 and '04, to get Walmart there
during the great recession of '08, he gave away the farm on deed restricted and that
commercial is so deed restricted it's this thick. So, again, staff has been nothing but
amazing. I have been a little bit pushing back. They have been a little bit pushing back.
And I'm the one to blame out of my team for that. We already -- and, again, I'm fighting
for the -- I will not retain the commercial, but I have -- to get this project approved -- and
this developer would not mind it sitting longer. We don't want it to sit longer. The HOA
-- current members shouldn't want it to sit longer. I had to get a commercial approval
that was acceptable to our seller. It already has deed restrictions this thick from
Walmart. We can barely -- he can barely do anything on it. Then I get staff kind of
starting to put another layer of restrictions. I mean at some point we need to get a
project approved that's going to be amazing for the city, but also survive and not
become second tier really -- I mean garbage commercial property. So, from that
standpoint 85 or 90 percent -- they can correct me if I'm wrong -- were all commercial
conditions that we had to work our way through to what is right for the city and what is
right -- not for me, not for the developer, what is also right for the city and usable
products. So, two projects in one made it very big. We were going to split them and
come in with two projects. We just got done doing a mixed use with this Council earlier
where we only had the residential, because our seller didn't want to go in, we felt
everybody was a little bit upset we didn't have the commercial with that. Here we come
in with one that is commercial and I'm getting questioned of maybe it's not right. I mean
it's hard. And we need the most viable commercial -- the city needs the most viable -- I
mean we don't want garbage. We don't want whatever garbage is. But -- and you are
only -- you are only going to have a little bit of second tier office. That's just not viable.
So, it was super important. I think Keith hit that part on the head. Super important to
get the right condition. Because what we do see is if you just get a bunch of bad
conditions in there just -- he is going to be in front of you with five DA mods in the next
seven years and that's not healthy for anybody either and what the commercial user
needs is an approved preliminary plat and that way their final plat, traffic studies and the
last of the conditions in the final plats, can all come in about a five month process. If we
didn't put them in our preliminary plat they would have an 18 month process like we
have right now to get to a preliminary plat, then, a final plat and you will never get a
commercial user. They won't wait that long. So, it's -- I think it's complex. I think we
have done an amazing job. I know your staff has done an amazing job. It's just there
was a lot of getting it right.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 37 of 45
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: Mr. Conger, I almost want to ask you if you had a chance to go back in time if
you would touch this piece of property, because it's been sitting there for 20 years since
it was annexed into the city and we have got a room full of people that are really
frustrated with somebody who is not here who caused all this grief that put you in the
position. They are really not mad at anybody in here. I know you are venting at City
Council, you are venting at developers, but the problem is the person you are really
upset at isn't even here, so we find ourselves sitting here with a development that's
been trying through multiple meetings to make this work with the city, who has had to do
a tremendous amount of modifications -- and I like looking at the transportation
solutions of the collector streets that this is going to bring to help alleviate all the traffic
coming out at one way. Now, it won't be until phase two or phase three, if the phases
change, that that second stretch will be built, but if it wasn't for the fact that we look at
future planning, we would never get anything done in this city, because that's how we do
things. We have to look at how a first phase and a second phase and a third phase
comes in and how we eventually get to those warrants and we get those signals and if
we don't take those steps we never have those things happen and I need to thank you
and your team, because it's been a lot of work and at the same time I need to
understand that the neighbors sitting over there, they are very frustrated and very
justified in their frustrations as they come here tonight, but I just got to make sure it's on
the record that a lot of the frustrations here tonight are not for people that are sitting in
this room and you have taken a lot of heat that you didn't cause and I appreciate the
work you have done.
Conger: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Overton, no, we definitely appreciate those words.
Yeah. I don't think my team wants to do it again. I would always sign up to do it again.
I -- we love Meridian. A majority of our land is in Meridian. We understand Meridian.
We are always blessed to be on the Comp Plan Committee, Zoning Committee, so, no,
we -- we knew this was a mess going in. None of this a surprise. We knew the HOA
and the community members were not happy and -- and so none of this did we get
blindsided. We are -- if nothing else -- and I have been in it for 30 years -- we -- we are
solution based and we can -- we will get to the finish line and we always do.
Overton: Mr. Mayor, one quick follow up.
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: Because you know me from previous statements I have made and I need to
make sure that the residents that are here hear this clearly, because we have dealt with
this in many different places in the city, but I was terrified this was going to come in as a
multi-family high density project --
Conger: Yeah.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 38 of 45
Overton: -- because when I looked at that area I figured that's exactly what we are
going to see and when I see a project coming in all the way down to seven dwelling
units per acre that makes me very happy, especially when I can say they are all going to
be single family units, which is going to meet a need. We don't -- we are not trying to
claim that this is affordable housing, but it's more affordable housing than a lot of the
housing we are seeing in the city and it's -- it's what we need, it's where we need it and
we can't get caught up in a lot of the arguments about our elementary schools and what
West Ada School District needs, because we talk to them quite often and they are
constantly modifying what they do based on city growth. Not this year -- for the last 40
years. They constantly modify what they have to do with their different cities, our
different schools, based on growth of the city. They react to decisions that are made up
on this dais and they are not trying to tell us not to build. You don't have West Ada
saying that. They understand that these developments happen. They knew this land
was available to be built and they will make the modifications necessary on new schools
being built and having to change guidelines on where students go today.
Conger: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Overton, I appreciate you mentioning the multi-
family part. I mean that doesn't carry a lot of weight when we say it in our neighborhood
meetings, but this definitely would have had higher density and I had to work hard with
this seller, because multi-family can pay double what I can pay, quite honestly. So,
might have to do a little more salesmanship when we are bringing our product in these
little higher density areas and, again, that's why I think Council's previous actions of
being at the lower end of density, because we have enough work trying to tie up this
land and pay less and, then, get this great single family for sale product approved on it
will be amazing.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. I think maybe I will just give you a sense of where I'm at. This to me is
tough. I see some challenges. I think there is a real traffic concern in this neighborhood
and there is a real traffic concern on McMillan. I think long term this collector helps
alleviate that, but it's going to create I think a worse situation in the near term. So, that's
a struggle for me. I do care a lot about the schools being overcrowded. That's not a
surprise to you. I think I have said that in everything you have ever been in, so that --
that wouldn't shock you. This has already been annexed in the city and for me the bar
on annexations is incredibly high. This has been annexed already. I can be supportive
of this if you came back with a letter that made it so that the seller basically agreed to
turn over their HOA to the actual residence of Bridgetower within a certain time frame or
upon delivery of the final plat for the park, something like that could get -- that could get
me there on this, because, then, I would feel like you are solving -- going out of your
way also to solve the broader problem. I am concerned about just the idea of turning
over the park to an HOA board that's controlled by this one developer when there has
been so much history and so much animosity and not having that trust factor with that
individual that they are going to do the right thing. I don't know if they will or they won't.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 39 of 45
1 just -- I have some concerns around that. That's -- that's what it would take for me
tonight. Yeah. There is -- there is four of us here, plus the Mayor. I'm sure you want to
hear from everybody where they are at. That's what it would take for me to approve
tonight or -- or in a subsequent meeting would be that kind of a letter, then, I think I
could -- I could get comfortable, because I would feel like we are actually, you know,
kind of be solving a longer term issue that I'm concerned about. So, hopefully, that
helps give you some insight as to where I'm at.
Conger: You bet. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader, as far as schools go I mean -- I
mean we have worked hard with schools. We definitely agree with Council Member
Overton, I mean they do this for a living and it doesn't mean the oversight of the council
and stuff hasn't been good, because three or four years ago your guys' pressure
actually probably did a lot of good. The school district did not provide a letter to begin
with. We had to beg. You guys begged. The reason they don't give letters, which is not
every time is because there is nothing to write about in this particular case. They
already make -- they already made an action to redistrict. I think there is another letter
in your packet that they -- they made the action to redistrict and, then, an action to re-
look at it this fall. Be very very clear, the school district knows -- and I'm making a bold
statement here -- these last of built-out neighborhoods they are going to end up that --
you can see their enrollment from kindergartner down, they are on a down slide -- not
the new areas like The Fields where you are going to see me in about four weeks. That
school needs to get built. But they have a Boise syndrome coming that there is -- these
schools in these built-out neighborhoods -- and as we talked with many of you Council
Members, the -- the kids are aging out, but there is a better way to say that, your homes
are pricing out and that's what happened to Boise and you -- these schools are
becoming less full. Not the new areas. I'm not that blazen. So, this particular case the
school district made an amazing move and already redistricted, because of the Star
school and things of that nature. So, we don't take that lightly. Hethe had about three
slides that we could whip up. I mean just because we do like to get down into it just like
you do as well.
Strader: Yeah.
Conger: And as far as getting a letter, I mean -- I don't know -- I mean I can get the
letter, I just don't know what teeth are in that. I mean we are going to get it turned over.
The final plat is going to come immediately. Nobody, including the current individual that
has that HOA, wants to keep this HOA. Once this approval is done there is no value in
having the HOA.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think just -- you know this about me. I'm a trust but verify type person. If I
had that letter from them acknowledging that plan that would go a long way toward me
getting there. But I guess I would encourage you -- because I don't know where my
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 40 of 45
fellow Council is at, but I would just encourage you, even if this is approved tonight
without me voting for it, I would just encourage you as a good neighbor to try to get that
letter. I think it would make for a better, more cohesive, more cooperative community in
this area of the city. I know you have done a lot of business. You are going to keep
doing a lot of business in our town and, you know, having 500 people that are really
teed off at -- not at you, but at somebody else is not healthy and I think this situation has
just festered for a long time and it's starting to affect other people that are not party to it.
So, just wanted to share that.
Conger: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Strader, no, we always love every positive
person we can get on the council in a time for a vote. But without a doubt I have
already committed to you to getting you that letter, so --
Strader: Thank you.
Conger: -- that's in motion.
Strader: Appreciate that.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Conger, just since everyone else has kind of said where
they are coming from, first and foremost I appreciate our team and your team going
back and forth and kind of just refining things, because as Hethe mentioned earlier, in-
fill is not easy and this one really wasn't easy. It's -- I appreciate Bill with the history,
giving that to us. I think we have still got some challenges, of course, with traffic that we
really have nothing we can do until your collector is done should this pass. But I think
that in the long run that that creates a better scenario than the current and appreciate
the density not being multi-family housing and so with those things -- I mean there is
some -- there is some tricks to this one, as you have already gone through with the
water and things like that. And I shouldn't say the water, because we know that that will
be taken care of. But with the park that's got the pond and things like that and so I think
if you can get a letter, that that really does help things. But in the meantime I will go
ahead and support this project. I appreciate the work that everyone has gone into. I'm
sorry that it's not what the neighbors would call ideal, but I think that the lower density is
a win in the long run.
Conger: Thank you.
Little Roberts: With that I would go ahead and make a motion -- I guess we need to
close the public hearing first. I move that we close the public hearing.
Overton: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 41 of 45
Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The
ayes have it and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: With that I would move that we approve Adero Mixed Use Neighborhood,
H-2024-0068.
Overton: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 2, H-2024-0068. Is there
discussion on the motion?
Whitlock: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Whitlock.
Whitlock: I'm going to support the motion as well, simply because I -- I trust Mr. Conger
will have the kind of conversation that needs to happen with the -- with the owner of the
other -- well, the developer of the other property and get a commitment that I think the --
the residents can be satisfied with. I think this, as I mentioned earlier, is -- is this 15
minute city and -- and able to walk to many of the amenities helps with some of the
traffic concerns that we have with an in-fill project. I think this is an ideal location for
what the developer is proposing here. So, I'm going to be supportive of this motion and
appreciate the fact that Mr. Conger and is willing to help alleviate some of the concerns
from the neighbors in Bridgetower.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I'm going to be voting no tonight, but I do want to explain a little bit. I actually
do have faith that Mr. Conger will have that conversation and that -- and that he will do
everything within his power to make that happen. I -- just based on feedback I have
heard from neighbors in my district and my neighboring district, I do have some trust
issues with the developer in Bridgetower and just some real concerns around how
things happened and that letter would go a long way toward alleviating those concerns
regarding the seller and that's the reason I'm going to be voting no. I would need that
letter I think to feel comfortable that we are solving the wider issue here, but I do -- I
think I have an intuition of the way this is going to go and I do wish you well. That's
where I'm at. Thanks.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 42 of 45
Simison: Any further comments? I will just say this. I have not been here as long as
Bill. I was not here when this property was annexed back in the day, but I have been on
staff while most of this has gone through different iterations and is this the best iteration
of this property that we have seen? I don't know if it is or not. It's different, you know, in
that context. But I will say this, it's got the best traffic connectivity of any project that
was initially planned to go forward and I remember the conversations where we were
talking about having to send everyone down the Walmart road to get them access
through that process and, you know, those were -- those were the conversations at the
time. So, to be able to, you know, make a four million dollar investment on a road to get
people out, you know -- the sad part is that's increased cost to the price of these homes.
We know that. You know, we know the developer is not taking this out of his pocket just
to say here is a -- here is a nice little donation and I'm a -- you know, it's going to be part
of it, but it's an important part to try to make this area function and do that and having
people that step up at the right time to make those -- I'm going to call concessions,
because, you know, there is certain times when they are warranted and there is certain
times when we would like to see them happen. Some of those things are -- they are
real value to the timing of this project. But, you know, I'm not -- who knows where we
go. We still have another parcel that is part of this general area that may or may not
develop under how it was proposed, so we are probably not done completely with this
area to my knowledge, but it's at least a good step forward to getting this area continue
to build out in a way that hopefully provides people, businesses, network of
transportation and as has already been mentioned between the schools and, you know,
I don't know how much Highway 16 will impact this part of Ten Mile. It may quite a bit as
people dump off at Ustick once Highway 16 is in. We will see. You know, the proof will
be in the pudding and we hope that the end result is the best benefit for the city, you
know. So, with that I will ask the Clerk to call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, nay; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
absent; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: All ayes. One nay. And the item is agreed to. So, thank you, good luck and
-- oh, I guess some of you are sticking around for the next one. I don't know who all.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. TWO ABSENT.
Simison: Do we need a break or we just want to move forward? We are going to take a
five minute break. I know it's going to be real quick. We are just going to take a five
minute recess for --
(Recess: 8.12 p.m. to 8.17 p.m.)
3. Public Hearing for Stapleton No. 4 (H-2025-0024) by Laren Bailey,
Conger Group, located at 238 W. Norwich Ct.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 43 of 45
A. Request: Vacation of a three (3) foot easement for public utilities,
pressure irrigation, and lot drainage encumbering Lot 31, Block 3 of
the Stapleton Subdivision No. 4.
Simison: All right. Council, we will go ahead come on back from our break and we will
move on to Item 3, which is a public hearing for Stapleton No. 4, H-2025-0024. We will
open this public hearing with staff comments.
Ritter: Okay. Good evening again, Mayor and Council Members. So, what we have
before you is a vacation. This site consists of 0.104 acres of land. It is zoned R-15. It's
located at 238 West North Street -- is to vacate a three foot easement for public utilities,
pressurized -- pressure irrigation and lot drainage. It's encumbering Lot 31, Block 3 of
Stapleton Subdivision. So, the applicant requests approval to vacate this easement. A
new easement will be re-established as the result of the property boundary adjustment.
Getting ahead of myself. Of a new property boundary adjustment and subsequent
recording of a quitclaim deed, which will formally establish the new property boundary.
The original lot when the Stapleton Subdivision was recorded, this lot -- the subdivision
established a three foot utility easement along the interior subdivision line. Per the
applicant Lot 31, Block 3, was designated to be 64 feet in width and all utilities were
connected to the lot and the construction drawings relied upon the dimension.
Unfortunately, the surveyor had made a mistake on the final plat and drew the lot 49
feet wide. The applicant didn't catch the error at the time, but all the infrastructure
construction has since been completed. There currently is not a building permit for the
property, so an existing structure will not be affected. A legal description and map
exhibit of the easement proposed to vacate it was included in the staff report.
Relinquishment letters were received from all the utility companies for it to be vacated.
So, this is the recorded plat and this is the area where it's -- the property would be -- the
lot would be located. So, it's a pretty straightforward application for staff and we are
recommending approval of the vacation request. Any questions for staff?
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Seeing none, would the
applicant like to make any comments?
Bailey: Mr. Mayor, my name is Laren Bailey. My work address is 4824 West Fairview
Avenue, Boise, Idaho. The only comment I want to make is I apologize that we have to
take up your time with us tonight. It was really just an error. You can see on the -- on
the map Linda had up, for whatever reason between the time the city reviewed it, the
county even reviewed it, everybody reviewed this. We reviewed it. We all were
comfortable with it. For some reason someone at the surveyor's office decided to line
that lot line up with the one to the north and that put us in the wrong place. So, we went
to put a home on it, the home we planned to put there to do a building permit and
realized this isn't the lot what we had in mind. So, we had to come through this process.
I tried to work this out with the county surveyor and do something less arduous, but he
didn't want to do that, he wanted us to do this process. So, that's why we are here
tonight. And if you have any questions I will answer those or just let you finish up.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 44 of 45
Simison: Thank you. Thank you, Laren. Council, any questions?
Bailey: Thank you.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Clerk, anyone signed up on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, three people signed up, but they spoke at the last hearing.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present or online that would like to provide testimony
on this item? If you are online use the raise your hand feature. Seeing Ralph not
coming forward and no one raising their hand online, does the applicant waive any final
comments? Applicant waives final comments. Council, what's your direction?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 3.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to close public hearing on Item 3. Is there any
discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, straightforward. Accidents happen. We get it. After considering all staff,
applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2025-0024 as presented in
the staff report for today's hearing date.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item H-2025-0024. Is there any
discussion? If not, clerk call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, yea; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
absent; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
June 10,2025
Page 45 of 45
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
Simison: Have a good evening. Council, anything under future meeting topics or a
motion to adjourn?
Strader: Going once. Going twice. Okay. Mr. Mayor, I move that we adjourn the
meeting.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Motion and second to adjourn the meeting. All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:33 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 6-24-2025
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 6-24-2025
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Migraine & Headache Awareness Month
E IDIAN
the Office of the Mayor
PRO CI A491A700010N
WHEREAS, migraine and headache disorders affect more than 40 million
Americans , approximately 1 in 4 households ; and,
WHEREAS, an estimated 4 million Americans live with chronic migraine ,
experiencing 15 or more days of migraine pain per month , with
approximately 75 % of those affected being women , significantly
impacting their personal , professional , and family lives , and,
WHEREAS, increased public awareness , improved access to care , and support for
research are essential to reduce the burden of migraine and headache
disorders and to improve the lives of those affected; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Meridian is committed to recognizing that persons living
with migraine disease deserve fair, equal , timely, and affordable access
to new and innovative treatments to live their lives to their fullest
potential .
THEREFORE, I , Robert E . Simison, proclaim the week of June 2025 , as
Af Of
.9 Itgratne & Headache
Awareness Vonth
in the City of Meridian and encourage all citizens to come alongside those in our
community who suffer from migraine and headache diseases with support and increasing
awareness .
i
Dated this 10' day of June, 2025
Robert E . Si is n , Mayor
Luke Cavener, City Council President
Liz Strader, City Council Vice -President
John Overton, City Council
Anne Little Roberts , City Council
Doug Taylor, City Council
Brian Whitlock, City Council
lip
5y
.
Ilk OFPI
13*
I �
1lfilll
� s
ell
ml
•
FA
. ►'�
mom
rV `
a
\. IN
9 r .
C
E IDIAN;---
/hl R
AGENDA ITEM
Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics
The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at
www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of
general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active
land use/development applications are not permitted during this time.
By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public
Forum. However, City Council may request the topic be added to a future
meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct
staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET
Date: June 10, 2025
Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and
provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of
the Public Forum:
• DO NOT:
o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning
and Zoning or City Council
o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters
• DO
o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first
o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic
is deemed inappropriate for this forum)
Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic
C� E IDIAN
Planning and Zoning Department Presentation and Outline
Changes to Agenda: \[if applicable\]
Item #2: Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068)
Application(s):
MDA, Rezone, Preliminary Plat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 69.18 acres of land, zoned C-G, LO, and CC located near the
NWC of N. Ten Mile and McMillan Rd.
History: \[details\]
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed-Use Community
Summary of Request:
Rezone of 11.186 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; reduce the L-O to 1.572 acres and rezone 22.90 acres to the C-G zoning district;
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.
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.
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 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.
• 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 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.
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 3.07.01C 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.
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 party. 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.
Development Agreement
The applicant is proposing two separate development agreements for the proposed mixed-use development.
Building Elevations
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.
Waterways
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.
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.
Staff Recommendation: 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 with the proposed changes to the conditions of approval:
• 1a - Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat. Conceptual plans provided, including the
landscape plan and conceptual building elevations for the commercial development included in Section VII and the provisions
contained herein are intended to serve as general guidance for future required commercial applications.
• 1c - 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 as determined by ACHD. Coordinate the scope of work with the Ada
County Highway District Planning Review staff. Additional conditions of approval may be required based on the findings of the
updated traffic study.
• 1g – Staff is working with the applicant regarding requirements for transitioning and will have this issue resolved prior to the
City Council hearing, for now the condition stands as presented.
• 1j - Development of the proposed plaza area shall be required with the first commercial phase of the project that is adjacent to
the plaza area, unless the final plat for the commercial portion is approved for phased development.
• 1k - 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 excluding the ten (10) foot multi-use pathway and landscaping on the west residential side of the new
collector road.
• 1p – Staff is working with the applicant on this issue and should have a resolution prior to the City Council hearing, for now the
conditions stands as presented.
• 1v – remove this condition as the phasing plan has been revised to show the amenities being built with the second phase.
Commission Recommendation: Approval
Summary of Commission Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Hethe Calrk, representing the applicant
ii. In opposition: Wade Ramsey, Robin Campbell, Patricia Fritschle, Tom Callison, Patty Scales, Richard Boyle, James Ferguson,
Janice Bochard, Roger Soucy, Christian Jensen, Troy Carniglia, Tracy Garrison, Megan Ratzesberger, Allison Rice, David
McAdams
iii. Commenting: Wade Ramsey, Robin Campbell, Patricia Fritschle, Tom Callison, Patty Scales, Richard Boyle, James Ferguson,
Janice Bochard, Roger Soucy, Christian Jensen, Troy Carniglia, Tracy Garrison, Megan Ratzesberger, Allison Rice, David
McAdams
iv. Written testimony: None
v. Key Issue(s): Too much density, increased traffic, safety concern for individuals trying to make a left turn onto Ten Mile from the
new collector road without a traffic signal, safety concerns with the increased traffic, overcrowding of the schools in the area,
proposed development not consistent with the neighborhood (R-8 vs R-15)
Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission:
i. Collector being completed in phase 1, density a bit high, limiting big box potential on commercial side
Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation:
a. Commercial Development Agreement:
1a - Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat. Conceptual plans
provided, including the landscape plan and conceptual building elevations for the commercial development
included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein are intended to serve as general guidance for
future required commercial applications.
1c - 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 as determined by ACHD.
Coordinate the scope of work with the Ada County Highway District Planning Review staff. Additional
conditions of approval may be required based on the findings of the updated traffic study.
1g – Staff is working with the applicant regarding requirements for transitioning and will have this issue
resolved prior to the City Council hearing, for now the condition stands as presented.
1j - Development of the proposed plaza area shall be required with the first commercial phase of the project
that is adjacent to the plaza area, unless the final plat for the commercial portion is approved for phased
development.
1k - 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 excluding the ten (10) foot multi-use pathway and landscaping
on the west residential side of the new collector road.
1p – Staff is working with the applicant on this issue and should have a resolution prior to the City Council
hearing, for now the conditions stands as presented.
b. Residential Development Agreement:
1v – remove this condition as the phasing plan has been revised to show the amenities being built with the
second phase.
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. Conditions 1g, 1p and 1u as staff and the applicant are still working to resolve these conditions.
• 1g – Revise the condition to state “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. Extended hours of operation may be requested through a
conditional use permit.”
• 1p –Revise the condition to state “Additional driveways accessing the new collector shall be prohibited unless otherwise
approved by Council and ACHD based on an approved updated TIS.”
• 1u – Revise condition to state “W. Gondola/W. Malta Drive shall be constructed to N. Vicenza Way, excluding only the ten
(10) foot multi-use pathway and landscaping on the east side of the new collector roadway in the first phase. The
remainder of the roadway to N. San Vito Way shall be completely constructed as a complete street including sidewalk and
landscaping on both sides, within the second phase.
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing:
Shawn Freeman, In opposition to the proposed development. Opposes rezoning from R-4 to R-8. The streets are not
equipped to handle the influx of vehicles. The increased density will lead to overcrowding, strain on local resources such as
schools, utilities and a decline in the peaceful environment that makes this area a desirable place to live.
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0068, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of June 10, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0068, as presented during the
hearing on June 10, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2024-0068 to the hearing date of \[date\] for the following reason(s): (You should state specific
reason(s) for continuance.)
Item #3: Stapleton No. 4 VAC (H-2025-0024)
Application(s):
Vacation
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 0.104 acres of land, zoned R-15 located at 238 W. Norwich St.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium High Density Residential
Summary of Request: Vacate a three (3) foot easement for public utilities, pressure irrigation, and lot drainage encumbering Lot 31,
Block 3 of Stapleton Subdivision No. 4.
The Applicant requests approval to vacate a three (3) foot easement for public utilities, pressure irrigation, and lot drainage along the
west property line of Lot 31, Block 3 of Stapleton Subdivision No. 4. A new easement will be re-established as a result of a Property
Boundary Adjustment (PBA) being submitted, reviewed, approved, and subsequent recording of a quitclaim deed, which will formally
establish a new property boundary.
The lot originated when the Stapleton Subdivision No. 4 was recorded May 28, 2024. This lot is zoned in the R-15 (medium-density
residential) zoning district. The subdivision established a 3-foot public utility, drainage, and irrigation easement along the interior
subdivision boundaries.
Per the applicant, Lot 31, Block 3 was designed to be sixty-four (64) feet in width; all the utilities were connected to the lot, and the
construction drawings relied upon that dimension. Unfortunately, the surveyor made a mistake on the final plat and drew the lot forty-
nine (49) feet wide. The applicant didn’t catch the error at that time, but all the infrastructure construction has since been complete.
There currently is not a building permit for the property so an existing structure will not be affected. A legal description and exhibit map
of the easement proposed to be vacated is included in Section V below.
Relinquishment letters were received from the Stapleton Community Association HOA, Sparklight, Intermountain Gas, Lumen, and
Idaho Power for the easement proposed to be vacated.
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2025-0024, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of June 10, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0024, as presented during the
hearing on June 10, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2025-0024 to the hearing date of \[date\] for the following reason(s): (You should state specific
reason(s) for continuance.)
h2
City Council MeetingJune 10, 2025
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
Conditions 1g, 1p and 1u as staff and the applicant are still working to resolve landscaping on both sides, within the second phase. completely constructed as a complete street including
sidewalk and first phase. The remainder of the roadway to N. San Vito Way shall be pathway and landscaping on the east side of the new collector roadway in the use -constructed to N.
Vicenza Way, excluding only the ten (10) foot multiRevise condition to state “W. Gondola/W. Malta Drive shall be –1u based on an approved updated TIS.” collector shall be prohibited
unless otherwise approved by Council and ACHD Revise the condition to state “Additional driveways accessing the new –1p a conditional use permit.”6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Extended hours
of operation may be requested through zoning district along W. Malta Drive / W. Gondola Drive shall be limited from G -Revise the condition to state “The business hours of operations
for the C–1g these conditions.
Phase 1Phase 2
FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map
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.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE: June 10, 2025 ITEM # 2
PROJECT NAME: Adero Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-2024-0068)
I wish to
testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing
(mark X (Please Print) HOA?
if yes)
10
11
12
13
14
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,,
DEPARTMENT REPORT
HEARING 6/10/2025 Legend
DATE:
, Project Location
TO: Mayor& City Council :::Area of Impact a�
= City Limits -@
1
FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner O Analysis
208-884-5533 - -
Iritter@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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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.
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
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
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.
Conceptual plans provided,including the landscape plan, conceptual plan, and conceptual
building elevations for the commercial development included in Section VII and the
provisions contained herein are intended to serve as general guidance for future required
commercial applications.
b. Future development of the site shall comply with the ordinances in effect at the time of
development.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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
as determined by ACED. Coordinate the scope of work with the Ada County Highway
District Planning Review 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 that is adjacent to the plaza area. ,tmless the final plat for-the eemmer-ei '
per-tion 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
excluding the ten(10)foot multi-use pathway and landscaping on the west residential
side of the new collector road.
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.
m. 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.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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.
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,Bleek 4 shall be installed with the first phase of
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
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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.
7. The development shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in
UDC 11-3B-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-3B-13.
8. Pathway and adjoining fencings and landscaping shall be constructed consistent with the
standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7A7, 11-3A-8 and 11-3B-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 11-613-7.
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.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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.
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 I I"map with bearings and distances
(marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a
Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this
document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development
plan approval.
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 I I-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-
1207 and any other applicable law or regulation.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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.
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-313.
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
htlp://www.meridiancily.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
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
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,
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:llweblink.meridiancity.or lWebLink/browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCit
Y
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
https:llweblink.meridianciLy.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCit
Y
F. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho(COMPASS)
https:llweblink.meridiancioy.ory WWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
G. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ)
https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
H. Ada County Highway District(ACHD)
https:llweblink.meridiancity.oLvlWebLinklbrowse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
Y
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
I. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD)
https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinklbrowse.aspx?id=379825&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
X
V. FINDINGS
A. Rezone(UDC 11-5B-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:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Commission finds 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;
Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the regulations
outlined in the requested R-8, R-I5 and C-G zoning districts.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the
public health, safety and welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by
any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited
to, school districts; and
Commission finds the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in an adverse
impact on the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services
within the City.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
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;
Commission finds 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;
Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be
adequate to accommodate the proposed development.
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's
capital improvement program;
Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public
improvements in accord with the City's Capital Improvement Program.
City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic or historic features that need to be
preserved with this development.
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:
The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on May 15,2025. At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject rezone,preliminary_plat
and Development Agreement modification requests.
I. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Hethe Clark,representin the he applicant
b. In opposition: Wade Ramsey,Robin Campbell,Patricia Fritschle, Tom Callison,Patty
Scales,Richard Boyle,James Ferguson,Janice Bochard,Rogery, Christian Jensen,
Troy Carniglia,Tracy Garrison,Megan Ratzesberger,Allison Rice,David McAdams
C. Commenting: Wade Ramsey,Robin Campbell,Patricia Fritschle,Tom Callison,Patty
Scales,Richard Boyle, James Ferguson, Janice Bochard,Rogery, Christian Jensen,
Troy Carniglia, Tracy Garrison,Megan Ratzesberger,Allison Rice,David McAdams
d. Written testimony:None
e. Staff presenting application: Linda Ritter
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Bill Parson
2. Key issue(s) public testimony
a. Too much density,increased traffic, safety concern for individuals trying to make a left
turn onto Ten Mile from the new collector road without a traffic signal, safety concerns
with the increased traffic,overcrowding of the schools in the area,proposed developmem
not consistent with the neighborhood(R-8 vs R-15)
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. Collector being completed in phase 1, density a bit high, limiting big box potential on
commercial side
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. Commercial Development Agreement:
1 a-Development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat.
Conceptual plans provided,including the landscape plan and conceptual building
elevations for the commercial development included in Section VII and the provisions
contained herein are intended to serve as general guidance for future required commercia
applications.
I c-Prior to submitting plans or a final plat that contains any commercial lots,the applic�
shall submit a traffic impact study to address the potential impacts of the commercial lots
as determined by ACHD. Coordinate the scope of work with the Ada County Highway
City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action
District Planning Review staff.Additional conditions of approval may be required based
the findings of the updated traffic study.
1 g—Staff is working with the applicant regarding requirements for transitioning and will
have this issue resolved prior to the City Council hearing, for now the condition stands as
presented.
1 i -Development of the proposed plaza area shall be required with the first commercial
phase of the project that is adjacent to the plaza area,unless the final plat for the
commercial portion is approved for phased development.
I-The commercial portion of the development shall be responsible for the construction
of the entire new collector roadway(Gondola/Malta Drive)including landscaping multh
pathways, and landscaping on both sides if it develops prior the residential portion
excluding the ten(10)foot multi-use pathway and landscaping on the west residential sid
of the new collector road.
Ip—Staff is working with the applicant on this issue and should have a resolution prior tc
the City Council hearing, for now the conditions stands as presented.
b Residential Development Agreement:
I—remove this condition as the phasing plan has been revised to show the amenities
being built with the second phase.
5. Outstandingissue(s)sus for City Council:
a. Conditions 1g, 1p and 1u as staff and the applicant are still working to resolve these
conditions.
C. City Council:
Pending
City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action
' 1 1
ct CHIN DEN
Locationof Impact
Anal
a. ■
sis
` 9 - ''7 J
k.
AIX
H f
III
I"nl,n
1 s A
I-I 1 '= 11 111111 - I illN fill E - T� - 1
■■II •,r al �f� r-•'
MCMILLAN-- -----------
I
a
■ R ,. .i .�
7131
W
Wit- IS
Legend
nn lulU911Project Location
fl 1 ��•'
CHINDEN
fnnnnonl nnl_ Ilxll� •nfnnnlinffunlln� ��ana1r111n11 f �ITq—I
�IIIeI ualnl eC IIIIl111' f�rl ulu 1-�.��.1a18'�L •tools.nal -_ 1 `__�—
Illln 1111111 1=p 11lnllF� nn11s q■ ' _
Area r r■FIIIII - w. �■ 4 IIIIIrn11x11x
51i11n nl• f =1 /�iL
/1111111/±■11■Ir 1 1 r �.�� I In11■lrlN OOIrq/ �� ar
0 Analysis
.Ilnn nm 1■xmu 2:= rinuun■xun►��L llrr�■
__,r !1 nn■■llllllr �' _ j:`pa �rr�iiiii iairr • q��:
♦♦ Na�N1\I
Illlrq rnlR 1 • Jpti� - mm�n• V 0:
_-�-- Ilrr■qr► �-� iairl�'��ln■■■■R�►�i1� i'�■
Ili-_�""•a■�ri I�Ii' �-'��' - r r+-=I■nrrruas Gay rllr nri
�■�.. ■r r `�f■i■nlnA\ as■11
• Z;;••r Nn nlli. rr 'Nr� \�� is m� i■■■ri■■ - phi�.a� .•■■ r/f� •r■rl �
- . erg�_ � ■-■nl�l Irl=- rr . . Inln.x.�
I 14 DTI - llll�.. ��:,,�, �.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 • �� rino mr f � ■ N►_
{�rr��I:uneunl 111 rlln IIm nrr, �ilr���� rruln■INS I
��-=_ H nnn I� furii inu >tn■■■ov �� an■■r a►.
•ulr b wr mmu■ r .nr■■■■no.� ■
a {{ry-Iia11 �Nrr r 1■1' l�=�rrrlmO {IJ 1i11 1 ■I `■w■■Nrn■o.Ily♦�iiri�1�nl
•:uarz+N V r nnm
I1a10 uarr lii 1 rr, Iln parr . 1 pu■>, long. 10101010.0
■� rn'-{■n■■i■'-
rnlr p.■� rl�w `� ii■iiil�:� ■■ �=rl
ne!:■ � ■ 1 r'ni'\► 1"1 ! ■-■■nn nnu•.-I om i
nm■9:•,mll If m��N� � m i iiiie fir�a r■n nmO■:o•nlr�_iil
11111■--C ml Q rr■II m■■�� moNrr■■ ■ ■■man
I nn i ■..,..�s�1i IIIInI��`_ 111 nn■■n■r arum
nn -1 nunlnl n!u ■omnruri II Z u1 l n nm n m
m = _ _ W �nm■ mn ■r nnr �q
�1111 wi rrlll�
■■��no1�� F .�uu1■rrlf r■■n111111 :..�
- -.rllprrll ■■■I111111� ••
am
Ii111illilmii!l
-IIIr IIp11u1n"a:Ill-rIN�Ngnlllh
�nnr�
n-aln ■nu�
■.0 a --- == =ill..- � -a_. r ri trp ��iiiiiiii� O II
llllll ri111x111 IIIIIIfI 1111■Inl ► n a-�a.i 1n11r ��N■N n■ f lI
ar� mlrnuu xuul •nxxn nnlnu �i� 4
�irnr► • ■■■ ■u
nxllnx�111 1 ��loom nnq "■ unu�ra��.r"i� � -�
I 1 _IlUllllli�In11tr� x11111 ■■11 1`Plrrrl(r � �•' we Ilona
Il 1 ?Ilfllllllll■IIIIIIII a �inxl- \I —�/r1 -1■1 Masan >� ij � 1■lnlr■Ir■ram
-mm r nml°I° n o •�H �rlrE�� �:• ��N� w mn nl
�' r�r r♦�r 00 xx •^
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
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
A Preliminary Plat(date: 12/17/2024)
PRELIMI NARY PLAT FOR
ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION ,�na
""""""""� - LOCATED IMTIE SE II4MYLT%N12T - _ -•�-•.,:2 —•� 1�
WIN
- —---— Y TOlML4HIE9 M01[R1,0.RNCEI W6T:601Y MERIgAM -wev✓o ve xcxi�bi•-e...,, .�i n�.r� eacliw: nm..o.a-aw mi �u'I��:
.Z z rn
0
- , t2
E'
a � d
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
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
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
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
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
r
MON
&LmbA&M&M
* _ 7 6.v y.
k r
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
• 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
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
L. Block Length Exhibit
d,..d
LLL
V
-_-_-- -- ADERO PARK SUBDIVISION
J' I BLACK IENLTN E-SIT
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
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
N. Residential Building Elevations(date: Click here to enter a date.)
NNW
}
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
�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
, I II
}Yii � F _
CHFUIT UNION
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
�Chl�l■I�i11i�11�
In
F �
NMI
Ago
�-�t W.
_
Oral
CaEfif7 UNIW4
I i
��E65
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
i�
t:
& � 3
DepartmentCity of Meridian po
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
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
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$6 acresr mare or less.
f LF wr.
57
! f
!'Tor
P;1202411 EMT112401 4-N TEN MILE RD TOMSurveyVrawingslLegal Descripti"W24014 R-8 Zone to Centerline
Dmcriptlmdocx
Page 13
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
IV
21
12
_ k a F—
v z
cn an q In!n w x ae.X Z X t a l M �
3+ NAp*"M'!4MAr
#:EmmIn im ° h*+ d M69tr'�YE _max
i= I
- -
47'x
—[f=VDITNA WAY
r
A I I I{
N6.l1'y @Q 4 • O I ��Q
R 1
U 4,
S4V7J 7 W JI V" ---- K. TEN MILE ROAD
PROP
o,maonxx$xa4o�x� auox5n{"� 4I_`
dd
m,� +~ cn
n4k kmm mm:tm###717e#m-q m
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
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
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
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 *�^��
rl
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
R. L-O Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map
'kRTY^2#iR17 'i IAA * , .iYY YlL
0 Oil N 9 11 w 0 ii 9
�
h 4.Z h h yy'2 x;4f x a 2 2 2 2 a w rx -r qP NiV°3422"€4&19' Iml
c
mw
nj +Y N a m m m Iti a A r r 21B IO NQM327J-E _��
�g
A
O V'
XN�I Up
m� I Ef
M xx 2fd.11' � I
�� �4 � 50LF°2l7TW �I x I
� I
— -------- sorrs�rwzu --------= °
y 9W-W%rw25*au N. UN HULK ROAD
N
g PRO
i � ■
�, in 4nNinx tt�txN�nX;tin tin;Atiht
1h, ul
w04
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
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
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
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
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
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
W IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Stapleton No. 4 (H-2025-0024) by Laren Bailey, Conger
Group, located at 238 W. Norwich Ct.
Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0024
A. Request: Vacation of a three (3) foot easement for public utilities, pressure irrigation, and lot
drainage encumbering Lot 31, Block 3 of the Stapleton Subdivision No. 4.
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE: June 10, 2025 ITEM # 3
PROJECT NAME: Stapleton No. 4 (H-2025-0024)
I wish to
testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing
(mark X (Please Print) HOA?
if yes)
1
2 �
,IPA U
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEDEPARTMENT REPORT
HEARING 6/10/2025
Legend 'j®
DATE: Project Location
TO: Mayor& City Council :::Area of Impact
�= City Limits
FROM: Linda Ritter,Associate Planner o Analysis
208-884-5533
lritter@meridiancity.org @ � -
APPLICANT: Laren Bailey, Conger Group t
SUBJECT: H-2025-0024 ---r
Stapleton No.4 VAC
LOCATION: 238 W.Norwich Ct located in the SE 1/4 ---
of the NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 25,
T.3N.,R.1 W. Parcel No. R8107450680
I. PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
Vacate a three(3) foot easement for public utilities,pressure irrigation, and lot drainage
encumbering Lot 31,Block 3 of Stapleton Subdivision No. 4.
B. Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the vacation of the public utility easement as proposed by the
Applicant and as agreed upon by the easement holders.
C. Decision
City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview
II. STAFF ANALYSIS
The Applicant requests approval to vacate a three (3) foot easement for public utilities,pressure
irrigation, and lot drainage along the west property line of Lot 31,Block 3 of Stapleton Subdivision
No. 4. A new easement will be re-established as a result of a Property Boundary Adjustment(PBA)
being submitted,reviewed,approved, and subsequent recording of a quitclaim deed,which will
formally established a new property boundary.
The lot originated when the Stapleton Subdivision No.4 was recorded May 28,2024. This lot is
zoned in the R-15 (medium-density residential)zoning district. The subdivision established a 3-foot
public utility, drainage, and irrigation easement along the interior subdivision boundaries.
Per the applicant,Lot 31,Block 3 was designed to be sixty-four(64) feet in width; all the utilities
were connected to the lot, and the construction drawings relied upon that dimension.Unfortunately,
the surveyor made a mistake on the final plat and drew the lot forty-nine (49)feet wide. The applicant
didn't catch the error at that time,but all the infrastructure construction has since been complete.
There currently is not a building permit for the property so an existing structure will not be affected.
A legal description and exhibit map of the easement proposed to be vacated is included in Section V
below.
Relinquishment letters were received from the Stapleton Community Association HOA, Sparklight,
Intermountain Gas,Lumen,and Idaho Power for the easement proposed to be vacated.
III. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Relinquishment Letters
See public record(copy the link into a separate browser)
https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=399050&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC
iv
IV. ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the vacation of the public utility easement as proposed by the
Applicant and as agreed upon by the easement holders.
B. City Council:
Pending
City of Meridian I Department Report II. Staff Analysis
' 1 1
VICTORY
ct Location
Analysisof Impact
• ' - -:
W r
C
AM
J1111l in
end MEN
u_
I • . 1
VICTOProject Location
RY—
' D►- ♦�i\�•�?I■� aJ�__
of Impact
nl►♦♦♦♦ 1.ar►� .�.F %':�: a .nnn�� IUAJ'liCnl�nn
Area
11♦i.�i♦♦i lan iii������n►q: .%e!_=•bi 1-1 1 i► _moon ICE-�=
■ �e�lln►♦is�►•� U■ p\rV►�i�•---=1 Iq♦i♦ ■I.�/ � -nnunu� uln e
Analysis
■ I♦♦ •p►Iw p■a�■��wC iG�'_€'__ '�♦ii♦ C �i♦ • 4u wuq�m1u1m:inn con
uuun/�♦ ♦ Ir■t. n m�■■►► ' i►���♦♦ �irii\� ` noo mile
■-nnmlu
■ =unnuun:�aVn�:nm mu■■.M4 • ~ ririri pir�i D`nnn:nnulnnl���nnnmi
J rylnn nnu�:■�nnuonn moor_ 00 ♦ �� rV�� ♦♦i ♦♦. � � ♦innnnnn nnnu��nunu i
1Ii1\IIIII�•`"►•' I�q,Ij�I� W ��0�.��j�♦i���iIIII`I�mn nurM1 rununm i
- �1�►�un�• m IIIIIIp♦♦.�i�i� I�i♦:♦rQi�i i���'. �nnmv nm
r • ♦���♦ ♦ ♦�• ••♦P.::mmn7C19i
�,1'1• Q..N, �� nnnnnm n
1�►1\IIIIII ��j�1 . �.i puunnurn
\�►11111■i�••��1���I� // \�II�►Ir .��I i:::....�11 n
TI►/1►��\11110\►���d.�i�•. I`�� •��1�U���1I��•�I
�I111 \ , "•••
� �11�O�mev®an..:®.r,®m 111►/�r.♦' \-.�-������♦�,��,,�I��,,,;;,n1-1
Jam_ L- �1111 11111�U��►.�.�� r►nm mule
LU
Q -"�,,�,�,,�ej UC'J �j♦►I�� I♦�♦I j50I���Q�OijI � 111-'
e-nnnunnn o
e °-annunnn
' _mn�Jmml nmum
r m p Ili
�_ ■1111111 11111111
�,(� �r11111111�
3. Future Land Use
Legend COymmercial
�C; 0
Project Location � a
Area of Impact �® ..�
O Analysis
LOW
Density
Residential ® Medium ®
--�I M Densi W -
—s-i
Residential ®®
-High Density Residential, '
I� Med-High
U6E Density
iResidential
d
MU-C
4. Planned Development Map
Legend
CO) Project Location as
MID
Area of Impact m
*== City Limits
�®
Planned Parcels
OAnalysis
® ® ®®
sum
F-1
- -
City of Meridian Department Report V. Exhibits
5. Property Boundary Adjustment Record of Survey
RECORD OF SURVEY FOR
F'11T LLC
LOTS 31 AND 32,BLOCK 3 OF STAPLETON SUBDIVISION NO 4,
LOCATED IN THE NEW OF THE SE114 OF SECTION 25 r.'
T 3 N-,R 1 W.,B.M,CITY OFMERMIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
2024 oww exa..-ievraea,mx
( ___—_ ___—_— _
.ern=m 1 �.NANIYIN Y1. P�BCIC) ������ smeaa mnuvu�
SatzYu'r z.Ti
_.._.._.._. ______________
27s=
j�
I
ocsra>�rae
- � � SGYtY]N)OfM0.3142C1-IA118-ZOIJO
4A*
NO
2030 S.WAHHIN(i LON AVF.
.i rhf EMMETT, 7
(20
8)398-810405FAX(208)398-81�rrx� ryrJ� / WWW.54WTOOTHL&COM
v�
City of Meridian Department Report V. Exhibits
B. Final Plat(date: 4/1/2024)
&�LE STAPLET01Y SUBDIVISION NO.4 BOOKS,PACE;-]]
LOCATED IN THE NX114 OF THE S.E.114 OF SECTION 25,T.3N.,R.I W.,B.M.,
MY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO
`
2024�7
6E 2�4K
7�1
4
;k
----------
-------------------------
-----------
l var
M�d
------------7-
01
- - — ------------
--------------
116t
I J,
7 -1 7
A2 -S,-A-
EMMETT,ID 83617
(")3SS-8104
FAX(M) -810.5 M
4,1 G WWW.SAWMOTHLSCOM
City of Meridian I Department Report V. Exhibits