Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-07-15 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Doug Taylor – Via Zoom Councilman John Overton Councilwoman Anne Little Roberts Councilman Brian Whitlock Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing (Continued from July 8, 2025) for Dayspring Subdivision (H-2024- 0070) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., located at South side of W. Ustick Rd., 1/4 mile East of N. McDermott Rd. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0070 A. Request: Annexation of 143.09 acres of land with R-4 (32.64 acres), R-8 (77.76 acres), TN-R (25.29 acres) and C-N (7.40 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 531 buildable lots (517 residential and 14 commercial) and 78 common lots on 143.09 acres of land in the R-4, R- 8, TN-R and C-N zoning districts. Motion to approve made by Councilman Overton, Seconded by Councilwoman Little Roberts. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock, Councilman Cavener Voting Nay: Councilwoman Strader 2. Public Hearing for proposed Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department Approved RESOLUTIONS \[Action Item\] 3. Resolution No. 25-2526: A Resolution Adopting Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; authorizing the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to collect such fees; and providing an effective date. Motion to approve made by Councilman Whitlock, Seconded by Councilwoman Little Roberts. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Cavener FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 7:22 P.M. Meridian City Council July 15, 2025. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:01 p.m. Tuesday, July 15, 2025, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Luke Cavener, Liz Strader, John Overton, Doug Taylor, Anne Little Roberts and Brian Whitlock. Other Present: Tina Lomeli, Bill Nary, Sonya Allen, Jamie Leslie, Steve Taulbee and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Liz Strader X Brian Whitlock Anne Little Roberts X John Overton _X_ Doug Taylor _X_Luke Cavener X Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call this meeting to order. For the record it is July 15th, 2025, at 6:01 p.m. We will begin this regular City 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: Tonight's invocation will be delivered by Jason Billester. If you would like to come forward, Jason, and for those that are here if you would like to take this as a moment of silence and reflection or join us in the community invocation. Jason, thank you. Billester: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If you will, please, join me in prayer. Heavenly Father, I thank you tonight, God, for your servants, our mayor, our city manager, our city staff, our city council members, law enforcement and the Meridian community and, Lord, we come to you tonight asking for your guidance, your wisdom, your discernment and support as we begin this meeting. We give this meeting and time to you and I pray that you will guide our discussion. It brings meaningful discussion and stronger bonds for our community. Help us, Lord, to trust you more and with an impartation of your godly wisdom and discernment I pray that they will quickly be able to solve our city's problems and make good policies. Lord, please bring a new level of peace and clarity to everyone involved in this meeting. Grant them excellence in their governance, in Jesus' mighty name, amen. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 2 of 26 Simison: Jason, thank you and thank you for your service to the Boise Rescue Mission. It's greatly appreciated for what you do in our community. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: Next up is adoption of the agenda. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: No changes this evening, so I move we adopt the agenda as presented. Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Madam Clerk, anyone signed up under public forum? Lomeli: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No one has signed up. ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing (Continued from July 8, 2025) for Dayspring Subdivision (H-2024-0070) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., located at South side of W. Ustick Rd., 1/4 mile East of N. McDermott Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 143.09 acres of land with R-4 (32.64 acres), R-8 (77.76 acres), TN-R (25.29 acres) and C-N (7.40 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 531 buildable lots (517 residential and 14 commercial) and 78 common lots on 143.09 acres of land in the R-4, R-8, TN-R and C-N zoning districts. Simison: Okay. Then with that we will move on to our Action Items. The first item up is a continuation from the July 8th Dayspring -- Dayspring Subdivision H-2024-0070. I'm going to first turn to staff to see if staff has any additional comments that they would like to kick us off with. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 3 of 26 Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council, no, I don't. Thank you. Simison: Okay. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Real quick just before we jump in, Mr. Mayor, I apologize I should have flagged this for you earlier. I just want to be upfront with Council. At the conclusion of our meeting last week we had a member of the public who wanted to come up and talk to me more about the application again, unaware of ex-parte communication. informed the citizen, if this is important to share with me, it's important to share it with the Council. His comments largely reflected about transportation concerns. I believe that citizen has sent us a letter that conveyed their feelings. I want to flag that for the record and if Council has concerns about me participating I'm happy to recuse myself at this point. I don't feel that there is a conflict, but I just -- I wanted to flag that before we move forward this evening. Simison: Council, any concerns? Thank you. Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thanks, Council. Allen: Mr. Mayor, excuse me. I should add that there have been two letters of public testimony that were received since last Tuesday's Council meeting. One was from Mark Graham and one was from Corey Thacker. I assume you have seen those in your -- in your packets, but just wanted to point that out on the record. Thank you. Simison: All right. Thank you. So, we did leave the public hearing open at the conclusion. So, I'm going to turn to -- is -- any public testimony? I don't know if anyone signed up to testify on this item. Would like to start with anybody who didn't have an opportunity to testify at the -- at last week's and if anyone else who already did testify is going to do so that, then, we ask you please limit to anything new that has not already been testified to this point in time. So, Madam Clerk. Lomeli: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have John Thomas Robinson that signed up. Robinson: I'm Tom Robinson. I live at 5198 West Ridgeside Court on the Seasons Park street and I was impressed last week with -- with Council Lady Strader's comments. By the way, it's been a revelation to me the last three weeks that I have attended these meetings the amount of time and effort that you all put into understanding these issues and the work that you do on them. I'm amazed and the developer and all of you. But it was interesting last week when you suggested a continuation -- continuance. If I had been the chairman of this committee I would have probably said, yeah, I think we have heard everything. Let's go ahead and take the vote. But for some reason you didn't and maybe there was a good reason you didn't, Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 4 of 26 but I was thinking about your comments last week, essentially saying we don't have the money. The city doesn't have the money for this. And, you know, in my opinion or understanding of the duties of city planners and city attorneys and developers, et cetera, the -- the idea is to have orderly development and maybe our -- our situation here is a matter of timing, because if the city doesn't have the money to put into this project where is the money going to come from? It's going to come from taxpayers like me and homeowners like me and until we get some kind of technique of getting the new developments to pay for their own schools and their own add-ons that are connected with that, it seems to me like we shouldn't -- as I look ahead it's going to be a big increase on homeowners like myself and it's going to drive a lot of elderly homeowners like myself out of their homes that they have purchased to retire in and live in the rest of their lives and it's unfortunate that we would do that. So, why don't we -- if -- if we are going to let the developers simply make the decisions on this and accelerate our -- we hire planners to make an orderly development for order -- plans for order the development of our city, why do we need councilmen, attorneys, city planners? Let's fire all them and let the developers make the plans. But that isn't the idea. The idea is that we should plan ahead and proceed if -- you guys have spent hours and years making plans for development of this area. So, why are we accelerating this when we don't have the money to match this money without loading the taxpayers who are already here some of us. Didn't raise our kids here even and we have been paying ever since we have moved here 30 years, why do we continue with this? Is not to -- and I'm glad that you gave us another chance. Thank you. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Not a question, but just -- I think maybe it's -- it's helpful to discuss a little bit. So, my financial concern is not around the sewer infrastructure specifically, because we have a model of kind of saving before we spend and we have a long-term financial plan, so by 2028 the city would have that money in place from the rate payers. That's on our Enterprise Fund. But my financial concern to your point, sir, is around our operating costs that the whole city absorbs and so schools are funded separately. That has been a frustration of mine in the past that developers often will donate school sites. They will do amazing things to try to help, but they can't actually pay impact fees to help build those, but that's kind of a different entity that that's their issue. My concern is around our operating costs, specifically around public safety and, for example, developers will pay impact fees. That's extremely helpful. It will help us build new buildings. It will help us pay for expensive capital projects, but, unfortunately, it doesn't help us to ramp up our hiring of personnel, paying their salaries and that sort of thing and that was my concern around the growth, but I just wanted to articulate that a little more for you, because I didn't want you to walk away from this conversation thinking that you would be directly on the hook -- or -- or citizens like -- obviously not you personally, but that citizens would be directly on the hook for the sewer infrastructure. In a roundabout way Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 5 of 26 yes, but through our rate paying model that we use on the Enterprise side. So, hopefully, that helps a little bit just to kind of discuss. Sure. Yeah. Simison: Thank you. Madam Clerk, anybody else sign up? Lomeli: Mr. Mayor, no one else has signed up. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present who would like to come forward and offer testimony or anybody online? If you are online you can use the raise your hand feature or if you are in the room if you would like to come forward at this time. Seeing no one coming forward and no one raising their hand, would the applicant like to come forward to close? McKay: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. Business address 1029 North Rosario in Meridian. Sonya, can you pop that up? I appreciate you guys giving us an opportunity to come back before you and you guys taking the time to seriously consider our project based on the size, based on the complexity and I would just like to clarify a few things. Obviously, you can see that -- that the Dayspring project is adjacent to urban development, so it is not leapfrog development and here is an overall area -- or overall vicinity map that you can see. The big thing that I wanted to stress is we sat down and we looked at this and I guess I wanted to obviously demonstrate to the City Council that this is -- this project is not getting what -- a free ride. We will be paying 2.1 million dollars in park impact fees, 207,000 dollars in police impact fees, 514,000 dollars in fire impact fees. So, our total impact fees to the City of Meridian is 2.85 million dollars. When you look at the meter fees, the sewer assessment, water assessment we are paying 3.8 million dollars just for these 441 detached and 71 attached dwellings. If we look at the ACHD impact fees and the trust fund, we are paying 1.866 -- 891 -- it's hard these big numbers. But 8.6 million dollars in impact fees. So, our total one time fees for this project is 9.24 million dollars. The commercial component based on 60,000 square feet, which is what we had in our traffic study, and I was very conservative, I mixed up the uses to low impact, high impact, but they are all neighborhood type commercial, we will be paying between probably 818,000 to a million dollars in ACHD impact fees. Then we looked at -- we talk to our client, the median price -- or the median assessed value of this property will be 650,000. So, after you take out the homeowners exemption we will be paying this project at build out we will be paying 1.89 million dollars in taxes within all the taxing districts with the applicable levies as is. Then if we look at the sewer main improvements, that McDermott Road improvements will be building 2,655 linear feet of 30 inch sewer 30 feet deep. The projected cost approximately, ten million dollars. Within Meridian Public Works CIP this is designated as KA, with a completion date in your own capital improvement plan of September 30th, 2028. Applicant is going to pay 50 percent of that cost, whether it's ten million, seven million, whatever it ends up being as per the cooperative development agreement. The Ustick sewer improvements, 2,855 linear feet of ten inch sewer, 783 linear feet of eight inch sewer, we will pay a hundred percent of that cost and install that prior to ACHD's rebuild of Ustick Road to five lanes, which is -- will be completed in 2027. In addition, we will be abandoning the Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 6 of 26 Autumn Faire lift station, we will be paying a hundred percent of that cost for decommissioning, connecting Autumn Faire to the gravity sewer and that is required within phase two. This is out of your own capital improvement plan. You can see the K4 McDermott extension, 22,746,000. Now, that includes the 30 inch sewer that we are going to install, in addition to that additional 27 inch sewer that goes on south. This is -- this is the K4 line right here. This is right out of your CIP. This is out of your CIP. It shows you guys have budgeted 2,880,000 to abandon the Autumn Faire lift station and connect it to gravity sewer. It shows the McDermott Extension program at 22,745,000. We talk about this area. Is this a priority area? That was one of the discussions we had last week. The public investments in this McDermott and Ustick area, the City of Meridian has constructed Fire Station No. 8, the north Meridian police station off of Owyhee Storm Avenue. That's less than 2.4 miles from Dayspring. It's closer to Dayspring than it is your Fields area. The future Meridian regional park, which you guys have had for multiple years, 47 acres, is located east of McDermott, north of Cherry Lane. It's 370 feet from Dayspring Subdivision to the southwest. Seasons Park, that's on our eastern boundary, will be connected to that via detached walks, pedestrian pathways, fully developed. Seven acres. Idaho Transportation Department has -- is constructing phase two and phase three of State Highway 16 extension. That is going to be an expressway -- a major expressway. The Ustick interchange is going to be completed in 2027 based on ITD's website. The McDermott bypass has been constructed. The traffic signal at Ustick at the bypass was completed at the end of 2024. Ada County Highway District is going to rebuild Ustick Road from five lane -- to five lanes from Ten Mile to Black Cat in 2025. Rebuild Ustick to five lanes from Black Cat to Owyhee Storm Avenue in 2027. City of Nampa is going to rebuild Ustick to five lanes from Owyhee Storm Avenue to the Phyllis Canal in 2027. Looking at ACHD's website they indicate that the Ustick corridor is a mobility corridor. Mobility corridors are like Overland, State Street, those are corridors that carry a high volume of traffic and they are going to lead to that interchange, which, then feeds out to 1-84. The other thing to keep in mind is West Ada School District already has two elementary sites north of our site. One is just -- you can throw a rock to on the north side of Ustick that's already there next to Springday. The other elementary site is over at Owyhee High School. So, they have two sites that are already there and ready to go with utilities and streets whenever they decide to pull that trigger. This is a vicinity map. This shows the 47 acres in blue. This is the 47 acres that the City of Meridian owns as a future regional park. Our collector roadway is coming right down here. I'm only 370 feet away from this future regional park. So, I guess my point is we have got a lot of things that are happening in this area. A lot of money being spent by many many agencies to open up this area, improve transportation, improve education. I had a meeting with Mike Moyle the day after your hearing. I went out and I met with him for over an hour and I talked to him about the concerns of city of Star, concerns of the City of Meridian and he said I'm working -- I have a draft of a CID bill and he said -- and I have schools as part of it, not only fire and police, but I also have schools and he said I'm taking this draft around. I have met with major developers in the county. He said I have also been talking with fire and police departments and he said I'm going to be making the rounds and -- and he said I understand the pressure that we have put on these cities with Bill 389. 1 did read Bill 389. And he said I fully understand that they need another revenue source and that Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 7 of 26 the pressure from growth needs to be addressed and we, as the legislature, need to do something and I said, well, I said the development community is here to support you. I said the cities, the mayors, the councils, I said they are all begging for you to step up to the plate and he said I am doing that and I'm going to be taking this draft around and he said he has a meeting to schedule with Mayor Chadwick of Star and he said he had some suggestions. I will finalize. Anyway, I'm just saying that we are not sitting back. We are not just riding on our laurels. This is a really great project that is going to build significant infrastructure that, obviously, needs to be installed prior to road improvements and I did do some research on where we are as a state on our median property taxes. We are 34th. Came out just the other day. Brand new stat. We are 34th out of 50 states for the median property tax on a single family dwelling. I think Alabama was last. Wait. Yea, Alabama. So -- Simison: In conclusion -- McKay: -- in conclusion we have got a great project. I have got great clients and we are excited and the Springday project cannot -- cannot carry the full burden of the cost to improve all of the collectors, the sewer and the things that need to take place out here within this time frame and I ask that the Council support this project, because it is a good project and it is the right time to get these things done and that's all I got to say, unless you got a question. Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant? Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Becky, I know that you went through it last week, but could you refresh my memory on the timeline? I remember it was 15 years, but like estimated like start of that, because there is so many moving parts to this. McKay: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Roberts, that's a good question. So, we -- we did have a significant number of phases within the -- within the Dayspring project, obviously, because of its size, which is not -- not unlike what we had at The Oaks -- Oaks North and Oaks South, which I did for Coleman Homes and Toll Brothers took it over. So, it's - - it's -- you know, they always want to build their central amenities within the -- the first or the second phase, get the collectors in. I think we have a total of 13 phases total in this project. Typically what we see is we are -- we are paving a phase a year and so, you know, it's obviously based on market conditions. Now, obviously, with this -- with this particular project, you know, it's imperative we want -- we want Ustick five lanes, we want to get our sewer in, so the off-sites are going to take a significant amount of time, because it's -- it's a heavy lift to do 30 inch sewer, 30 feet deep, high ground water. There is only certain times of the year that we can do it, certain times we can shut McDermott down, so that's going to be the heavy lifting. So, it's not like, hey, homes are popping up here next spring. That's not happening. I mean we are -- I don't see homes Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 8 of 26 coming up -- you know, popping up until Ustick is five lanes and -- and it's an incremental process and -- and for Toll, you know, we will -- we will have one phase under construction getting ready to pave and, then, we will start another one for them, so they -- they kind of -- it's kind of like a cyclical thing. They don't want to run out of momentum or run out of lots, but it's not like I'm bringing on 13 phases in the next two years. That's just not happening. It can't happen. It's impossible. You just can't logistically do it. Plan approval takes us about a year anymore with Army Corps permits and city, ACHD. So, it's -- it's -- it's a slow haul anymore. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor, Becky, you have been doing this a while, so just your best off- the-hook Becky guess, break ground on the first house in two years? Three years? McKay: I would -- I would say not until probably 2027. 2027. Little Roberts: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Sonya, can you pull up the staff report? Particularly I'm looking at page five, the service impact summary, figure number three. Allen: Yes. Give me just one moment, please. Cavener: Becky, I think we touched a little bit on this last week, but I have to admit towards the end of the evening my brain was a little foggy, so I don't know if it was something I intended to talk to you about or I did, so forgive me, I didn't go back and review the minutes. My questions are when we look at this service impact tool, right, we rate things as ready, marginal and caution and there are some of these that I look at with greater emphasis. Well, transit and, you know, distance to schools -- or, excuse me, distance to parks are important. They are not as important as sewer, EMS, police, fire and so when I -- when I see there is caution for EMS, fire, and police, that worries me for our current residents in that area, but it certainly worries me about future residents in that area, that I wouldn't want to welcome people to our community unless we could meet the standard that we have provided to our other residents. Help me understand -- you -- to Council Member Roberts' point, you have been doing this a long time and I really value your expertise, but when I look at this it causes me pause and you are here before us with this information as well and still wanting to move forward. Help me understand what you and your client are going to do to overcome these very legitimate concerns about service in that area. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 9 of 26 McKay: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, obviously, we will be extending sewer. Water is already available to the site. Cavener: Yep. McKay: There is 12 inch water main right in front of Ustick. It's already looped. It goes north on McDermott. So, we will be extending the sewer to this area, which, obviously, will serve other adjoining properties, including the future regional park that the city has. Cavener: I think -- I'm less concerned about sewer. I'm more about -- McKay: Emergency services? Cavener: Yeah. Police and fire. They are rated as caution. McKay: So, you have -- you have station -- you have your Station No. 8, which is just west on Ustick and north on Owyhee Storm. That is less than 2.4 miles. So, it's almost a straight shot over to where my projects are. So, I guess I'm struggling -- I'm struggling with -- you have -- you have already made that investment in that general vicinity to serve development -- Cavener: I hear you. McKay: -- and -- and it's anticipated that that will serve The Fields project, which that lift station that Can-Ada lift station isn't even online. In addition, it's going to improve service for this area, the existing residents and, then, these residents. These residents aren't going to come online for a couple of years and it's going to be an incremental process as these homes become occupied. I don't have any multi-family component where we are going to have 250 residents automatically boom. This is going to be -- you know, 40, 50 lots at a time and, then, the homes are built incrementally. So, you have already -- you have already had the expenditure in this area and I guess I'm struggling with what -- what am I lacking? Cavener: And -- and, Becky, I think that is fair and I agree with you. I guess maybe it's a question, then, for our -- our police and fire, which is they are the ones that provide this data why is it coming back, then, as critical or caution, because to your point we have got a police and a fire station over there, but there must be some reason why in a staff report it is our EMS, fire and our EMS police are rated at caution. So, I guess, Mr. Mayor, if it's -- McKay: Is that from COMPASS or is that from your own fire and police department? Cavener: I believe it's from our fire department and our police department. McKay: I thought the fire department -- I -- my recollection was had no comment. I don't know. Am I -- Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 10 of 26 Cavener: Mr. Mayor, is it possible -- can we hear from police and fire? Because those -- that to me is the biggest hurdle for me to overcome is -- McKay: You are looking at the COMPASS -- the little -- Cavener: I'm looking at the staff report that's provided for -- to us as Council and the public to make these decisions. Taulbee: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Cavener, to be honest, I'm not familiar with this service accessibility report for this specific project. I believe it was reviewed before I came on board. Cavener: Okay. Taulbee: In saying that I also would believe, just based on the response time here, that it was done before Station 8 was constructed and that's just looking at on the surface. I could look into it in more detail for you if you like. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I don't know where the rest of Council is. To me this -- this is the hurdle to overcome and so if -- certainly if this analysis was done before we built the station, think in fairness we have done the applicant a disservice -- a great disservice and so I do think that if we can spend some time and truth this out when this was completed and the data that we were used, because, just being frank, I can't support something if -- if we are hearing caution for our police and fire services and we are going to add a whole bunch of homes. So, if we have erred in not doing this in a timely manner, let's get that and let's take some ownership for that and that would very well likely at least address my major concern about this request before us. McKay: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, this project was submitted -- I think on the 22nd of December of last year, so I am not sure when Station 8 became operational. Simison: It was a year before that. Sonya, can you speak to how this chart is filled out? Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council, Brian McClure in our office designed this and I can't fully explain it. I'm sorry. I am looking at our map to see if our current data matches this, though. If you will give me just a moment. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 11 of 26 Strader: Maybe while you are checking on that, I did just have a comment. I appreciate you sitting down with Mike Moyle. Thank you for doing that. McKay: You're welcome. I was glad to do it. And I have his cell number and he says he wants to meet again and I said I will take you up on that. Strader: I think sometimes people hearing the message from us doesn't get across as well, but sometimes other stakeholders have better luck and I just -- I don't like saying no to things. I actually don't. I do try to get to yes. I'm going to have a hard time -- especially if our levy fails I'm going to have a really hard time until that bill gets fixed and it's not, you know, something that I think we are going to solve in this meeting, but I just wanted to compliment you. I think you are one of the people that takes community wide problems seriously and takes a lot of ownership of trying your best to help and I just wanted to say I'm very grateful for that. I really appreciate that about you. Thank you. McKay: Thank you very much. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: While Sonya is looking that up, I -- I had a similar question to Council President Cavener. The project last week to the north of this -- I will be quick. The project to the north did not have similar -- I'm done. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: What I think good Council Member Whitlock is saying is that the -- the staff report for the Springday project did show that the services were marginal. Not ready, but not in caution. And for me that was certainly a basis is why I was -- I think I touched on that last week -- a basis of why I was willing to support the Dayspring. I think that's what you were trying to say before feedback cut you off. Whitlock: Correct. Allen: So, Mr. Mayor, to respond to those questions I will go to Springday real quick first, because I was just looking at that. So, it's in the yellow on Springday and that is closer to Ustick Road and that -- that makes a difference, too. The service accessibility tool differs on what parcel you select. So, some of these larger parcels that have a bigger area it can -- it can be a little bit different. So, on the Dayspring property I did look at all the parcels from Ustick Road clear to the south and they are all showing red on emergency services for fire and police and I can't tell you why. I don't know the Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 12 of 26 difference between the Springday and this -- and Dayspring and why they are -- they are coming up differently. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Becky, I'm sorry. This is -- to have this stuff kind of playing out. We are trying to figure out what methodology we are using in a -- in a staff report on the fly and that's - - that's not acceptable. That's not how we typically do business. But, Mr. Mayor, maybe it's a ten minute recess, so that we can hopefully get on the phone with the appropriate people and so that we, as Council, can feel like regardless whatever decision we are intending or planning to make tonight that it is with the most accurate information and, listen, staff, this is -- I should have -- I thought -- I meant to flag this for you guys earlier and I didn't do that, so falls very much into -- the blame falls largely on my shoulder. So, Becky, I'm personally apologizing to you as well, but, Mr. Mayor, a five, ten break for us to make sure that when -- when the study was done certainly if this report penalizes larger applications because of their size -- solely because of their size, that to me is an important factor for me to be aware of and if this was broken down into 15 separate projects for each phase would it receive the same rating. So, we have got some information. We need to truth. I don't know if we can figure it out in five or ten minutes. Simison: And maybe ask a general question that maybe can be answered. What's our current citywide response time on fire? Taulbee: Mr. Mayor, our current citywide response time is anywhere between seven and ten minutes. Simison: So, wherever your feelings are on response times, this falls within -- somewhere to that level. So, how someone is determining if this serves a red, yellow, or green? Don't know what determining factor they have chosen in this process as that pertains to your current -- you know, I don't know if this was a five would that be green? A six green? A seven green? Cavener: Mr. Mayor, in all fairness, the applications that we see we -- we don't see caution for police and fire services and so what that has told me is that whatever our subject matter experts basis is for marginal -- which I view as acceptable -- this is worse than that and I don't know why, because to the applicant's point we have got a police station and a fire station that's pretty darn close to where this is and so that's why I want to understand the why and I'm -- I'm just being frank, I'm a little frustrated that our subject matter experts for the city can't give me that explanation right now and so I would like to take some time, so that -- because, again, I'm a no right now because of these things. Now, if we can provide the level of service that our citizens expect and what our future citizens would expect, I would -- I want to support this, but I can't right now, but if I -- if my opposition is based on incorrect data I want to know that ASAP. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 13 of 26 Simison: Well, we will go ahead and take a ten minute recess to see if we can find the staff member who put this together to determine the information. Allen: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, there is an explanation in the staff report. It's on screen on C, service assessment notes, and if we take a little break I will try to get that information for you. Thank you. Simison: Okay. We will reconvene as close to 6:50 as practical. (Recess: 6:40 p.m. to 6:47 p.m.) Simison: All right. We will go ahead and come on back from recess. Council, we do have Mr. McClure who has joined us who is the person who helped put together this information in the staff report, so, Brian, if you want to go ahead and unmute just so we can make sure we can hear you. McClure: Can you hear me? Simison: Yes, we can. Okay. So, Council, questions if you would like to ask Mr. McClure. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Brian, thanks for joining us, man. I'm sorry about this. Maybe two questions. One was the -- the service report that is included in the staff report, the service impact tool, was it using data before Station 8 was built and the auxiliary police station built? McClure: Council, Mayor, Councilman Cavener, no. The -- the tool uses existing data. Both of those points are in GIS. But they function very differently. Fire is based off response time, which is not just distance traveled, but also intersections and, then, intersection delays and, then, PD is not on response time, but on current crime statistics in the area. I don't actually know how all of that works, but off the top my head it's based off of current PD reporting for how they do -- they are mostly square mile blocks and it's the number of crimes, the types of crimes, but it's not a response time factor and they are both existing conditions only. Cavener: So, Mr. Mayor, quick follow up. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: So, Brian, you couldn't, then, say here is -- here is why EMS fire, EMS police are rated at caution versus a neighborhood that's right across the street being rated as marginal. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 14 of 26 McClure: I -- sometimes. I can't say specifically off the cuff on this one. What happens very frequently, though, is when you look at a big project it assumes the centroid -- the center of that parcel and since there is no roads oftentimes those areas fall outside of, you know, easy access places. A lot of times developments, when they come on -- come online and they provide more roads, those things improve, because there is more connectivity in the area. So, if something is typically like yellow across the street, then, I would expect something on the south side to also be yellow once they add in more roads. It's just existing conditions out there right now. Cavener: Okay. That's helpful. McClure: And, then, on the PD side their -- their analysis grids -- there is a term they use for that. I don't -- I don't remember off the top of my head, but they are based -- they are separated by section miles. So, something on the north is going to -- could be completely different than something on the south based off the developments and their respective grids. Cavener: Okay. Thank you. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Yes. Was that -- Taylor: Councilman Taylor. Simison: Oh. Sorry, Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Yeah. I have a question for Brian. So, kind of to clarify. So, Brian, is it -- when you are looking at the data are you doing it parcel by parcel and, then, considering the existing infrastructure that overlays the parcel by parcel? Is that correct? Am I just interpreting that -- or understanding it correctly? McClure: Could -- Mayor, Councilman Taylor, could you maybe repeat that a little bit differently for me? I'm not quite tracking. Taylor: Sure. So, what we are looking at here is a rather large development, which would include a lot of potential ownership parcels when you are kind of gridded out on -- on a GIS map. So, in my mind I'm just wondering, because it's such a large parcel that doesn't have any infrastructure in it, but does that kind of increase the chances of like a red or a cautionary development? Because I'm just -- I'm just trying to understand how you take into account the entire project when there is no existing development agreement. So, you have to look at the existing parcel map to understand it. Is that a little bit more clear? McClure: Councilman Taylor, yes, I think I have a better handle of that now. So, the entire tool is automated. It was -- it was developed in the 2019 comprehensive plan and Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 15 of 26 -- and, then, finessed a few years after that. It's auto -- it's fully automated. Every parcel in the city is run basically constantly and it's based off of existing infrastructure in there. For projects that have multiple parcels, the planners typically just take -- they click the one that's most denser or the biggest and they click on that one, what's most typical of -- of the environment currently. So, there could be some outliers that fall off into green and some that fall off into red, but they pick what's sort of the major component there and they report on that -- on that primary sort of parcel in the center of that parcel. Does that help? Taylor: Yeah. It does. And, Mr. Mayor, if I could just a quick follow up. Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I mean we are looking at one of the larger developments -- proposals in quite a long time and I'm just wondering is it -- can you tell by looking at it -- and it doesn't sound like you can, because it's maybe automated, but if you picked a parcel that's just maybe far away from any existing infrastructure, because it felt like it was the most accurate representation of the entire proposal, would that skew the results in a way that's not necessarily accurate? Just, again, we are looking at a very large proposal and I'm just wondering if it's -- you know, somehow the automatic data being sent to us is a little bit skewed. So, I'm just trying to gather some insight as to like what parcel and maybe where it was that was selected. McClure: Councilman Taylor, I don't know who has the screen right now, but could you mouse up a little bit for me, so I can see the parcel number? Allen: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor, if I may respond to that, Brian. I did just now check all the parcels and all of them are red for fire and police. If that answers your question, Brian. McClure: It does. Yes. I would also just note it's impossible not for things to be skewed a little bit, just because there are so many parcels and even if you have the lowest common denominator and it's just a tail end, you know, you are not -- one -- one flat -- one number is not going to represent absolutely the entire project always. So, things will always be slightly skewed from that perspective. It's just sort of a snapshot of the area. I am trying to turn on the -- sorry. This is Deranga or Dayspring? Allen: Dayspring. McClure: Dayspring. Let me turn on fire response time. Give me one second. Fire response time does vary out here, because there are some existing roads out there. The closest to the Ustick Road is fine. Down where the proposed collector is -- Sonya could probably help you with that. That's all generally okay. Looking at it I would expect all this area to be improved with development out here. But I think what Sonya has in her staff report is -- is generally reflected just because of the size of the parcel. Some of Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 16 of 26 this area -- most of this area is definitely currently red, but a lot of the area could be improved with more connectivity out here. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Yeah. Just maybe the one last clarification. And I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to have some clarity. It seems like this is a very static representation of what we have. It's not taking into account the new roadway infrastructure and connectivity that we will have. So, it's not dynamic in that it's anticipating that. Is that an accurate way to understand this? I'm looking at the caution. As I understand it today it's not taking into account the new roadways and new connectivity that we will have in several years from now. McClure: Mayor, Councilman Taylor, that's correct. I'm not sure I would call it static, but it is -- it is a snapshot of right now. It goes back to the desire in 2019 to have growth priority areas and this was intended to help understand what areas are most ready for growth in-fill generally being prioritized heavily, actually, in this tool. It is not a development review tool and it does not necessarily reflect what the applicant is proposing in front of you. Those things are very different. The purpose and intent of those things is very different. Taylor: Thank you. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: What -- Brian, just so for context also, like just the very top one within a half mile of city limits it's yellow. Is that saying the furthest point away from the annexation? Because you have to be -- to annex you need to be connected the city. So, how does that apply in this -- I mean I think it's just a data point amongst many -- many, but just trying to understand why -- how you get a yellow of being a half -- within with a half mile of city limits if you have to be contiguous? McClure: The city limit boundaries are measured from the edge of the partial lines. So, the partial that Sonya has selected there, the S1-2, blah, blah, blah, ending in 500, that one is in -- that one is within half a mile of existing city limits measured from the edge. Does that answer your question? Simison: 'ish. McClure: Okay. Simison: I just don't know how it applies generally. If you are contiguous you would think you would have to be adjacent to city limits, not within a half a mile. But I digress. That's really to just my -- Councilman Overton. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 17 of 26 Overton: Mr. Mayor, Brian, emergency services police is on the screen, not enough data to report an average response time. With no data or not enough data to report average response time, is it defaulting to red? McClure: Yes. It's just a snapshot point to, hey, we don't know enough -- we don't know what's out here. It could be typically that -- it's because the data is so low that the value is suppressed and the red is just, hey, look at me. It's not meant to be a grade or a rank and even if you look up top, the overall score, the second percentile, that's just reflecting of every parcel compared to every parcel and that doesn't mean whether something's good or bad or, again, how that reflects on the actual proposed development. Overton: Mr. Mayor, follow up? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: So, Brian, if -- being we have a brand new police station within the last two years 2.4 miles away from this location and we had enough data and we showed quick response times this could actually be greened. McClure: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Overton, I don't know. Unlike Fire, it is not just based off of how fast something gets there. It's also based off of the type of responses and calls they receive in the area and they -- and there is -- I think there is three different tiers there. All three of those are factored. I don't actually have access to that information. We checked it a few months ago and -- when something broke. But it's not just how fast they can get there, it also deals with the type of crime and the types of calls they are responding to. Simison: And my guess if there is not enough data reported, because there is no crimes that have occurred? McClure: Or there hasn't been a spread. I would have to look into the -- into the map. don't know off the top of my head. But there is definitely not enough data to report something that would be fair. Simison: Brian, don't go anywhere, but -- are you good? Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I'm certainly ready to move on from that chart. I think we are going to have to at this point after talking to police and fire and having Brian talk, I think in this case, for whatever reason, we need to discount some of what we are seeing in that chart as not being accurate. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 18 of 26 Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I have no other questions for the applicant and I -- unless anyone else on Council does, I'm -- maybe give the applicant a -- one last opportunity to provide any closing comments and in light of the rigmarole that we have put them through. McKay: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. I appreciate your effort trying to analyze everything. I mean this is -- these are important decisions for your community, important decisions for -- that affect property owners, developers. We did look at Apple Maps. Apple Maps shows a five minute response from your Fire Station No. 8 to the subject property. When we build these collectors out we are obviously going to improve response time not only to our property, but the adjoining subdivisions, because they can shoot down our collector and get over to Autumn Faire a lot faster than they can wind through their circuitous roadway network. Sonya put up on the screen kind of a little qualifier that says that a project should not be approved or denied due to these data points. I don't know if you noticed that, but that was kind of -- that was kind of unusual. I mean, obviously, statistics -- we do the best we can with statistics, but sometimes they don't always give us a full picture. So, I ask that the Council, obviously, consider the logic here, the big picture of this project and what this project will bring to the City of Meridian and I ask you to support it. Thank you very much. Simison: Thank you. Council, any additional questions for applicant? Okay. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I would move that we close the public hearing on Item H-2024-0070. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on H-2024-0070. Is there discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Be glad to start off with comments. Going back to last Tuesday, I guess I looked at both of these projects as being connected. Related. Unable to separate the two of them to satisfy the agreement that we would make as a city having to do with the extension of the sewer. When we talk about the city can't afford to do this, it's almost Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 19 of 26 like the city can't afford not to do this. I confirmed this morning with our Public Works director that the savings to the city -- the savings to the city for the sewer is a minimum of five million dollars. The savings to the city is that they will put that sewer in the ground through Ustick Road before it's made into five lanes. If we allow ACHD to complete that road -- if we allow ACHD -- when ACHD completes that road in '27 and, then, in FY-28 we were approved to do that city, then, we have to go tear up a brand new five lane road to put in a sewer at our full cost, which, as was pointed out, could be higher than what our applicants are going to be able to get it done for. We always get challenged when it comes to schools. Is there going to be enough room in the schools? And because this sits on the south side of the road the schools that are impacted -- every one of those schools from the elementary, the middle school, to the high school are extremely under attended right now. There are no issues with West Ada and as was pointed out in the letter from West Ada School District, they have the room and already set for two elementary schools and they have no need with these projects to go forward with those schools. They are fully confident that they have the room within the West Ada School District to house any additional students that come from this project or these two projects. I stood in amazement when we saw that chart realizing that we had opened up within the last two years the fire and police station so close and yet we could have a -- a report like that that said it was poor. I don't have an answer for that. I don't think any of us up here do today. I know that having the north station, plus Fire Station No. 8 within two and a half miles of this location -- all of our response times are going to be some of the best in the city. We are going to be in great shape. The transportation, which is always one of my biggest concerns, because this has got so many phases and it's going to take so long and we are going to have Ustick out to five lanes by 2027 and we are going to have the completion of the limited access Highway 16, to me it seems like it's not just the perfect timing to get this started, but we have got the roadway finally being built before most of this construction is completed. Now, that goes without saying if we were talking about two big projects like this and we did not have some agreement on the sewer and we had two lane country roads out here that weren't going to be done until 2031 or 2032, 1 would be a no already; right? I mean this is something that's not going to happen. But we have all the pieces in place. We have already put all those pieces in place. We have done a darn good job I think as a city and working with our ACHD partners and working with West Ada School District to be prepared for these two big projects and to be the benefactor of saving at least five million dollars, if not more, on this project partnering with the developer in this case. So, with that said I absolutely support this project moving forward. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I don't need to beat a dead horse, so I will just refer to my comments from last week. I stand by them and I think I further explained my concern. I think it's an interesting intellectual exercise to ask yourself if you had requests for numerous accelerations of our sewer infrastructure simultaneously how that would play out? I just think we need to be disciplined about how we grow and within that is because of Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 20 of 26 specifically the context around our city's financial circumstances and I will reiterate that I deeply appreciate Becky McKay having a conversation with Mike Moyle about the 389 Bill and how important it is to me personally that that bill is fixed. Thank you. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: Try this again. I appreciated the public hearing that we had and the testimony and the input. This is my district and so very concerned about what's happening and the growth pattern that will be out there and I heard from constituents and in the public testimony concerns about traffic. I also heard from the applicant that they were willing to address some of those concerns with traffic calming devices on Tricia Way and I think that satisfied some of the concerns. I mentioned this last week, but, again, it's not their project, it's to the south. Somebody else owns that parcel and over the course of a 13 phase development there may come a time when that property to the south comes before us and that connection down to Black Cat is made as an -- as an egress from this particular property. So, I think that will be addressed at -- at some point in the future -- potentially the near future, because I do think that the infrastructure from a police and fire standpoint is there and certainly with this trunk line going in from a sewer standpoint. The water is already there. I think there will be more opportunities and we will have an opportunity to address the additional transportation concerns that came up during the public hearing. I'm supportive of the cooperative development agreement. I think it's a unique opportunity for us to share some of those costs and to get the infrastructure in place. I appreciate the intellectual exercise of what would we do if we had multiple cooperative development agreements in front of us? I think Warren indicated that there are probably only a handful of opportunities like that -- two or three I think if I recall from the presentation. So, that's not a limiting factor for me. I think I can be consistent based on the fact that we won't see a flood of these types of cooperative development agreements. As Becky went through her slides tonight I appreciated the one slide that indicated both the one time and the ongoing revenues that would come and investments that would be made. In my own mind I tried to factor what the average valuation of a home would be in that area. Assign a property tax value to that and would that be sufficient to cover some of the ongoing operational expenses and so I appreciate you doing the math for me. That's not my strong suit. But it was helpful to see those numbers of what the ongoing revenues would be to help on the operational side. I think those are my main points and I appreciate -- appreciate the fact that we were able to get some additional information tonight and it was helpful in -- in crystallizing things in my mind of where we need to go with this -- with this project. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I appreciate the -- the opportunity to kind of take another stab at this. It was helpful to spend a week kind of contemplating the testimony to be taken. I went back Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 21 of 26 and reread the staff report. I actually am glad we had that conversation on some of the -- the metrics to kind of look at that. I think it was all helpful and healthy. As I look at this project I share a lot with what Councilman Overton shared and so I won't repeat too much of that, but I would just make a couple of points. You know, there was some discussion -- is this a priority growth area? I think it's clear we have made it that. I think the infrastructure that is out there with ACHD, with ITD, with the city's own investment in some, you know, police and fire stations, we have clearly identified this as a place where we want to grow and where we want to put the infrastructure and those conversations started years ago to do that. So, I don't feel like this project is accelerating growth beyond what we have really anticipated. I really appreciate the creativity of the idea of a cooperative agreement. I spent a lot of time on that. I had a lot of questions. I feel like it's a really good deal for the City of Meridian. I think that I appreciate the applicant being willing to go out on a limb a little bit and to kind of work with us and -- and have a good partnership and relationship with the city to get this done. I think that's very unique. I appreciate that and I think the city will benefit from that. As was mentioned the fiscal impact I think will be significant. A lot of discussion if the -- if -- if the -- our concerns about operating costs are sufficient. I certainly don't disregard those comments at all. I think there is a lot of validity to that and that's why we are having bigger and broader discussions about public safety levies and so forth. But I think if it were true that our operating -- concerns about operating costs were so acute I think we should be talking about moratoriums, because I don't think this project alone justifies that. I think -- again, I don't dismiss that, because that we are in a very difficult financial situation, but I don't -- my own -- looking through the budget and contemplating I don't think the operating costs on this project alone is enough to justify saying no to it. I think there is more benefits than there are liabilities and, in fact, I see a lot of benefit here. So, again, if it's true that our operating costs are such a problem, we really should be having a discussion about six month or 12 month moratoriums and I don't think that we are there. I will just end with this. I think -- I think this is a great project. I want to thank the applicant for bringing it. I can only imagine the amount of man hours and time and resources that have been put into this. Thank you for helping us build out a really nice city. I think as I was looking through it I -- I think this will be a good project. It's in a -- it's in a -- one of the fastest growing areas of town. I think we are going to see a lot of interest there, especially as these other projects get done. So, I'm going to be supporting this tonight and I -- but I do appreciate the vigorous discussion all around. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor and Council, without reiterating the comments from my last three council members, I concur, I think that this is a great project in what's happened -- turned out to be the right space. We have a new fire station, new police station, new high school and so it really has kind of become the perfect spot, even if we didn't intend it that way at the time all this was happening. I think being able to put the sewer in and not have the road torn up twice and have a great savings to the city is a huge benefit. I Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 22 of 26 definitely -- I mean this is a huge project. I'm glad we have been so thoughtful and had such great discussions. Definitely let us look at how we do our processing and things like that with regarding to the GIS system and things. So, thank you for your patience as we are still in the process of working through that. But I think that we have really gained a comfort level tonight with that system to know that we really are okay public safety wise in that area and that the development will contribute to the city being able to maintain that as we move along and that it's not going to happen overnight and that infrastructure will go in prior -- that the whole city in that area needs will go in prior to the houses actually starting to be built. So, with all of that I will be supporting the project. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Be brief. Thanks to our staff for kind of pivoting kind of last minute to help us get some additional information and certainly patience for the applicant and the public. I know at one point or another all of us have heard from somebody in our community that talks about get the infrastructure in place before you build and this is a project where the infrastructure is in place, which is why I had such concerns when a staff report says caution when it comes to the things that we have direct control of, which is emergency responses. Recognizing that maybe we use some data sources or data points to make some determinations about if something is -- if you should have caution or not aside, because I believe the location of our police and our fire and certainly I very much have strong faith in the data from West Ada that we are continuing to see a shift in a trend down in school enrollment, that a long phase project like this will be -- students will be generated just in time that the schools, again, will be able to continue to accommodate that student growth. These houses will come online as we were going to be able to bring on additional firefighters and additional police officers to meet the need in this area. So, with my hesitation about some of the data in our -- in the staff report aside, I'm -- I'm satisfied with this application, because I do think it brings a lot of value to our community and 1, too, will be in support of the motion this evening. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: If there is no further comments, I will move forward with a motion. Mr. Mayor, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, knowing that this project is contingent upon both the city and developer's mutual intent to enter into cooperative agreement to extend sewer service to the property ahead of the city's scheduled infrastructure project, I move to approve File No. H-2024-0070 as presented in a staff report for the hearing date of today July 15th, 2025. Little Roberts: Second. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 23 of 26 Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve the item. Does the motion include all the comments from staff and applicant pertaining to all the provisions regarding traffic calming measures, et cetera, that were discussed last week? Was that the intention? Overton: Mr. Mayor, yes, it does. Little Roberts: Second concurs. Simison: All right. Is there discussion on the motion? If not Clerk call the roll. Roll Call: Cavener, yea; Strader, nay; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea; Whitlock, yea. Simison: Five ayes. One nay. And the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. Simison: Thank you, everybody, for your multiple -- for the coming back and the conversation. Brian, appreciate you getting back on this evening to help us out and good luck. I guess we will see you back here before it moves forward again for further conversation, but that will be private. 2. Public Hearing for proposed Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department Simison: So, with that we will move on to Item 2 for the evening, which is a public hearing for proposed Homecourt fees and adult sports fees for Meridian Parks and Recreation Department. Open this public hearing with comments from Mr. White. White: Mr. Mayor, Members of the staff, thanks for having me tonight. In front of you is the proposed Homecourt fees and a handful of adult sports fees for volleyball and basketball coming up. A couple weeks ago I was in front of you, kind of proposing these fees and getting feedback from you guys and since, then, we posted these fees in the paper. We also posted these fees on site at Homecourt, trying to get feedback from participants and stuff like that. The primary response we got was, yeah, you haven't raised fees for nine to ten years. This is expected. All around -- and I was talking to a gentleman today -- same response. So, with that I will stand for questions if you have some. Simison: Thank you, Garrett. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Is there anybody in the room or online that would like to provide testimony on this item? If you are online use the raise your hand feature. Seeing no one raise their hand. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 24 of 26 Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Credit to Garrett White for being online and in person -- oh, sorry, Dean. Thank you. And I will credit to Garrett for being on the line and in person at the same time. But seeing nobody putting their hand up to testify, I move we close the public hearing on proposed Homecourt fees and adult -- adult -- fall adult sport fees for the Meridian Parks and Rec Department. Whitlock: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the above hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. RESOLUTIONS [Action Item] 3. Resolution No. 25-2526: A Resolution Adopting Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; authorizing the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to collect such fees; and providing an effective date. Simison: So, next item up is Item 3, which is Resolution No. 25-2526. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: I move that we approve Item No. 3, Resolution No. 25-2526, resolution adopting Homecourt fees and fall -- fall adult sports fees, Meridian Parks and Rec. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Resolution No. 25-2526. Is there discussion on the motion? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Quickly before a vote, I know this is kind of a simple resolution before us, but it's the result of a lot of great work from our staff, our Parks Commission, our good parks liaison and I just specifically I want to thank Garrett for being really responsive to the feedback and working proactive -- working proactively to meet the needs of this facility, Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 25 of 26 both currently and in the long run. So, really, really great work and much much appreciated. Simison: Thank you. Is there further discussion? If not Clerk call the roll. Roll Call: Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea; Whitlock, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or a motion to adjourn? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: It seems like it would be great to have a workshop about the components that go into our staff reports in that table and just maybe some follow up on what goes into that, how does fire assess it, how does police assess it, and expectations as well just when people come that they are kind of ready to specifically discuss or we make sure the right people are in the room and all of that. So, that -- that's my only suggestion for a future meeting topic. Simison: Okay. Anything else? Then do I have a different motion? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Move we adjourn the meeting. Strader: Second. Simison: Motion and second adjourn the meeting. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7.22 P.M. Meridian City Council July 15,2025 Page 26 of 26 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 8 / 12 25 MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 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: July 15t", 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 h2 City Council MeetingJuly 15, 2025 Slide 1 h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order: hoodc, 12/19/2006 Zoning MapAerialFLUM Residential:DocView.aspx?id=404260&dbid=0&repohttps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Commercial:DocView.aspx?id=403430&dbid=0&repohttps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=396651&dbi d=0&repohttps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/ Changes to Agenda: None Item#17: Virgin Mary&St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Church (H-2025-0015) Application(s): Development Agreement Modification Size of property,existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 0.55 acres of land, is zoned L-0 and is located at 4383 N. Locust Grove Rd. History: This property was annexed in 2016 with the requirement of a DA,which includes a portion of the abutting property to the south that was originally part of the subject property. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU-N (0.4 acre)&MDR(northern 0.14 acre) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests an amendment to the existing DA for a new agreement that will only apply to the subject property.The amendment includes an updated concept development plan and change in use of the property. The existing concept plan anticipated the existing house on the northern portion of the property either being remodeled for an office use and remaining or being removed and a new office building constructed in its place.The southern portion of the property was anticipated to develop with a new office building, or the existing office on the adjacent parcel to the south would be expanded onto the subject property. Since that time,the residential home has been removed from the site and not replaced with a new building. The proposed development plan is for a 9,930 sq.ft. church with an occupancy of 160 people.Access is proposed via N. Bright Angel —no access is proposed or allowed via Locust Grove Rd.Additional ROW is required to be dedicated as required by ACHD for the ultimate expansion of Locust Grove Rd.to 5-lanes and Bright Angel Ave.to 3-lanes abutting the site. Based on the square footage of the church, a minimum of 20 off-street parking spaces are required to be provided.A total of 11 spaces are proposed on-site and an alternative off-street parking plan for a shared use parking agreement is proposed with a nearby daycare facility(Brighter Beginnings Learning Center) located at 1463 E. Star Rd. to use up to 15 of their parking spaces during their off-hours on Saturdays between 9:00 am and 1:00 pm, Sundays and Holy holidays when the daycare owner's parking needs are expected to be less—additional spaces require approval. The provision of alternative off-street parking requires submittal of an alternative compliance application to the parking standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6 and approval of such by the Director,which hasn't yet been submitted. With the proposed shared parking, a total of 26 off-street spaces will be available for the proposed use during certain days and times as specified in the agreement. If additional parking is needed, it will have to be accommodated on-street in the residential neighborhood if the proposed application is approved. The normal business hours of operation for the daycare are currently Monday through Friday from 6:30 am to 6:00 pm but could expand to Saturdays in the future.There are conflicts that exist between the standard hours of operation of the daycare and/or the use agreement and the proposed church on Saturday evenings between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm and during certain days/times on Holy holidays/Feasts(i.e. Friday before passion week from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm, Saturdays during Passion Week from 1:00 to 2:00 pm and from 12:00 am to 6:30 am and 5:00 pm to 10:00 pm.The day/times of nativity feast&the Feast of the Baptism may also conflict depending on what day of the week they fall on. If the daycare changes their hours to include Saturdays in the future, it would also present a significant conflict. It should also be noted that the hours of operation in the L-0 district are limited to the hours between 6:00 am& 10:00 pm,therefore, the hours between 12:00 am and 6:00 am on Saturday during Passion Week would not be allowed. Staff recommends the Applicant submit an updated shared use parking agreement and/or hours of operation for the church that doesn't conflict with the standard operating hours for both uses, including the Holy holidays(i.e. Feasts),for inclusion in the new DA with the application for alternative compliance to the required parking standards. The Parkins-Nourse Lateral runs along the east boundary of site along N. Locust Grove Rd.—most of the ditch is piped with a short 20'+/-section that is open at the north end,which is required to be piped with development. A minimum 25'wide landscaped street buffer is required to be provided along Locust Grove Rd., measured from the ultimate back of curb location. The applicant requests approval of a reduced street buffer width of 12'6",which requires submittal of an alternative compliance application and demonstration that a unique hardship caused by the required street buffer exists; the request needs to also include a proposal of a specific alternative landscape plan that meets or exceeds the intent of the required buffer—in no case shall the width be reduced to less than 10%of the depth of the lot(after ROW dedication). A minimum 20-foot wide landscape buffer to residential uses is required to be provided along the northern property boundary. The Applicant requests Council approval of a reduced buffer width of 5 feet along this boundary with no reductions to the building setback. Council should determine if the request is appropriate. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown for a 2-story church with a main level approximately 4'above ground level and a lower-level daylight basement;the elevations will include windows at the lower level that aren't currently shown. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: If Council deems the proposed use and development plan appropriate for this site, Staff recommends a DA with the provisions noted in the staff report and requirement for the Applicant submit and obtain Director approval of Alternative Compliance applications for an alternative off-street parking plan in order to comply with the minimum off-street parking standards listed in the UDC; and a reduced street buffer width along N. Locust Grove Rd. prior to City Council approval of the signed DA. This will ensure the DA isn't amended for a development plan that isn't feasible or that isn't approved. If one or both of these applications is denied by the Director, revisions to the site plan shall be made to comply with the minimum standards for such in the UDC. Additionally, Staff recommends the Applicant submit an updated shared use parking agreement and/or hours of operation for the church that don't conflict with the standard operating hours for both uses, including the Holy holidays (i.e. Feasts),for inclusion in the new DA. Lastly, Staff requests Council amend DA provision#11 to reflect that business hours of operation shall not extend beyond the hours of 6:00 am to 10:00 pm as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3B for the L-0 zoning district. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2025-0015, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 8, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0015,as presented during the hearing on July 8,2025,for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2025-0015 to the hearing date of for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item#20: PAW Subdivision (H-2024-0073) Application(s): ➢ Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit Size of property,existing zoning,and location: This site consists of 4.77 acres of land,zoned CC and R-40 located at 1680 W. Ustick Road. History: H-2021-0102; FP-2022-0034; DA Inst#2022-063228 Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Non-Residential Summary of Request: In 2022, a proposal to rezone 3.42 acres of the subject property from C-C to R-40, and a preliminary plat for 33 townhouse lots, 2 lots for 2 vertically integrated buildings with 6 residential units each (commercial and residential), 1 commercial lot, and 10 common lots.Along with a conditional use permit for townhouses in the R-40 zoning district. The proposal was approved by the City Council; however,the preliminary plat expired prior to receiving the City Engineer's signature. The Conditional Use Permit also expired with the application. The applicant is back to requesting a Preliminary Plat with 49 lots(33 residential, 2 vertically integrated buildings, 1 commercial, 10 common lots and 3 private streets); and a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed townhomes.Townhouses are allowed by conditional use in the R-40 zoning district and vertically integrated structures are a principally permitted use in the C-C zoning district. Although it has not been determined what type of future use would occur on the commercial lot,the concept plan suggests a drive through establishment. If this drive-through is proposed in the future, it will require the approval of a conditional use permit once a user has been identified. Building elevations were submitted with this application. The elevations show townhouses comprised of materials consisting of rock, cement board and hardie board, lap siding,with pitched roofs, exposed timber frame and trellis features,with stone bases.Windows are included on many of the garage doors. The elevations demonstrate significant fenestration and modulation as well as a variety of roofline variation. Most buildings also include first floor covered porches and second story decks. Staff find the elevations, as proposed, demonstrate high quality design, but the elevations of the vertically integrated structures reflect a townhouse design rather than a commercial business.At design review the first floor(commercial portion)of the vertically integrated buildings shall meet the commercial architectural design standards. Staff Recommendation:Approval with conditions Written Testimony: None Commission Recommendation:Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Applicant ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None v. Key Issue(s): None Key Issue(s)of Discussion by Commission: i. None Commission Change(s)to Staff Recommendation: i. None Outstanding Issue(s)for City Council: i. None Testimony Written since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0073, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 8, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0073,as presented during the hearing on July 8,2025,for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2024-0073 to the hearing date of[date]for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item#21: Springday Subdivision (H-2024-0069) Application(s): ➢ Annexation &Zoning ➢ Preliminary Plat Size of property,existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 40.84 acres of land,zoned RUT in Ada County, located approximately'/4 mile west of N. Black Cat Rd.on the north side of W. Ustick Rd. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (36.6 acres)&Office (1.8 acres) Summary of Request: The Applicant requests annexation of 40.84 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district for the development of 170 SFR homes at a gross density of 4.43 units/acre consistent with the density desired of 3 to 8 units per acre in the MDR district. Although a portion of this property is designated for Office uses, no office uses are proposed due to the location of the collector street, which after ROW dedication only leaves 0.65 acre,which the Applicant states isn't large enough to develop as such. There are mixed- use designated properties directly to the south that could accommodate some of the office uses planned for this area.The Wardle out- parcel at the SWC of the site will likely be converted to or re-develop with an office use in the future. For these reasons&because FLUM designations are not parcel specific,the Applicant requests the adjacent abutting MDR designation apply to the Office designated portion of the site.At the request of Staff, the annexation boundary includes the adjacent 2.26 acre property to the east owned by the Bureau of Reclamation where the Eightmile Lateral lies;the preliminary plat does not include that property. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 170 buildable lots and 19 common lots on 38.56 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district.The average residential lot size for the proposed development is 5,546 sq. ft.with a minimum lot size of 4,600 sq.ft. and a maximum lot size of 9,317 sq.ft.A phasing plan was submitted that shows 6 phases of development. Access is proposed via one collector street connection to Ustick Rd. at the SWC of the site,which stubs to the northern property line for future extension in accord with the Master Street Map.A stub street is proposed to the west for future extension and interconnectivity and ROW extends to the Wardle out-parcel for future access.An emergency only access is proposed on the eastern portion of the property via Ustick Rd. A 35'wide street buffer is required along Ustick Rd.,designated as an entryway corridor;20'wide street buffers are required along the collector street, landscaped in accord with UDC standards. Open space&site amenities are proposed in excess of the requirements.A minimum of 5.78 acres (or 15%) is required—8.5 acres(or 22.04%) is proposed.A minimum of 8 site amenity points are required, a total of 29 points are provided, as follows: ➢ Quality of Life: o Picnic area on a site 5,000 sq.ft. or greater in size—2 points o Dog park—2 points o Two(2)dog waste stations—0.5 points each for a total of 1 point ➢ Recreation Activity Area: o Two(2) paved sports courts—4 points each for a total of 8 points o Swimming pool—4 points o Swimming pool changing facilities and restrooms—6 points ➢ Pedestrian or Bicycle Circulation System: o Multi-use pathways—2,445'—2 points per'/4 mile for a total of 4 points ➢ Multi-modal: o Enclosed bicycle storage—2 points A variety of conceptual building elevations were submitted that represent the quality of future homes planned in this development.The final design of single-family attached units are required to comply with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. Single-family detached units are exempt from design standards. Water service is available at the site; sewer service is not available and will need to be extended from its current location north of W. Ustick Rd. in N. McDermott Rd. approximately 1.1 miles to the site.Approval of the subdivision's sewer system is contingent upon the submittal and approval of plans to serve the proposed development. While the extension of sewer infrastructure in this area is included in a City project scheduled for 2028, the developer is seeking to partner with the City to accelerate the timeline, contingent upon securing entitlements for the property. Because the City does not support annexing and entitling property for development without a timely plan to extend municipal services, Staff recommends that approval of the project be contingent upon both the City's and Developer's mutual intent to enter into a cooperative agreement to extend sewer service to the property ahead of the City's scheduled infrastructure project.This agreement should be executed within six(6)months of the approval of the Findings and prior to the adoption of the annexation ordinance,which would formally incorporate the property into the City. In the absence of such an agreement,the property will not be annexed. Commission Recommendation:Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions ii. In opposition: Shawn Freeman (letter) iii.Commenting: Shawn Wardle iv. Written testimony: Mitch &Brittany Watson, Martin&Joanne Oemig and Shawn Freeman v.Key Issue(s): • Request for the City to limit density to 1-3 units per acre in all new neighborhoods to ease the current and future infrastructure and increase the quality of life for Meridian residents and leave as many waterways uncovered as possible for wildlife. • Opinion the proposed density is too high and will negatively impact the character and quality of life in their neighborhood and will lead to overcrowding,strain on local resources such as schools and utilities. • Questions pertaining to the provision of access and services to the Wardle parcel; request for a recommendation to be made to the Traffic Safety Commission to reduce the speed limit on Ustick Rd. Key Issue(s)of Discussion by Commission: Support of the Applicant's proposal to extend sewer infrastructure to serve the development prior to the City's project and completion of the Ustick road widening project. Commission Change(s)to Staff Recommendation: None Outstanding Issue(s)for City Council:Approximately 1.8 acres of this property is designated on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan as Office; however,due to the proposed location of the collector street and the small remaining area, no office uses are proposed.The Applicant requests Council approval to apply the adjacent Medium Density Residential (MDR) FLUM designation to the Office designated portion of the property. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0069, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 8, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2024-0069,as presented during the hearing on July 8,2025,for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2024-0069 to the hearing date of for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item#22: Dayspring Subdivision (H-2024-0070) Application(s): ➢ Annexation &Zoning ➢ Preliminary Plat Size of property,existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 143.09 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located on the south side of W. Ustick Rd., '/4 mile east of N. McDermott Rd. History: None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use—Community(22.27 acres)on the northeastern portion of the property& Medium Density Residential (120.82 acres)on the southwestern portion.A future school site is also designated along the eastern boundary of the site. Summary of Request: The Applicant requests annexation of 143.09-acres of land with R-4(32.64-acres), R-8(77.76-acres), TN-R (25.29-acres)and C-N (7.40-acres)zoning for the development of 517 residential dwelling units consisting of a mix of SFR detached homes&townhomes and commercial uses.The proposed mix of uses and densities are consistent with that desired in the underlying FLUM designations for the site.WASD submitted comments stating a school is not needed in the area designated for such on the FLUM. A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 531 buildable lots (517 residential & 14 commercial)and 78 common lots on 143.09-acres of land in the R-4, R-8, TN-R and C-N zoning districts. The average residential lot size for the proposed development is 6,544 sq.ft. with a minimum lot size of 1,800 sq.ft. and a maximum lot size of 20,064 sq.ft. The proposed commercial lots have an average size of 14,375 sq.ft. A phasing plan was submitted that shows 13 phases of development. Access is proposed via one collector street at the NEC of the site from W. Ustick Rd.,which extends to the south &west boundaries of the site in accord with the Master Street Map. Four(4)existing stub streets at the eastern boundary of the property will also provide access and be extended with development. Stub streets are proposed to adjacent parcels to the east,west and south for future extension and interconnectivity as shown on the plat.A backage road is proposed along W. Ustick Rd.with the 1st phase of development which will provide a connection between the entry road and the McDermott Rd. bypass and provide access to the commercial lots. The McDermott Road bypass has been constructed adjacent to this site to the west and is currently under the jurisdiction of ITD but is anticipated to be transferred to ACHD in the future. Staff recommends W. McMurtrey St. is extended off-site to the west and connects to the McDermott Road bypass with approval from ITD. If approval cannot be obtained from ITD, the street should be extended once under the jurisdiction of ACHD. A 35'wide street buffer is required along Ustick Rd.,designated as an entryway corridor;20'wide street buffers are required along collector streets, landscaped in accord with UDC standards. Qualified open space&site amenities are proposed in excess of the minimum standards.A minimum of 19.38 acres is required— 31.72 acres(or 22.9%) is proposed.A minimum of 29 site amenity points are required, a total of 55 points are provided, as follows: ➢ Quality of Life: o Picnic area on a site 5,000 sq.ft. or greater in size—2 points each for a total of 6 points o Dog park—2 points o Six(6)dog waste stations—0.5 points each for a total of 3 points ➢ Recreation Activity Area: o Two(2) paved sports courts(pickleball)—4 points each for a total of 8 points o (2)swimming pools—4 points each for a total of 8 points o Swimming pool changing facilities and restrooms—6 points each for a total of 12 points ➢ Pedestrian or Bicycle Circulation System: o Multi-use pathways—2 per'/4 mile for a total of 6 points ➢ Multi-modal: o (2)enclosed bicycle storage at pool house—2 points each for a total of 4 points A variety of conceptual building elevations were submitted for the SFR detached homes and townhomes that represent the quality of future homes planned in this development. Conceptual elevations were also submitted for the commercial structures that demonstrate a variety of different cohesive design themes for the entire development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for mixed-use designated areas. Water service is available at the site; sewer service is not available and will need to be extended from its current location north of W. Ustick Rd. in N. McDermott Rd. approximately 0.8 miles to the site.Approval of the subdivision's sewer system is contingent upon the submittal and approval of plans to serve the proposed development. While the extension of sewer infrastructure in this area is included in a City project scheduled for 2028, the developer is seeking to partner with the City to accelerate the timeline, contingent upon securing entitlements for the property. Because the City does not support annexing and entitling property for development without a timely plan to extend municipal services, Staff recommends that approval of the project be contingent upon both the City's and Developer's mutual intent to enter into a cooperative agreement to extend sewer service to the property ahead of the City's scheduled infrastructure project.This agreement should be executed within six(6)months of the approval of the Findings and prior to the adoption of the annexation ordinance,which would formally incorporate the property into the City. In the absence of such an agreement,the property will not be annexed. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions ii. In opposition: None iii.Commenting: Ryan Howell, Don LaFever, Rick Munn, Mark Graham, Tom Robinson, Corey Thacker, Shantel Robinson iv. Written testimony: Several letters of testimony have been received (see public record) v.Key Issue(s): o Safety concerns pertaining to an increase in traffic from the eastern accesses to the development through Tricia's Crossing and Turnberry Crossing subdivisions,specifically around Seasons Park and in the area where children wait for the bus. o Belief the TIS didn't fully reflect the possible traffic issues for the Autumn Faire&Turnberry subdivisions—opinion that access for the site isn't sufficient to handle the number of lots proposed and needs to have a multi-lane roadway and roundabout at the Ustick intersection. o Concerns pertaining to more people using Seasons Park and not enough parking as it is with people parking along adjacent streets;concern pertaining to irrigation pressure and if it will go down with more users; opinion that the density is too high and lot sizes aren't comparable with adjacent existing development. o Request for right-of-way to be obtained off-site for the extension of the collector street to Cherry Ln.for better access for the site. Key Issue(s)of Discussion by Commission: ii. Generally in favor of the proposed development and the design and diversity proposed within it. iii. Belief development will occur slow enough for infrastructure to grow in this area over the next 15 years until full build-out. Commission Change(s)to Staff Recommendation: None Outstanding Issue(s)for City Council: None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: David &Becci Carmack—Concerns pertaining to the extension of the N.Tricia Way stub streets at the east side of the subdivision with development and the additional traffic these accesses will create around Season's Park; safety concerns for children darting across the streets surrounding the park to cars parked on both sides of the street and the blind corner at the entry to the park that is a traffic hazard. Request for traffic calming measures to be required in this area at both new access points that connect to Tricia Way. Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0070, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 8, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2024-0070,as presented during the hearing on July 8,2025,for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2024-0070 to the hearing date of for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s)for continuance.) W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing (Continued from July 8, 2025) for Dayspring Subdivision (H- 2024-0070) by Engineering Solutions, LLP., located at South side of W. Ustick Rd., 1/4 mile East of N. McDermott Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2024-0070 A. Request: Annexation of 143.09 acres of land with R-4 (32.64 acres), R-8 (77.76 acres), TN-R (25.29 acres) and C-N (7.40 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 531 buildable lots (517 residential and 14 commercial) and 78 common lots on 143.09 acres of land in the R-4, R-8, TN-R and C-N zoning districts. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: July 15,, 2025 ITEM PROJECT NAME: Dayspring Subdivision H-2024-0070 Cont. from 7-8-2025 I wish to testify Representing Your Full Name Your Full Address (mark X HOA? (Please Print) if yes) 2 3 11d C �vvL 1 tt S L[OM 06 ��K50V, yu Al a 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for proposed Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: July 15, 2025 ITEM PROJECT NAME: IVIPR Summer 2025 Fee Schedule I wish to testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing (mark x (Please Print) HOA? if yes) 1 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 25-2526 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: CAVENER,LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON, STRADER,TAYLOR,WHITLOCK A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW FEES OF THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, following publication of notice in the Meridian Press on July 1, 2025, and July 8, 2025, according to the requirements of Idaho Code section 63-1311A, on July 15, 2025 the City Council of the City of Meridian held a hearing on the adoption of proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, following such hearing, the City Council,by formal motion, did approve said proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the 2025 Homecourt Fees and Adult Sports of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the fees adopted for the 2025 Homecourt Fees and Adult Sports shall remain in effect until September 1, at which point the fees set forth in Exhibit A hereto shall supersede any and all fees for the enumerated services previously adopted. Section 3. That the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department is hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of said fees. Section 4. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 15th day of Jul. 2025. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 15th day of Jul. 2025. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE I OF 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, regarding proposed fee increases as set forth below. Further information is available at the Parks and Recreation Department, at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at the public hearing. Written testimony is welcome; written materials should be submitted to the City Clerk. All testimony and materials presented shall become property of the City of Meridian. For auditory, visual, or language accommodation, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (208) 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public hearing. Proposed fee increases: EXHIBIT A 2025 HOMECOURT AND ADULT SPORT FEES: Current Proposed Note:Sales tax will be collected in addition to Lee Fee New Fee Youth Day Pass $1.89 $3.77 Adult Day Pass $2.83 $4.72 Senior Day Pass $1.89 $3.77 Non—Resident Day Pass $3.77 $5.66 Youth Membership $15.00 $26.42 Adult Membership $20.00 $33.02 Senior Membership $15.00 $26.42 Non—Resident Membership $25.00 $39.62 Practice Court Fee Per Hour $42.44 $61.32 Tournament Court Fee Per Hour $70.75 Volleyball 9 week& Single Elimination $297.17 $330.19 Basketball 8 week &Double Elimination $707.55 $768.87 Volleyball 9 week&No Tournament $259.43 $297.17 Volleyball 8 week & Single Tournament N/A $297.17 PUBLISH on July 1, 2025, and July 8, 2025. ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 OF 3 Charlene Way From:Tina Lomeli Sent:Monday, July 7, 2025 9:07 AM To:Charlene Way Subject:FW: Home court Fee increase This is going to Public Hearing. How do we save this to a folder for Public Comments? -----Original Message----- From: Russell Anderson <russand74@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 6, 2025 4:58 PM To: Clerks Comment <comment@meridiancity.org> Subject: Home court Fee increase External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. My wife and I use Home court for pickleball . Great staff and building. We live in Ada county . We know cost go up that increase seems pretty steep. We pay $26.50 each includes tax monthly. There is no senior rate for us. I would understand $30 to $35 a month for each of us We use it about 3 to 4 mornings during the week. Thank You Russ Anderson 208 590 3824 Sent from my iPhone 1 W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution No. 25-2526: A Resolution Adopting Homecourt Fees and Fall Adult Sports fees for Meridian Parks & Recreation Department; authorizing the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to collect such fees; and providing an effective date. CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 25-2526 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: CAVENER,LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON, STRADER,TAYLOR,WHITLOCK A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW FEES OF THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT; AUTHORIZING THE MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO COLLECT SUCH FEES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, following publication of notice in the Meridian Press on July 1, 2025, and July 8, 2025, according to the requirements of Idaho Code section 63-1311A, on July 15, 2025 the City Council of the City of Meridian held a hearing on the adoption of proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, following such hearing, the City Council,by formal motion, did approve said proposed new fees of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the 2025 Homecourt Fees and Adult Sports of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto, is hereby adopted. Section 2. That the fees adopted for the 2025 Homecourt Fees and Adult Sports shall remain in effect until September 1, at which point the fees set forth in Exhibit A hereto shall supersede any and all fees for the enumerated services previously adopted. Section 3. That the Meridian Parks and Recreation Department is hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of said fees. Section 4. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this15th day of Jul. 2025. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 15th day of Jul. 2025. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE I OF 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, regarding proposed fee increases as set forth below. Further information is available at the Parks and Recreation Department, at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at the public hearing. Written testimony is welcome; written materials should be submitted to the City Clerk. All testimony and materials presented shall become property of the City of Meridian. For auditory, visual, or language accommodation, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (208) 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public hearing. Proposed fee increases: EXHIBIT A 2025 HOMECOURT AND ADULT SPORT FEES: Current Proposed Note:Sales tax will be collected in addition to Lee Fee New Fee Youth Day Pass $1.89 $3.77 Adult Day Pass $2.83 $4.72 Senior Day Pass $1.89 $3.77 Non—Resident Day Pass $3.77 $5.66 Youth Membership $15.00 $26.42 Adult Membership $20.00 $33.02 Senior Membership $15.00 $26.42 Non—Resident Membership $25.00 $39.62 Practice Court Fee Per Hour $42.44 $61.32 Tournament Court Fee Per Hour $70.75 Volleyball 9 week& Single Elimination $297.17 $330.19 Basketball 8 week &Double Elimination $707.55 $768.87 Volleyball 9 week&No Tournament $259.43 $297.17 Volleyball 8 week & Single Tournament N/A $297.17 PUBLISH on July 1, 2025, and July 8, 2025. ADOPTION OF FEE SCHEDULE OF MERIDIAN PARKS&RECREATION DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 OF 3