Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 -11 Comprehensive Plan Amendment I f BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 11FRIDIAN UPLAND INDUSTRIES APPLICATION TO AIMEND THE MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO DESIGNATE THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF EAGLE ROAD AND FAIR17IEW AVENUE AS A SITE FOR A REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER FINDINGS OF FACT AND C014CLUSIONS The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan having come on for public hearing and the Plan- nig and Zoning Commission having made findings of fact and conclusions and given the City Council its recommendation on said application and the City Council having heard any and all testimony .that was submitted, and having duly considered all the evidence, officially noticed evidence, and facts , the Comprehensive Plan itself, the Local Planning Act of 1975 , the Planning and Zoning Commission Find- ings of Fact and Conclusions , the City Council makes the followinc: FINDINGS OF FACT 1 . That the application was submitted by Upland Industries Corporation and is not an amendment proposed by the Commission or the City Council . 2 . That the specific parcels of property to which the applica - tion pertains are the Northwest Quarter of Section 9 , Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, (hereafter referred to as Parcel 1) which is commonly known as the Southeast Corner of the intersections of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue, and AMBROSE, E FITZGERALD 8 CROOKSTON PAGE 1 Anomeys and Counselors P0.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83641 aisphone 98$-WI i II I the Northeast Quarter of Section 8 , Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, (hereafter referred to as Parcel 2) which is commonly known as the Southwest corner of the inter- section of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue . 3. That the two specific parcels included in the application are contained within Meridian' s Area of Impact; the parcels are included within the Urban Service Planning Area and have been in the City limits for over two years . The Parcels were zoned industrial at the time of their annexation and are presently zoned Light Industrial . 4 . The Comprehensive Plan Policy Diagram appears to designate the area within which the two parcels are located as follows : for Parcel 1 in the "Eastern Industrial Review Area" and for Parcel 2 in the "Rural Residential Reserve" of the "North Curve Neighborhood" and the "Eastern Industrial Review Area . " The Plan also generally designates one site for a regional shopping center, that being at the I-84/11eridian Road Interchanae . In order to develop Parcel 1 as a regional shopping center the Applicant's proposed amendments per- taining to a regional shopping center must be approved. Likewise th Applicant' s amendments to remove the "Rural Residential Reserve" from Parcel 2 should be approved to allow the proposed industrial development and remove the possible conflict that exists between the Plan and the present zoning of Parcel- 2 . 5 . The application has been processed under the Amendment AMBROSE. Provision and Procedures of the Plan as set forth on pages 5A , 55, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Allorneys and Counselors PAGE 2 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 -s isphone 88&4"l and 56 of the Plan and the Local Planning Act of 1975 , Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code . 6 . Pursuant to the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan and the Local Planning Act, the Planning and Zoning Commission has made its Findings of Fact and Conclusions and has made its recommendation to the City Council . The City Council has reviewed those Findings and Conclusions and relies on them for many of the Findings and Conclusions made herein. 7 . That the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing o the application on December 3, 1984 ; that notice of said public hearing was published in the Valley ;dews , the official newspaper of the City of Meridian, in two consecutive issues the first of which was published fifteen ( 15) days prior to December 3, 1984 , the date of the public hearing; that notice of said hearing was available to other newspapers , radio and television stations , 8 . That there have been no chances in the application since the December 3 , 1984 public hearing nor were there any changes in th application since it was submitted. 9 . The Commission found that the application addressed the Amendment requirements under the Amendment Provision and Procedures set forth at page 54 of the Plan and the City Council agrees with such findings . 10 . The applicant' s reasons why the Plan should be amended are stated in application as follows : 1 1 . The condition and situation which warrants the change being AM BROSE, FITZGERALD 6CROOKSTON Aflorneya and PAGE 3 CounWorb P.O.Box 427 Mendlan,ICaho 83642 elephwe 888-4481 made in the Plan is that the Citv of Meridian and its surrounding area are not served by a Regional Shopping Center and that the property belonging to the Petitioner is amenable to development of a Regional Shopping Center with outstanding representation by major department stores , specialty stores and services for the residents of the City of Meridian and the surrounding region. The land in question has heretofore been annexed into the City of Meridian. 2 . The public need for and benefit from such a change in the Comprehensive Plan would generally be to : (A) Provide for the orderly growth of the City of Meridian and its environs ; B) Make readily available to the residents of the City of Meridian a wide range of store and shopping facilities and services that can only be furnished by a Regional Shopping Center- (C) To attract to the City of Meridian and generate within the City a large volume of business that would result from the location within the City a Regional Shopping Center of adequate size to serve the entire Treasure Valley and metropolitan market; 0)) The current designation of a single site for a proposed regional shopping center within the City of Meridian has been in effect for several years . The property though designated has not proved adequate to attract the major retailers necessary to support the development of a regional shopping center. It is probable that the northern Ada County area in which the City of Meridian is situate is one of the largest metropolitan markets in the entire nation not presently served by a Regional Shopping Center, The size of the population within the metropolitan area and the trade area would indicate that given a suitable location for a Regional Shopping Center, the major retail stores necessary to make up the development of such Regional Shopping Center would hasten to enter the market. Upland Industries Corporation submits that the site at the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road will be able to attract these major retail stores and that the Regional Shopping Center can equally become a AMBROSE. reality. It is apparent by reason of the inability FITZGERALD 8 CROOKSTON Atlorneytand PAGE 4 Counselors P.O Bnx 427 Meridian,Idaho 63642 aphone 888441 of the presently designated sites and of the Boise Re-Development Administration to attract establishment of a Regional Shopping Center either at these other sites or in the downtown Boise area , that the major retail firms have not found those other locations to be adequate for their. needs . 11 . The Application, in general terms, requests that Parcel 1 be identified and designated in the Plan as a site for a regional shopping center and that the "Rural Residential Reserve" designa- tion of the Plan be removed from Parcel 2 . The Application continues in specific terms to request specific changes to the Policy Diagram and to many of the policies and objectives of the various components of the Plan such that the Plan' s focus on a single designation of a regional shopping center site is changed to a two site designation focus . Many of the specific requested changes do not deal with the regional shopping center portion of the Plan, but with other components of the Plan that would be effected by a two site designation, one at Eagle Road and Fairview and one at Pleridian Road and I-84 . However, the requested changes are mainly a result of two site designations . The Application, however, requests that even in the event the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue site is not approved for a regional shopping center, that approval be given for removal of "Rural Residential Reserve" designation South of Fairview Avenue so the present Light Industrial zoning is definitely not in conflict with the Plan. 12 . The Application sets forth in paragraph seven as follows: AMBROSE. "It is respectfully submitted that the suitability FITZGERALD 6 CROOKSTON Attorneysane PAGE 5Counselors P,O.Box 427 Morldien,10aho 83642 M•e0hone 8881461 for a regional shopping center of this location at the intersection of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue in the City of Meridian will be amply demonstrated by the testimony and exhibits to be introduced at the hearings on this cause , which will consist generally of reference to the suitability of the site itself for development, transportation access to and from from the site, demographic study of trends for the growth of the City of Meridian and Northern Ada County and the Transportation Plan for Northern Ada County, together with Petitioner 's proposed improvements to be made to the property. " The Applicant presented to the Commission no testimony or exhibits at the hearings held on this Application along the lines represented by the above quoted statement. However, the applicant did address those areas at the hearing before the City Council when it submitted its document intitled Testimony In Support Of Application For Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Additionally those areas were addres- sed by the testimony of John Melaniphy in his oral presentation at the City Council hearing held December 3 , 198A . 13 . That the Plan, in dealing with Commercial Activity Center of which a regional shopping center is one, states as follows under Commercial Activity Centers at pages 19 & 20 : REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER: As the largest of the Commercial Activity Centers ; it is designed to serve Ada County and the surrounding counties which make up the Treasure Valley. In all cases , the locations of Commercial Activity Center should be guided by performance and development standards . These standards consider, among other aspects: Traffic Volume and Type Trip Generation Impacts on Arterial Street System Proximity to Other Commercial Development' Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas AMBROSE. Accessibility of Site FITZGERALD Parking Demands &CROOKSTON Attorneys and pA G E b Counselors P.O-Box a27 Meridian,Idaho BW2 ephone888a461 , Pedestrian Circulation Available Utility Systems Aesthetics (Design Considerations) Drainage Meridian is encouraging the potential development of a Regional Shopping Center near the Meridian/Kuna Road Freeway interchange . When it becomes a reality, it will have a significant impact upon Meridian and has the potential of becoming Meridian's new Central Business District. The proposed private development program calls for over a million-square-foot shopping center, which will provide a wide variety of retail enterprises and sup- porting commercial uses (such as office complexes, multi- family residential units , medical clinics, motels and entertainment facilities) . POLICIES 1 . It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and support the development of a Regional Shopping Center as the core commercial activity within Meridian' s Urban Service Plan- ning Area, as well as the Treasure Valley. 2 . The evaluation of the Regional Shopping Center_ development shall be primarily based upon its consistency with the land use policies of !7er- dian' s Comprehensive Plan, as well as the future air quality plan of northern Ada County . 3. As the specific plans are prepared and implemen- tation and construction timetables are establish- ed, the evaluation and review of the Regional Shopping Center development shall be conductec'_ through an Environmental Impact Analysis procedure. 14 . The Local Planning Act of 1975 indicates in Section 67- 6508 that the Plan should be based on the following components : population, economic development, land use, natural resources ; hazardous areas , public services , facilities, and utilities , trans- portation, recreation, special areas or sites , housing, community design, and implementation. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON PAGE 7 Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Marldlan.Idaho 0642 ephone 888.4461 15 . That - the Applicant at the Planning and Zoning Commission level failed to address almost all of the items referred to in paragraphs 13 and 14 above but at the hearing and in its evidence before the City Council the Applicant addressed all of those items in paragraph 13 and most of the relative significant factors in paragraph 14 . 16 . That the items contained in paragraph 13 above are thirteen in number, they really deal with the following seven items, to wit: a) traffic, vehicular or pedestrian; b) pro ximity to other commercial development; c) impact on neighborhood residential areas ; d) available utility systems ; e) aesthetics ; fuse impacts upon other adjacent uses ; and g) drainage . a) TPAFFIC 1 . That the testimony submitted by the Applicant concludes that their location is excellant because of its location on two major arteriels , Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road. However, their evidence admit that vast impr_ovrnents would have to be made to those two arterials over anO above improvements already planned for Eagle Road due to its inclusion in the State Highway system as a result of the Eagle Road/ I-84 Interchange . 2 . That additionally tie Applicant admits that vast improvements would have to be made to Fairview Avenue Fairview Avenue is already heavily burden along its route where commercial activities have been developed 3 . That besides the above improvements , Applicant's evidence makes several assumptions of road im- provements in their study area as a result of residential needs . These assumed improvements includ- ed six (6) lanes on Fairview Avenue, four ( 4) lanes on Franklin Road, four ( 4) lanes on Eagle Road betwee the proposed interchanae and Ustick Road, four (4) lanes on Cloverdale Road between Overland Road and AMBROSE. FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneyaand PAGE 8 Couneelore P.O Box 427 Meridian,Idaho &W2 eiephone 888-4461 Franklin Road; and four (4) lanes on Five Pile Road between Overland Road and Franklin Road. No evidence was submitted from the Ada County Highway Department or the State of Idaho Department of Transportation that these assumptions of improvements due to residential growth were valid or that the improvements could or would be made even if finances were not a problem. 4 . That in the traffice study area bounded by Meridian Road on the West, Ustick Road on the North, Maple Grove Road on the East, and Overland Road on the South , vast improvements need to be made and these improvements are discussed on pages V-21 and V-22 of the Applicant' s Testimony. Only entrances on Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue are claimed to be site related improvements . The other improvements are either assumed improvements or it is not stated whether those improvements are site related or assume improvements . 5 . That the Ada County Highwav District is under the same 1% budget and tax restraints as the City of Meridian; that the testimony reveals that the traffic study "is not intended to imply any direct responsibil- ity for improvements either by the developer, the Ada County Highway District or the Idaho Transportation Department. . . The final responsibility for implementing any recommended improvements above and beyond those planned by Ada County , will have to be negotiated between the developer, the ACHD and the ITD." (p. V-21, Testimony) . 6 . That the shopping center would generate 37 , 200 trips per day and that the automobile would be used almost exclusively for those trips - that comparing Figure 5 .1 (p. V-2 , Testimony) which supposedly show the expected level of traffic in 1988 without a shopping center at Applicant ' s location with Figure 5 . 6 (p. V-12 , Testimony) which supposedly shows the expected level of traffic if the shopping center were built, a great increase in traffic levels is shown_ Comparing the figures on Fairview Avenue from Clover- dale Road to Eagle Road there would be an increase of. 41, 490 daily trips due -to the shopping center; like_ wise on Eagle Road from Fairview Avenue to Franklin Road there would be an increase of 27, 320 daily trips , likewise there would be significant increases in trip AMBROSE, traffic on the other arteriels in the study area due FITZGERALD 3CROOKSTON Attorneys and PAGE 9 Cou melon P.O.boy 427 Meridian,Idaho &W2 Telephone 888-4461 to the placement of a shopping center at Applicant's location, 7 . That the testimony of the Applicant reveals that the impact on the arterial street system would be severe. 8 . That the Ada County Highway District conducted a bond election in approximately 1983 to aide the District in financing needed improvements to the roads within the District; that said election did not succeed. 9 . That the Applicant has stated that the site is excellantly situated for access due to being situated at the intersection of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue , (p. III-1 , Testimony) ; that Applicant further states that a regional shopping site must be con- venient to reach over roads with enough unused traffic capacity to avoid high levels of congestion. 10 . Assuming the road improvments suggested by the Applicant, the site would have good accessibility. 11 . That the Applicant states there would be 4, 000- 5, 000 parking spaces with an average of 400 square feet per parking space . 12 . That the Applicant did not detail pedestrian circulation or internal circulation design other than to provide the Proposed Mall Site Plan (p. VIII-2 , Testimony) and to point out the ring road. 13. The Applicant stated there would be two site access roads off of Eagle Road and three access roads off of Fairview with one access on each road being signalized and the others not; that improvements to both roads would be required to accomplish ease of direct access to the site from those roads . 14 . That the roads in the area , particularly Fairview Avenue and Eacle Road are not in good repair; that Eagle Road is now a narrow two lane road; that the Eagle Road/I-84 Interchange project will bring some improvements to Eaqle Road; that Fairview is a four lane road, that the closer you get to Boise and existing commercial development is extremely over- burdened and inadequate; that Franklin Road har AMBROSE, recently been improved but is still only two lanes : FfTZGERALD that Cloverdale Road. and Five 'file Road were recently 6CROOKSTON Allorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 PAGE 10 Meridian,Idaho 63642 wephone BB81461 improved and resurfaced but are still only two lane roads ; that no evidence was submitted. b_v the Applicant as to how the road improvement it states would be necessary would be financed . 15_ That the City of Meridian does not have jurisdiction over the roads nor does it have financing responsibility. b) PROXIMITY TO OTHER CO`V!FRCIAL DEVELOPMENTS 1 . That the Applicant's mall location is two miles from Cherry Plaza and a little more than two miles from Downtown Meridian; that it is two miles from the retail shops at Fairview Avenue and Five TMiile Road. 2 . That the Applicant states that "The development o a regional shopping center at its location should not have an adverse impact on the retail facilities located in Meridian, nor should it have a significant impact on the balance of retail facilities , mainly, shopper goods stores , in Ada County. " That in support of that statement the Applicant points out that the retail in Ieridian is not of a regional nature nor is there a regional mall in Ada County from which its mall would drat• away customers . 3 . That there was no evidence submitted contrary to Applicant ' s statement however, it is noted that there has been testimony in a prior annexation and comprehe sive plan amendment application ( Quona) in which opponents to that application testified that a region 1 mall built along Eagle Road would be detrimental to retail trade in downtown Meridian. 4 . That it must also he noted that when Karcher_ x•lall was built it did draw business away from the downtown areas of Nampa and Caldwell . 5 . That Fairview Avenue has historically been developed as a retail corridor and that co=..ercia]. development has and is , extending towards Meridian from Boise . c) IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD- P.FSIDENTIAL AREAS 1 . That there is not any significant residential development surroundinc the Applicant' s location? what residences there are in the area are homes related to AMBROSE, FITZGERALD farm activities . 6 CROOKSTON II 'i Aliomeye and j Coun$elora ` PAGE 11 P.O Box 427 4 Merid an,Idaho &W2 !1 eiaphoneBBB-44bi I� _ 2 . That there is some continuing residential develop- ment in the North Curve Neighborhood! - that such development is approximately one mile from the Applicant' s site . d) AVAILABLE UTILITY SYSTEMS 1 . That the Applicant is the owner of 160 acreas in the Southwest Quadrant of the intersection of Fairvie Avenue and Eagle Road which it is developing as an industrial park . The Applicant is bringing sewer and water service to that parcel . As a result water and sewer service will be adjacent to and available for Applicant§ mall location. Costs for these extensions will be the Applicant' s . 2 . That the Applicant is likewise bringing electricit , gas , and telephone service to its industrial park and, therefore those utilities will be adjacent anli available to Applicant's mall site . Costs for these extensions will be Applicant' s _ 3 . That no evidence was submitted- as to the impact o the City' s water and sewer facilities as a result of the development of Applicant's site as a regional - shopping mall . 4 . That the Applicant's land is in the City limits and at the time of its annexation the City committed water and sewer services to the site, however, such commitment was "For an industrial use . No detailed evidence was submitted showing the difference in cost if any, between providing water and sewer to a regional shopping center as opposed to an industrial park. e) AESTHETICS The Applicant submitted no evidence detailing the aesthetic effect of locating a mall at its site other than its general site plan; a requirement of such at this juncture may be premature . f) USE IMPACTS UPOid OTHER ADJACENT USES 1 . The Applicant states that a regional shopping center would be compatible with its light industrial park, AM B ROSE, FITZGERALD 2 . The r;ajority of the land surrounding the site is 6CROOKSTON agricultural ; there is some industrial and warehouse Attorneys and Counseiora P.Q.Box 427 Meridian,Ida SM42 PAGE 12 •1ephone 98&401 use south of the proposed mall site . 3. There is no significant residential use in the adjacent areas . 4 . No specific evidence was submitted as to the effect a mall at this location would have on Downtown Meridian other than a conclusionary remark which stated Downtown should not be adversely effected. This is discussed in another finding. g) DRAINAGE This item is discussed and adequatley presented as apparently the drainage plans for Applicant's mall site and its industrial park have been approved although no specific evidence was submitted evidencin this approval as to the mall site . 17 . That most of the important items referred to in paragraph 14 and set forth in 67--6508, Idaho Code„ as stated in paragraph 15 above, have been addressed; that these items need to be addressed by an application to amend a comprehensive plan as they ar the integral components of the original plan; any proposed amendment effects these components . It is felt, however, that this application to amend the Plan to locating a regional shopping center would not effect the following components : Natural Resources , Hazardous Areas Recreation, Special Areas or Sites , and Implementation. The other components would be effected and should be addressed and in most cases were addressed by the Applicant and are discussed below. a) POPULATION 1 . That the POPULATIQN GROWTH section of the Plan -begins with the following statement: "Encourage orderly growth for a self-sufficient AMBROSE, community, but discourage unplanned growth within or FITZGERALD adjacent to the Cit17 and the Urban Service Planning aCROOKSTON Area (USPA) . " (Plan, p. 12) At lorneya and Counse,wa Likewise , one of the policies is stated at page 12 PO Box427 as follows : Merldlan,tdaho 83842 PAGE 13 elaphone 888-Wl "Unimproved or unrealized land within the Meridian City limits and Urban Service Planning Area should be utilized in order to maximize public investments, curtail urban sprawl and protect existing agrieultura lands from unnecessary infringement. " 2 . The Applicant concludes in its Testimony that the designation of a second mall site at its property would give Meridian more opportunities to work toward the goal of increased economic self-sufficency (Testimony, p. VI-5) and that to maintain the agricultural land surrounding its site the City could do so by proper zoning_ (Testimony , p. VI-4) 3 . That Applicant speaks to the population base necessary to support a regional mall (Testimonv, p. III-2) and speaks to the demographics , existing and expected (Testimony, p_ III-4) in Ada County and in specific radius surrounding its location. 4 . The Applicant does not speak to population or demographics as such specifically relate to Meridian and how the location of a mall at its site would effect the population and demographics of Meridian; fiqures or projections for such may not, however, be readily available or easily obtainable. 5. The Testimony does indicate that there would be a net vain in jobs to the community and that many -of these jobs could go to Meridian residents . (Testimony, p. VI-7) b) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1 , The Plan encourages economic development. It contains the following policies as to general economi development: p.15 "The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourage industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas wher-e commercial and industrial interest and activities are to dominate. Stripping of industrial and commercial uses are AMBROSE. not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. " FITZGERALD 8CROOKSTON Attorneys and PAGE 14 Couneelore P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho V642 'elephone 88841461 2 . The Plan at page 14 as its initial statement on Economic Development states as follows : p.14 "Stimulate , encourage and give preference to those types of economic activities and developments which provide opportunities for th employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need for persons to commute to neighboring cities. The City of Meridian and its residents view the economic enterprises of industry, retail com- mercial and personal services as an integral part of a planned community. The City 's physical development, economic stability, social stratification and institutional effectiveness for dealing with public needs are dependent upo such economic opportunities . " 3 . That the Plan lists three commercial activity centers, the largest being a Regional Shopping Center and states as follows at page 19 of the Plan. p.19 "REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER: As the largest of the commercial activity cents s, it is designed to serve Ada County and the surrounding counties which make up the Treasure Valley. " 4 . That the Plan goes on to detail the consideration and standards for the location of a commercial activity center. These have previously been stated and dis- cussed in paragraphs 13 and 16 above of these Findings . 5 . That the Plan goes on to state where the Regional Shopping Center is to be located and deals with specific policies all of which have been mentioned in paragraph 13 above of these Findings . The Applicant' proposed Plan Amendment does not remove the Meridian/ Kuna Road/I-84 designation as a site for a Regional Shopping Center but does add its location as a second site. The amendment also does not alter the policies that pertain to a Regional Shopping Center. Of significance in these policies and statements are the expressed goals that the regional shopping center could become the central business district of Meridian and that it could be the core commercial activity within Meridian' s Urban Service Planning Area. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD CROOKSTON II PAGE 15 AUomays and I Counselor P.O.Box 427 Merldlen.ldsho 93642 ­ephone 8884481 i 6 . That the Testimony of the Applicant states as follows pertaining to the economic development impact of a mall located at its site: a. That it would create 2, 500 to 3 ,000 jobs with an annual payroll of over $20 ,000 ,000 .00 b. That during construction there would be over 600 man-year jobs with a payroll of between $26 ,000 , 000 .00 and $28, 900 ,000 .00 c. That these jobs would have a multiplier effect of creating additional jobs and that there would be net gain of jobs even though there would be some shifting of workers . d. That upon completion the mall would h-ave retail sales of $160 ,000 , 000 .00 by 1990 . e . That the jobs created could go to Meridian residents . f. That the mall at its location should not detract from existing Downtwon Meridian business -and may compliment them in that they are not of a regiona category. g. That realization of economic benefit would be faster if its land were developed as a regional mall as opposed to an industrail park. 7 . That it is noted that the evidence submitted in the Quong Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Annexation Application by both Mr. Quong and Mr. Nahas showed similar economic benefits and impact from the development of a Regional Shopping Mall at their respective locations . 8 . That the Plan also states as economic development policies , as follows at page 15 : p.15 "Positive programs should be undertaken to support existing industrial and commercial area to ensure their continued vitality, such as: a. Detailed Design Studies b. Economic Feasibility Studies AMBROSE, FITZGERALD c. Zoning changes to assure c?esired economic 8 CROOKSTON development. Attorneys and Counselors PAGE 16 P.O.Box 417 Meridian.Idaho 5W2 eiaphone 866 401 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effective) integrated into existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. " c) LAND USE The Comprehensive Plan identifies consistency with land use policies of the Plan as a major guideline in the evaluation of a regional shop- ping center, 1 . - That the Plan identifies three land uses that are not in compliance with the goals and objectives of the Plan : polluting industries , strip commercial or industrail and scattered residential (sprawl or spread) ; that urban sprawl is defined as scattered development which is not contiguous to the urbanized part of the municipality_ Sprawl is characterized by significant amounts of vacant land intermixed with parcles of Urban development----formless dispersal of a congested urban area with little or no regard for the interrelationships of such factors as logical transportation, employment, health and recreational needs _ 2 . That the plan presently identifies the land use of the Applicant' s site for industrial development as part of the Eastern Tndustrial Review Area; that Applicant' s amendment would, of course , bring the proposed mall uses into conformity with the Plan as amended. 3 . That at present there are significant amounts of vacant land between Applicant ' s site and iRha would be considered the urbanized portion of Meridian, or for that matter, Boise . d) PUBLIC SERVICES , FACILITIES , AND UTILITIES This component has previously been discussed as part of the location standards for a commercial activity center . - (See Findings 16d.) However, at this juncture in discussing the -planning coroponents the existing policies pertaining to Public Services , Utilities , Facilities should b AMBROSE, noted. FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON Attorneys and PAGE 17 Counselors P.O.Box•27 Meridian,Idaho 83W '@Phone 8884461 1 . That the pertinent fire protection policies at page 38 of the Plan state as , follows : p. 38 "To insure adequate protection for new developments, provisions shall be made for satellite fire stations which have a staff of fire fighters equipped with the appropriate fire-fighting facilities . Improvements regarding the jointly used central Meridian fire station (City and Rural Fire Districts) should be reviewed periodically because of the growth and development within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area . Adequate water supply and water pressure should be available to provide fire protection for urban-type development within the Urban Service Planning Area . " 2 . That the pertinant police protection policies at page 38 of the Plan state •as follows : p. 38 "Police protection within the City limits and police protection furnished by the Ada County Sheriff ' s Department in the areas outside the City limits , but within the Urban Service Planning- Area, should be assessed for deficiencies according to the recommended service ratio of 1.6 to 1 . 8 policemen per 1 , 000 persons . " 3. That the pertinent water supply policies at page 39 of the Plan states as follows: p . 39 The monitoring and review o; the Meridian municipal water system should be continued because of the potential for growth and development within the Urban Service Planning Area . All new developments shall be phased as to their connection to the municipal central water system within the Urban Service Planning Area . Adequate water supply should be available for fire protection. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON PAGE 18 Attorneys and Counselor P,O Box 427 Merldlan,Idaho 63642 elePhone BB8-4481 4 . That the pertinent sewer policies at page 40 of the Plan state as follows : p.40 All new subdivisions , planned developments and large commercial and industrial developr..?ent projects shall be required to connect to the municipal sewer system. e) TRANSPORTATIOU This component has previously been partially discussed as part of the location standards for commercial activity centers . (See Findin 16 a . ) However, at this juncture of the Findings the existing Plan policies should be noted and discussed. 1 . That the level of service of the transporta system greatly influences the development and physical organization of the planning area and the City. 2 . That Fairview Avenue, Franklin Road, and. Eagle Road, all roads which play an extremely important role in Applicant 's development, are designated as Principal Arterials as is the Kunz/ Meridian Road South of Franklin Road which also is an integral part of the 'applicant's road study ana development. 3 . That East First Street (The continuation of the Kuna/Meridian Road) is not listed as a mina arterial but as a collector. 4 . That the plan has as one of its transporta- tion policies "Efficient and safe access should be provided to and .From shopping centers, since it is crucial to the economic success of the centers , as well as to the maintenance and efficient traffic movements on the public road- ways adjacent to the development. f) MOUSING 1 . The Plan contains housing policies and the following policies are included therein at page 26 of the Plan: AMBROSE. p.26 "Fvery effort shall he made by the City of FITZGERALD Meridian to encourage commercial and indust- bCROOKSTON rial grovith and development which furthers Allorneye and Counselors P.Q.Box,27 PAGE 19 Maridlan.Idaho BIW2 'siaphone W54461 employment and economic self-sufficiency and reduces -Meridian's present reliance on Boise ' s Metropolitan economic and employemnt center. The development of housing for all income groups close to employemnt and shopping centers should be encouraged. " 2 . The Testimony of the Applicant concludes that existing housing in the North Curve Neighb i-hood and adjacent to Old Town should be enhance by commercial development at its mall location; that the mall would increase the demand for housing in Meridian including a more than pro- portionate demand for multi-family housing in t e vicinity of the mall site; that there is a sufficient inventory of residential lots to meet the demand. g) CWUlUNITY DESIGN 1 . The Plan states as its lead-in policy for community design at page 48 as follows : p.48 "Create a visual and functional identity for the City of Meridian within Ada County and its surrounding enviorment. " 2 . The only discussion of community design found in Applicant's Testimony is at page VI-5 where it states "By designating this site as a regional shopping area , the City will have node of commercial development at Cherry Plaza, down- town and at this -site. " 18. That the Plan references at page 20 that air duality should be a primary evaluation factor for the development of a regional shopping center. The Applicant addresses this begimi g at page VI-1 of its Testimony. The Applicant's Testimony basically relies on the fact that if its site were developed as .a regional shopping center as opposed to another site its site would not decrease air quality any more than if the other site had developed. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD It further states that reduction of air pollution will Generally 8 CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O-Box 427 PAGE 20 Merld Ian.Idaho 83642 'elephone BOB-446 1 increase in the .Meridian Area due to advanced technology will tend t reduce the carhon monoxide in auto emissions which are the main source of tae air pollution even though there will be growth in population and then more vehicles _ No detailed data is provided as to the exact impact on the air quality of a regional mall located at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue, 19 . That throughout the Plan referance is made to the regional shopping center at the Meridian Road/I-84 Interchange; that particularly at page 7 of the Plan, the Policy Diagram indicates tha a regional shopping center site is designated in the Northeast Quadrant of the Meridian Road/I-84 Interchange . The Application would add an additional site at the Southeast Quadrant of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road but would not remove the 114eridian-Road site. That the Plan, in many places other than in the portion dealing with the commercial activity centers and the Policy Diagram, refers to "the Regional Shopping Center" or "the Porposed Regional shopping Center, Northeast of the I-Ea/Aeridian 'load Intersection" or such other single reference terminology; that the Applicant's requests would change such references to refer to two sites or make the wording such that it would apply to two sites for a regional shopping center . - 20 _ That the Planning and Zoning Commission as part of its review and action on the present Application made findings relative to the existing site for a regional shopping center at Meridian 'toad AMBROSE, and I-84 , the Quong Application which pertained to the development FITZGE RAID &CR0OKSTON of a regional shopping center at Eagle RoaO and I-84 , and the presen Attorneys and Counselors P.D.Box 427 PAGE 21 Meridian.Idaho 83842 Teiephone 888401 application. Those findings are specifically judicially noticed and are found to be valid and are adopted by the City Council and thus are repeated herein below as follows : a) The similarities , when comparing the Quong Eagle Road site and the Upland Eagle Road site which might dictate denial of the Upland Application, are as follows : 1 . Neither site is adjacent to the existing retail center of Meridian; 2 . Both sites may require greater service cost for water, sewer, police and fire protection, than the Meridian Road site ; 3 . The revenues to the City of lleriOian from a regional shopping center at either site may not offset the expenses to the City - 4 . The basic property tax structure - has not changed since the Quong Annexation request. b) The dissimilarities , or in some cases similarities , hetween the Quong site and the Upland site and the record in each case which might lend support for approval of the present Application are as follows : 1 . The Quong site was not already annexed to the City and zoned, as the Upland site is; 2 . The Quong site, to become annexed and a reality required an annexation route that went South of the interstate to encompass lands that would not have been serviced by water and sewer even though annexed: 3 . Much of the Quong site was not included in the then existing Urban Service Planning Area; 4 . Water and sewer lines are presently being extended to land adjacent to the Upland sit by the Applicant at its cost; 5 _ Police and fire vehicles would not be re- AMBROSE, quired to travel outside the City limits FITZG ERALD S CROOKSTON AIlorneys and PAGE 22 Counselors P.O,Box 427 Meridlan,Idaho 89842 ,lephone 988-4481 y when taking the quickest route to the Upland site ; 6 . The site is already zoned industrial an adjacent land is presently being developed industrially; 7 . The Upland site does not have as much adjacent existing residential property which could be impacted adversely by development. B . The Upland site is already serviced" by Fairview Avenue, a four lane principal artereal ; 9 . The Eagle Road intersection at I-84 is planned to be developed into an inter- change; 10 . The Upland site is a little closer .to Meridian' s existing retail center and is connected to that` existing retail by Fairview Avenue which is likely to be developed commercially -as .evidenced by the commercial development- along Fairvi w toward and in Boise; 11 . The Upland site is closer to Boise wher the majority of people in the Treasure Valley are who would use a regional shopping center and yet the Copland site is still in Meridian' s City limits . c) The similarities and dissimilarities between the Upland site and the Nahas site which might tend to lend support to approval of the Upland Application or at least make it a toss-up as to which site is pre- ferable are as follows : 1. Both sites are already in the Urban Service Planning Area and the City limits and zoned; 2 . Both sites will .soon have water and sewer services adjacent to the land; 3 . The City is already obligated to provide AMBROSE, fire and police protection to the sites FITZGERALD regardless of cost albeit one may cost &CROOKSTON Allomeys and Counselors P.o-Box 427 PAGE 23 Meridian,Idaho SW2 Telephone 8884461 more than the other; 4 . Neither site if developed as a regional shopping center will increase the revenues of the City significantly and for sure not enough to pay for the cost of service: 5 . The transportation impact on the present downtown of Meridian would be less if the Upland site were developed; 6 . The Nahas site has been annexed" -and zoned and capable of being developed as a regional shopping center for almost ten years and yet the major retailers have not yet decided to locate -at that site . d) That the above facts pertaining to the Upland site other than those pertaining to water, sewer and drain- age, have been obtained from the material submitted during the Quong Annexation and accbmpan_ving -plan Amendment either by the Nahas people or by the Quong people or have been officially or judciially noticed b the Commission; some facts , in addition to those referenced above, which the Commission has taken notic of are as follows , some of which may have already been stated above: 1 . The Applicant' s land is in Meridian' s Area of Impact and Urban Service Plan- ing Area ; 2 . The land is annexed and is presently zoned light industrial , 3 . Sewer and water lines are presently being extended by the Applicant to service its -industrial ground in the Southwest Quadrant of the Eagle Road/ Fairview Avenue intersection and thus water and sewer lines will be adjacent to the Applicant's proposed site of a regional- shopping .center, 4 . The proposed site is serviced by two principal transportation arteriels , AMBROSE, Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road; FITZG E RA LO dCROOKSTON 5 , -The State of Idaho Department of Attorneys and Transportation has existing plans for Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho PAGE 24 W642 +isDhooe 8884461 construction of an interch�Lnge at Eagle_ Road and I-84 and designation of Eagle Road from Fairview Avenue to I-84 as part of U.S . Highway 30 ; that there will thus be two interstate interchanges in the Urban Service Planning Area; 6 . That since the land is already in the City, it has the obligation to provide municipal services to the land, those being specifically police and fire protection and water and sewer; 7 . There is very limited residential development near the Applicant's land and what is there is sparse and limited to farm homes and buildings ; 8. When the 1978 Meridian Comprehensive Plan was adopted the only suggested sit for a regional shopping center was at Meridian Road and I-84 ; also the only interchange in the Meridian Area of Impact or Urban Service Planning Area was at that site and now there is one planned for Eagle Road and I-84 ; 9 . The Meridian Road shopping center site has been annexed and zoned for .at least 10 years and has been capable of being developed as a regional shopping center for that amount of time and vet no center has been constructed nor does it appear one will be soon. 21. That in the above findings and discussions dealing with the location of a commercial activity center and the planning components there was no mention of costs ; the Applicant did not submit any detailed data on what it would cost the City of Meridian to provide services to its proposed mall site; that it submitted no detailed data on.-what it would cost the Ada County Highway -District or the Idaho Department of Transportation to make the necessary road AM BROSE. FITZGERALD improvements to facilitate Applicant's proposed mall . The only &CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 09"481 PAGE 25 comment is that -Meridian has , by previously annexing its land, committed to pay those costs and that by its traffic study no inferrence is to be made as to how the improvements would be financed . The Applicant impliedly condludes that even though the City is now financially restricted by the 1% budget and tax restraints that this situtation may be alleviated and then the City could reap the benefits of $160 ,000 ,000 .00 retail sales facility. 22 . That costs comparisons were made between the development of a shopping center at Meridian Road/I-84 and at Eagle Road/I-84 in the Findings of the �Quong Application. Judicial notice of those comparisons, although not set forth herein, is hereby taken, that a shopping mall .located anywhere in the City of #3eridian is going to cost the City of Meridian money which, at present, cannot be recouped - through taxes . 23 . That the Applicant's Testimony, beginning at page N71-5 compares Chubbuck and Karcher balls to its proposed site,- it admits at page VI-G that when Karcher Mall went in between Nampa and Caldwell that it attracted much of the business from the downtown of both of those cities . It explains that this would not occur to Meridian- as a result of its proposed mall because there is more population around its mall site and because Meridian has no "regional" type business that would be drawn away_ Meridian has an approximate population of 7500 people, although the population figures in five mile radius of Eagle Road and Fairview, Applicant states to be 76, 70 - _ AM9ROSE, . and within a three mile radius to be 29 , 530 . FITZGE RALD ACROOKSTON Attorneys and PAGE 2 6 Counselors P.O.Boa 427 Meridian,Idaho B3542 }epf+one 86&4461 24 . That the Applicant has requested the City to amend its Comprehensive Plan to designate its Parcel I as a site for a regions shopping center; that the Applicant submitted no evidence which would indicate that if the amendment were granted that a regional shopping center would actually be constructed at that location; there were no tenant leases or commitments submitted nor was there any mention that a mall would actually be constructed at that location. 25 . That in general, the testimony , both oral and written, :submitted by the Applicant, particularly that relating to Market Analysis and most of cSite Suitability, pertained to the ability of its site to be successful, to be constructed, and to be the regional shopping center for Northern Ada County and Treasure Valley, albeit, there are referrences to local impact on meridian* that Meridian doe want a regional shopping center but it also wants to know the impact such would have on its community and how such would relate, impact and effect the City. 26 . That although reference to the below may have inferential y been stated in other findings the following goals , policies, and objectives in the Plan are spceifically noted: p .8 "GOALS OF THE COMPREFENSIVE PLAN Goal 3: To encourage the kind of economic growth and development which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for .existing and .future residents, reduces the -present reliance on Boise and strengthens the City 's ability to finance -and implement public improvements, services and its open space character. " p.9 "LAND USE: POLICIES AMBROSE, 1 . The City of Meridian intends to plan for the FITZGERALD aCROOKSTON periodic reviewing, monitoring and ul5datinc of land uses within the Area of Impact and the Urban Attorneye and Couneelora P.O.Box 427 PAv E 2 7 Meridian.Idaho I'` 83642 Telephone BSB4461 Service Planning Area 4 . The following land use activities are not in compliance with the basic goals of the Comprehensi e Plan: a . . . . b. Strip commercial and strip industrial" p.14 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "Stimulate, encourage and give perference to those types of economic activities and developments which provide opportunities . for .the employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need for persons to commute to neighborin-g . cities . "The City of Meridian and its residents view the economic enterprises of industry, retail com- mercial and personal services as an integral par of a planned community. The City 's physical development, economic stability, social stratification and institutional effectiveness for dealing with public needs are dependant upon such economic opportunities . To accomplish the the above objective, the Comprehensive Plan provides for INDUSTRIAL REVIEW AREAS, CWVIERC;AL ACTIVITY CENTERS and MIXED-USE REVIEW AREAS . " INDUSTRIAL REVIEW AREAS The Comprehensive Plan intends to prepare for Meridian ' s business and employment future by reserving land for industrial , retail , commercial and office uses and so removing them from the categories of land on which residential develop- ment can be proposed. " p.25 HOUSING DEE7ELOP_HE14T, POLICIES 11 2 . Every effort shallbe made-:by the City-of Meridian to encourage commercial and industrial AMBROSE. growth and development which furthers enploynent FITZGERALD 6 CROOKSTON AttorneVeand PAGE 28 Couneeiore P.O.Boa 427 Meridian,Idaho &%42 aeph*na 868-W I and economic self-sufficiency and reduces Meridian 's present reliance on Boise 's Metropolitan economic and employment center . " p.53 OTHER PROJECTS "2 . Support and encourage development of Commercial Activity Centers Regional Shopping Center ,r 27 . The following- statements of the "Meridian Comprehensive Plan are noted: p.1 FORWARD "The Comprehensive Plan is primarily a policy document identifying policies to guide future development within and outside of the City of Meridian. The Comprehensive Plan is recogni?abl the primary step in identifying the quality of life the City residents desire and relating goal to its capacity to achieve particular end result . It was developed with a broad base of community- wide citizen input and is both sensitive to the chancing needs of the community and recognizes a commitment to preserve the values identified b the City residents . NATURE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A Comprehensive Plan is an official document, by local governments and public agencies , which serves as a policy guide for decisions concerning_ the physical development of a co;rmunit�'i. it indicates , in a general way, how the conununity may develop in the next 20 to 30 years . The essential characteristics of the Comprehensive Plan are that it is comprehensive, general, long- range and represents- a process--not a product. Comprehensive=pieans -that the plan encompasses all areas of the community and all functional element which bear on physical development. General means that the plan summarizes policies and AMBROSE. proposals and does not develop detailed ,ite plans. FITZGERALD Lonc_--rante means that the plan looks be-.,on,] the 8 CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors PAGE 29 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idano &W2 Telephone 88&1/81 pressing current issues toward the aspect of problems which the community may face in the futu' e. Finally, as a Erocess (not a product) , the Comprehensive Plan is an ongoing process for directing change that occurs inevitably in a community--not a document that is written once, for all time . " p.lh "CO1111MERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS Retail commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers . Both general categories often share locational needs and often prove mutually sup- portive. In order to coordinate with the sup- portive areas of residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided. " p..15 "ECONOMIC POLICIES 1 . The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmoshpere which en- courages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 2 . It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interest and activities are to dominate . 4 . Positive programs should be undertaken to support existing industrial and commercial areas to ensure their continued vitality, such as ; C. Zoning changes to assure desired economic development. 6. It is the policy of the City of Meriidan to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into existing . residential areas, and plan for .new shopping.. centers as growth and development warrant. AMBROSE, PITZGERALD d CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors PAGE 30 P.Q.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 888-4461 S. The City of !Meridian intends to establish Commercial Development Desian. ruides which: a . Provide for the grouping of commercial buildings on a single parcel of land in such manner as to create a harmonious, efficient and convenient retail shopping environment; " p.6 POLICY DIAGIRMI "With the anticipation of growth and development pressures during the next decade, the Comprehensive Plan summarizes the potential distributions of land use activities within the Urban Service Plan- ning Area that are based upon policy recommenda- tions . The Policy Diagram attempts to make general designations of appropriate and compatible land use, expresses the ultimate growth of the Meridian community if all the land were -develope and provides a flexible framework for further detailed land use decisions. % - - The Policy Diagram is to be used as •a general guide for land use decision-making--not as a legalistic, literal and definitive map_ As applications and proposals of land uses are submitted, the Policy Diagram is not intended to be used as the sole, authoritative -means for decision-making, . ?father, it is but one of the many tools which- are available for public officials as they exercise their responsibility regarding the health, safety and welfare -of the general public. p. 50 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW If the Comprehensive Plan is to be useful and effective, it should not be filed away but should be continually reviewed and updated. The recom- mendations within the Comprehensive Plan should not be interpreted as unalterable commitments , but rather as a reflection of the best *foreseeable direction at a given point in time. It is recom- mended by the Meridian Planning and- Zoning Commission that at least a yearly review shall be held of the Comprehensive Plan to update and/or reaffirm the Plan to fit the changing needs as well as unforeseen planning problems and AMBROSE. opportunities . FRZGERALD &CROOKSTON A1lornayeana PAGE 31 Counselor P.O.Box 427 M*hdlan,4tlahO 03642 -elephone W4461 28. That- the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Compre hensive Plan provide that "Applications for Comprehensive Plan Amendments shall be acted upon by the City Council within 16 months form the date of their filing unless, upon written agreement of the applicant, an additional amount of time may be specified. " 29 . That the testimony submitted at the public hearing held by the City Council was generally against the granting of the application. 30 . That from the testimony the City Council has heard pertaining to this application and the Quona application and from the attitudes of the people expressed to the City Council and from the newspaper and broadcast media reports, it can be judicially noticed that the people of Meridian and Ada County desire to have a regional shopping mall, regardless of where it is , as soon as possible but that there are differences of opinion as to where it should be located. AMBROSE, FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho PAGE 32 a3642 Telephone 8854461 CONCLUSIONS 1 . That all the procedural requirements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, hereafter refered to as the Plan, and of the Local Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including all notice and hearing requirements , have been met; that the City Council has authority to amend the Plan. 2 . That Upland Industries Application to amend the Plan was initiated by the Applicant and not by the Commission or the City Council: 3 . That the City Council may take judicial or official notice cf existing conditions in the City, County and State and of governmental - - actions, po-licies, and ordinances and of its own prior findings in other land use applications and those of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 4 . That the function of adopting, amending or repealing a Comprehensive Plan is a legislative function. Burt vs City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.2d 1075 (1983) . That even though this is a legislative function, the Local Planning Act requires that Findings of Fact and Conclusions be made for any application provided for in the Act. 5 . That the Application itself was concluded by the Planning and Zoning Commission to have met the requirements- cif the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan and such conclusion is reaffirm d- 6. That paragraph K. of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan provides in part as follows: AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneyeend PAGE 33 Couneelora P.Q.Box 427 i Mwrldlan,Idaho &%42 "stephone BBS-4461 v � "k. Amendment of the Comprehensive plan may be granted only to correct an error in the Plan or because of substantial change in the actual conditions of an area which results in a material discrepancy or disparity between the conditions in the area and all or part of the Plan. " That this Application has been processed under the above requirement and must be judged on that basis; however, it is noted that such a requirement is more restrictive than allowed or required under the Local Planning Act; that the Commission recommended an amendment to Section K which removes the idea that an amendment may only be granted to correct an error or change in actual conditions which recommendation has been approved by the City Council; such restric ti e requirement was an error in itself since it is difficult to plan for the future and make necessary changes when the -Commission and Council must be guided by actual conditions. Such is a conflict in term- inology and the function of a Comprehensive Plan to "plan. " 7. That the Plan is what it says it is . It is a Plan. The portions of the Plan set forth in Finding number 27 reflect that the Plan "summarizes policies and proposals and does not develop detailed site plans. " The comment to the Policy Diagram indicates that the Diagram is not "intended to be used as the sole, authoritative means for decision-making" but "is to be used as a general guide for land use decision-making---not as a legalistic, literal and definitive map. " The Plan therefore should be liberally construed but still maintained as the functional guideline ,for land- use decisions ; i :e. , the Plan policies and objectives cannot be AMBROSE, FITZGERALD willy-nilly disregarded when there is an apparent conflict between &CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors PAGE 34 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho $3642 Telephone WS-448f the Plan and a proposed use. 8 . That the Commission has the duty, as does the City Council, to continually plan; that the City Council treats amendments propose by private entities as part of that planning duty and function- the City cannot, and should not, be the sole initiator of possible amendments; the City Council treats amendment applications as a mean of bringing possible and necessary planning changes to light. 9 . At the time the Plan was initially adopted there was only one interstate interchange and now there is an additional one planned for the Eagle Road/I-84 intersection; also at the time of initial adoption of the Plan the Eagle Road/rairview_ Avenue area was not in the City .limits and some of it not in the Urban Service Planning Area; likewise , sewer and water was not to or adjacent to the land owned by the Applicant. It is concluded that these changes and others noted in the Findinus , are a substantial chance in the actual conditions of the area, and even of the entire Urban Service Planning Area, which has resulted in a substantial change in the actual conditions of the area which resulted in a material discrepancy or disparity between the conditions of the area and all or part of the Plan sufficient to meet the requirements of paragraph K. of the Amendment Provisions and Procedures of the Plan. 10 . It is likewise concluded that the above referenced changes warranted a review of the-plan, and amendment of the Plan if deemed appropriate, regardless of _whether the Applicant had submitted its AMBROSE, Application. The Application brought to light and focused in on FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON Attomeysand PAGE 35 Counselors P.O.Box 427 Mendkan,Idaho 8,9B42 -eiephone 8B8-N81 the need to review the Plan. The City -Council now, is required to assess not only the Application but also whether those changes above- warrant adopting the proposed amendment and whether the changes of the Application itself are in the best interest of the plan and the City, and whether they are desireable . 11. That the part of the Application pertaining to a regional shopping center would have to be adopted to allow the developement intentions of the Applicant as set forth in the Application. 12 . The main focus of the assessment of that part of the Application pertaining to the designation of a site for a regional shopping center is dictated by those factors mentioned in Findings of Fact, paragraph 13 and 14 , the Application itself, the facts presented in the hearings or officially noticed,--and the goals , objectives, and policies of the Plan as it exists and the various planning components of 67-6508, Idaho Code. 13 . That pertaining to the cormercial activity center location performance and development standards alone contained in paragraph .- 13 of the Findings it is concluded as follows : a. TRAFFIC That the Applicant' s site , if developed, poses a sever impact on the roads in the area it chose to study and that vast improvements would have to be made to those roads and highways the cost of which improvements were not specifically addressed; that due to - the 1% restrictions and the public's attitude on bond issues ,- those costs could not apparently be borne by the Ada -- County Highway District; that -unless contributions to the costs of road improvements were anade by- ,the-- Applicant, the traffic impact of Applicant's develop ment on existing roads in their present condition AMBROSE, dictate that the Application be denied. FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Attorneys and PAGE 36 Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 8884461 That assuming the road improvements suggested by the Applicant could be financed, clovernmentally or private , the site would have excellant accessibility for a regional shopping center. b. PROXIMITY TO OTHER COW1,1ERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS That thus -d.ue to experiences of Karcher Mall in drawing business from downtown Nampa and Caldwell and due to the Applicant' s site being approximately two miles from existing retail in ?Meridian, it is concluded that Applicant's location would be detrimental to the City of Meridian; that it is likely that Fairview- Avenue will continue to receive comriercial development pressure that could be detrimental to Meridian's present retail regardless of development of a regional shopping center . C. IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AREAS That there would be no detrimental impact on the surrounding residential negihborhood if Applicant's location were developed as a regional shopping center. d. AVAILABLE UTILITY SYSTF.IS That there is or will be *Meridian water and sewer available to Applicant' s site ; that other utilities of electricity, gas, and telephone are available; that th cost of extending all utilities would be at no cost to the City of Meridian. That as far as availability the utilities present no problem to the development of Applicant's site . That, however, the Applicant did no specifically detail the cost to the City providing sewer and water to a regional shopping center at Applicant' s site , nor was the impact on the sewer and water systems detailed or discussed. e . AESTHETICS That the aesthetic impact of a development at Applicant' s site was not detailed in the evidence but such is not felt to be detrimental to the Application. f. USE IMPACTS UPON OTHER ADJACENT USES That there would be no adverse impacts upon the uses immediately adjacent to Applicant' s proposed site for a regional mall; that a regional mall would be compatible with the light industrail uses presently being_ developed AMBROSE, FITZGERALD by the Applicant in the Southwest Quadrant of the ECROOKSTON Attor"eys'nd PAGE 37 Counselors P.O.Boy 427 Merltlian,Idaho 83642 e-*phone 8084461 � v intersection of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road and wit the other industrial and the residential uses in the area. g. DRAINAGE That drainage is not a problem or a drawback to the development of a regional mall at Applicant's location That as far as the location of a regional shopping center it is concluded that the site itself, without considering needed traffic improvements and-the possible loss of retail commercial establishments from downtown Meridian, is a good location for a regional shopping center. However, the traffic problems present real road blocks and the loss of retail is a problem and will be discussed again later in these conclusions . 14 . That since the Local Land Use Planning Act requires the City to consider several components in developing a comprehensive plan, i is felt that the impact an amendment would have on those components must likewise be examined or at least there must be an examination of the components effected by the amendment, that these components deal with more than just location of a shopping center site. There- fore it is concluded as follows : a. POPULATION That under the lead-in paragraph of the Flan per- taining to population and the other population policies it is felt that a regional mall develop- ment at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue would not necessarily be orderly growth and would tend to induce urban sprawl-. mat even though the Applicant did not detail the impact its development would have on the population AMBROSE, of .Meridian, it is felt that the population would FITZGERALD increase and the center would add a net gain of 8 CROOKSTON Atlo"ye end Couneelore PAGE 38 P.O.Box 427 Meridlen,ideho 63642 wePhone 9884461 employment to Meridian and contribute to Meridian gaining self-sufficiency; however, , a mall at any other location in Meridian would do the same. b. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT That a regional mall developed at Applicant's site would meet the general policies of the Plan regard' ng economic development. It would add jobs, both dur' nq construction and upon operation. It would tend to reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities . It would add approximately $160 ,000 ,000 .00 to the retail sales in Meridian. However, a regional shopping center at another location in Meridian would do the same. That as far as specifics under economic development one of the major goals of the Plan for commercial activity centers is that the regional shopping center could become the central business district f Meridian and that it would be the core commercial activity with Meridian's Urban Service Planning Area . The proposed amendment does not change nr amend the above goal. It is felt that the develop- ment of a mall at Fairview and Eagle Road would shift the emphasis of the City from the East First Street dorridor to Eagle and Fairview and make "Oldtown" oldtown. C. LAUD USE That the Applicant' s location would not create or le strip commercial, however, it could be considered to be or create sprawl in that there is a great amount of undeveloped ground between developed Meridian and Applicant' s site. d. PUBLIC SERVICES , FACILITIES AND UTILITIES That portions of this component were discussed in these conclusions dealing with Parcel 1 as a location for a regional mall, however, additional comments need to be made and, as this component includes more than just sewer, water, gas, electricity, and telephone, the. undiscussed facets need to be mentioned. That the only evidence submitted by the Applicant states that when the City annexed its land for AMBROSE. FITZGERALD industrial purposes the City com. iced itself to d CROOKSTON Attorneynand PAGE 39 Counselors P.O Boy 427 Meridian,Idaho &W2 Telephone BSO-4E61 i 15 . That the impact on the air quality of Northern Ada County is stated by the Plan to be a standard in evaluating the development of a regional shopping center. It is concluded better evidence on this standard would have been beneficial but that the new auto emissions testing program should help the air quality; that the development of one site over another would not increase or decrease the air quality and thus the lack of evidence is not deemed detrimental to the Application: that the development of any regional mall in Meridian is doing to adversely impact the air duality. 16 . That in light of the above conclusion on the various plan- ning components and the air quality it is concluded that in general Applicant's amendment would not adversely impact population, economi development, land use, housing, or air quality- that there would be an adverse impact on transportation and that has previously been discussed but that adverse impact would be the same if any regional mall were developed; that specifically under population and in general under community design Applicant' s development of a regional center on Parcel 1 would tend to violate the policy against urban sprawl , and would shift the emphasis of the City to the East spread- ing it out; that considering the cost findincs contained in the Quon , application, public services , facilities and utilities would be more adversely effected by a regional mall located at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue rather than at Meridian Road and I-84 even though the latter site would likewise adversely impact the public services, AMBROSE, facilities and utilities provided by the City of Meridian. FITZGERALD 6 CROOKSTON PAGE 41 Attorneys and Counselors V.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 886.4161 17 . Even though no representative of the owners of the I-84/ Meridian Road site testified at the City Council public hearing or objected to the granting of this Application based on the record in the Quong application as they did before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council concludes , for the same reasons as the Commission did, which findings and conclusions are incorporated herein by this reference, that the Quona record does not dictate a denial o this Application. 18 . That the Council concludes that, even though the Applicant's proposal pertains specifically to one parcel, the Application effect the entire plan. The change from a single site designation of a regional shopping mall to a two site designation would effect many o the components of the Plan and their policies . The -original Plan is so oriented to the present Meridian Road/I-84 site that a change to add an additional site would ripple through the Plan. I 19 . That one of the major themes, if not the most prominent theme, of the Plan is that Meridian wants growth and development which is orderly and balanced. This is evidenced by Finding 26 . Likewise, it is evidenced by the Plan at page 2 : "The goals , objectives and Policies herein expressed underline and shape the character and orientation of Meridian 's Comprehensive Plan. They deal with three major concerns of the people of Meridian: 1) orderly growth and development; 2) Economic growth and balance; and 3) Improvement of the quality of life. " 20 . That throughout the Plan the theme and desire for economic AMBROSE. growth and jobs and self-sufficiency is repeated. one of the major FITZGERALD ACROOKSTON PACE 42 Attorneys and counselors P.O.Box W Meridian,Idaho 83G42 I@�aphone BB84461 means the Plan states as achieving the above was, and is , the development of a regional shopping center in Meridian. Much of the Plan' s focus is upon a regional shopping center. The Plan specifically located the site for such a center as the *Meridian Road I--84 intersection. This site designation may have been contrary to the idea that the Plan is a general guideline and not a legalistic, definitive document but at the time of adoption of the Plan it was the only "site" in "sight. " The area has changed. The development of an additional interchange, the extension of the Urban Service Planning Area and the extension of water and sewer lines make re- evaluation of the Plan, and possibly the single designation of a regional shopping center, appropriate , Whether there is one site designated or two or more, the desire of the people of Heridian is for a shopping center and the fact that the Plan strenuously endorses a regional shopping center as a means to achieve economic growth, jobs and self-sufficiency cannot be easily disregarded and any proposal that would, in fact, be developed as a regional shoppin center must receive serious consideration. 21 . It can be, and is , judicially noticed that the people of the City of Meridian would like to have a regional shopping center located in Meridian. It can likewise be judically noticed that there are and will be differences of opinion as to where such a center should be located or what site has the better likelihood of drawing tenants and of actually being developed. AMBROSE, 22 . The Council concludes that the facts presented by the FITZGERALD 6CROOKSTON PAGE 43 Attorneys and Counselors P.O Box 427 Meridian,Idaho &%42 Telephone$SB4461 Applicant and the officially noticed facts , are sufficient to meet the requirements of Paragraph K of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan to amend the Plan; that the facts, part- icularly that there has been a site designated for a regional shopping center for some time and yet it has not developed, that the Upland site is serviced by two principal arteriels , that there will soon be an Eagle Road/1-84 interchange, that sewer and water are or will be available to the Upland site, that the Upland site is connected to Meridian' s existing retail by means of Fairview Avenue, an historically well developed commercial arteriel, and that the sit is already annexed and must be provided with municipal services regardless of how it is developed, present cogent reasons for lookin further into the designation of the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue site as a regional shopping center site. 23 . That even though the Council has concluded the Applicant has presented sufficient evidence to support an amendment, but maybe not its specific amendment, to the Comprehensive Plan, there are several items of great concern to the Council which lead the Council to believe that the actual amendment proposed by the Applicant might not be in the best interest of the City. These items are : 1) the traffic improvements necessary and the costs thereof; 2) the possibility of loss 6f retail business downtown and the shift of emphasis of the -City to the East; 3) - the possibility of creating or contributing to urban sprawl; 4) the fact that no evidence was submitted that if in fact the amendment was granted that a regional AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD 6 CROOKSTON Attorneysand PAGE 44 Counselors P.O Box 427 Merloian,Idaho 63642 Teiephone 888-4461 shopping center would in fact be constructed on the site ; 5Y the possibility that the City would have two sites capable of being developed as a regional shopping center and yet no center! and 6) the cost of providing City services . 24 . That certainly, only one site in Meridian, if any, is goin to be developed as a regional shopping center; that the traffic and cost of City services problems are going to exist whichever site, if any, is developed and thus those concerns are greatly nullified, however, the other concerns mentioned above are peculiar to Applicant 's site. 25 . That Meridian is caught in a dichotomy. On the one hand A City wants economic growth and development which will supply jobs , add to the tax base even though it would be of 11mited effect at present, and increase the City' s self--sufficiency and a regional shopping center, if developed, is seen as fulfilling that desire. On the other hand the City does not want the above at the expense of ruining the present downtown, of contributing to urban sprawl and reducing the identity of the City, and of creating the possibility that even if Applicant's amendment were approved and changes made in the Plan the City could very well not achieve its desires mentioned on the other side of this dichotomy. 26 . That it has previoulsy been concluded that the Plan is a plan and should not dictate exact locations and that the designation of Meridian Road/I-84 as the only site for a regional. s'hoppina cente may have been in error; that the Applicant could argue that even now AMBROSE. FITZGERALD the City is refusing to use the Plan as a planning document in faili a IL CROOKSTON Allo neys and Dounselors PAGE 45 P.D.Box 427 Merld Ian,Idaho &W2 Telephone 888-4481 to designate an -additional regional shopping center site and that the City is again using the Plan to dictate specific land uses ; however, even though Applicant's proposed amendment and use is Pervasive and would effect many components of the Plan and its present focus on on regional shopping center site, it still should also be viewed as a specific amendment that has only been requested to allow one specific development--a regional shopping center. The problem may be that th original plan did designate one site , however, that fact must be lived with; that until there is proof that another site will in fact be constructed there is no logical sense in changing the existing Plan everytime an additional shopping center site is- proposed. 27. The City Council finally concludes that% just creating the possibility that a regional shopping center could be constructed a-t Applicant' s site and thus only possibly provide the City with economic growth is not sufficient justification to amend the Comprehensive Plan as requester: by the Applicant at this time; that if the Applicant can provide evidence sufficient to show the Council that the Council 's action to amend the Plan as requested woulC not b fruitless , the Council would consider amending its Plan, as the gains from actually having; a regional shopping center are felt to outweigh the difficulties and the possible drawbacks of Applicant' s location: Additionally the people of meridian want a regional shopping center somewhere, if it in fact is constructed. Thus it is concluded that the City Council should invoke its option, upon agreement of the Applicant, to table this Application AMBRO5E, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON PAGE 46 Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 88&44E1 employment to Meridian and contribute to Meridian gaining self-sufficiency; however, , a mall at any other location in Meridian would do the same_ b. ECONOMIC DEVELOP14ENT That a regional mail developed at Applicant' s site would meet the general policies of the Plan regarding economic development. It would add jobs, both dur' nc$ construction and upon operation. It would tend to reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities . It would add approximately $160,000 ,000 .60 to the retail sales in Meridian. However, a regional shopping center at another location in Meridian wo ld do the same. That as far as specifics under economic developmen one of the major goals of the Plan for commercial activity centers is that the regional shopping center could become the central business district cf Meridian and that it would be the core commercial activity with Meridian' s Urban Service Planning Area. The proposed amendment does not change =ior amend the above goal. It is felt that the develop- ment of a mall at Fairview and Eagle Road would shift the emphasis of the City from the East First Street dorridor to Eagle and Fairview and make "Oldtown" oldtown. C. LAND USE That the Applicant's location would not create or le strip commercial, however, it could be considered to be or create sprawl in that there is a great amount of undeveloped ground between developed Meridian and Applicant's site. d. PUBLIC SERVICES , FACILITIES AND UTILITIES That portions of this component were discussed in these conclusions dealing with Parcel 1 as a location for a regional mall, however, additional comments need to be made and., as this component includes more than just sewer, water, gas, 11, electricity, and telephone, the undiscussed facets need to be mentioned. That the only evidence submitted by the Applicant AMBROSE, states that when the City annexed its land for FITZGERALD industrial purposes the City commited itself to 8 CROOKSTON I Atlomeye ana Counselors PAGE 39 P.O.Box 427 Mehdtl an.IAsho &%42 T elophons Sea-WI until approximately sixteen months from the date the Application was filed to afford the Applicant opportunity to provide evidence that its location would actually be constructed as a regional shopping center. If Applicant can provide that evidence, it does not necessarily mean the other problems referred to above would be disregarded. They would have to be worked out and solved, if at -all possible. _ AMBROSE, F ITZGERALD A CROOKSTON Atlomeys and Counselors PAGE 4 7 P.D Box 427 Merldian,Idaho 89642 Telephone B88 4461 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby. adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions . ROLL CALL Councilman Brewer Voted t,/e,? Councilman Tolsma Voted C Councilman Myers Voted Councilman Giesler Voted Mayor Kingsford (Tie Breaker) Voted MOTION APPROVED: DENIED: AMBROSE. FITZGERALD 8 CROOKSTON Attorneys end Counselors ?.O,Box 427 PAGE 48 Merldmn.Idaho 8.9(i42 Telephone BS&4441 z BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN UPLAND INDUSTRIES APPLICATION TO ATTEND THE MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL RESERVE CONTAINED IN THE NORTH CURVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Compre- hensive Plan having come on for Public Hearing and the City Council having heard any and all testimony that teas submitted and having duly considered all the evidence, officially noticed evidence, and Facts of the Comprehensive Plan itself, the Local Plannina Act of 1975, the City Council of the City of Meridian makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the application was submitted by Upland Industries Corporation and is not an amendment proposed by the Commission or the City Council. 2 . That the specific parcels of property to which the application pertains are the Northwest Quarter of Section 9 , Townshi 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, (hereafter referred to as Parcel 1) which is commonly known as the Southeast Carrier of the intersections of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue, and the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 3 North, Ranee 1 East, Boise-Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, (hereafter referred to as Parcel MaaasE, 2) which is commonly known as the Southwest corner of the inter- FZGERALG ROOKSTON torrm"&W ovn..m Page 1 0.SnW Fare.kkft 93642 �p�Nt section of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue . 3 . That the two specific parcels included in the application are contained within Meridian 's Area of Impact as recently negotiate between the City and Ada County; the parcels are included within the Urban Service Planning Area and have been in the City limits for over two years . The parcels were zoned industrial at the time of their annexation and are presently zoned Light Industrial pursuant to the recently enacted Zoning Ordinance . 4 . The Comprehensive Plan Policy Diagram appears to designate the area within which the two parcels are located as being in the "Eastern Industrail Review Area" and in the "Rural Residential Reserve" of the "North Curve Neighborhood. " The Applicant's amend- ments to remove the "Rural Residential Reserve" from Parcel 2 should be approved to allow the proposed industrail development and remove the possible conflict that exists between the Plan and the present zoning of Parcel 2 . Parcel 1 could be considered to be in the "Eastern Industrail Review Area . " 5 . The application has been processed under the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan as set forth on pages 54, 55, and 56 of the Plan . 6 . The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment on December 3, 1984 ; that notice of said hearing was duly published in the official newspaper in the City of Meridian and was published sixteen days prior to said December 3, oABROSE. 1984 hearing; that no changes have been made in the application or fZOERALD ROOUTON proposed amendment. 1«r,w.WW 'AWWWn "AuT Wage 2 ..,,,,,1 ;. 0,4461 i� 7 . The Application as it pertains to the removal of the "Rural Residential Reserve" addresses the Amendment requirements under Amendment Provision and Procedures set forth at page 54 of the Plan; that Applicant 's reasons why the Plan should be amended for the removal of the "Rural Residential Reserve" are so that the zoning of Light Industrial, which is the zone the land presently carries, is not in conflict with the Plan where is states that the area is included in the "Rural Residential Reserve" of the North Curve . B . The Application, in general terms , requests that the "Rural Residential Reserve" designation of the Plan be removed from Parcel 2 and from South of Fairview Avenue, so the present Light Industrial zoning is definitely not in conflict with the Plan. 9 . That on page 58 of the Plan in the glossary "Rural Residenital Reserve" areas is defined as follo�-?s : "Rural Residential-Reserve Areas ; Areas of the Urban Service Planning Area which are intended for specified future use (Residential or Industrail) ; . . . " 10 . That the Council takes Judicial notice of the fact that the Applicant's land is in the Meridian Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area; that the land is annexed and is presently zoned Light Industrial; that sewer and water lines are presently being extended by the Applicant to service its ground in Parcel 2 an that therefore water and sewer will also be adjacent to Parcel 1; that the two Parcels are serviced by two principal transportation arterials those being Fairview Avenue and Eagel ,Raod; that there is �M BROSE. TZOERALD ,ROOKBTON very limited Residential development near the Applicant ' s land and ion»y.M4 .ouno.kw. o■0%427 IaWM.kbW Page 3 as,441 what is there is sparse and limited to farm homes and buildings . 11. The following goals, policies , and objectives in the Plan are noted; page 9 Land Use ; Policies, "I. The City of r4eridia intends to plan for the periodic reviewing, monitoring and updating of land uses within the Area of Impact and the Urban Service Plan- ning Area, " page 14 Economic Development, "Stimulate , encourage and give perference to those types of economic activities and develop- ments which provide opportunities for the employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need for persons to commute to neighborhood cities . " "Industrial Review Areas , the Comprehensive Plan intends to prepare for Meridian' s business and employment future by reserving land for industrial, retail, com- mercial and office uses and so removing them from the categories of land on which residential development can be proposed, " 12 . The following statements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan are noted: p. 15 "Economic Policies e orl lan s ail make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 2 . It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial in- terest and activities are to dominate. 4 . Positive programs should be undertaken to support existing industrial and commercial areas to ensure their continued vitality, such as : %MBROBE, TZOERALo . . . ROOKSTON iomWy%rq OWNWW ,. O Bor 4v Page 4 W,",Ww" an" C. Zoning changes to assure desired economic development. P. 6 Policy Diagram "With the anticipation of growth and development pressures during the next decade, the Comprehensive Plan summarizes the potential distributions of land use activities within the Urban Service planning Area that are based upon policy recommendations . The policy Diagram attempts to make general designations of appropriate and compatible land use, expresses the ultimate growth of the Meridian community if all the land were developed, and provides a flexible framaork for further detailed land use decisions . The Policy Diagram is to be used as a general guide for land use decision-making--not as a legalistic, literal and definitive map . As applications and proposals of land uses are submitted, the Policy Diagram is not intended to be used as the sole, authoritative means for decision-making. ;rather, it is but one of many tools which are available for public officilas as they exercise their responsibility regarding the health, safety and welfare of the general public, 13. That at the public hearing held for the City Council there was no public comment received objecting to the proposed amendment removing Parcel 2 and all land South of Fairview Avenue from the "Rural Residential Reserve" designation of the North Curve Neighborhood Area. COINCLUSIONS 1 . That all the procedural requirements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, hereafter referred to as the Plan, and of the Local Planning Act, Title 67 , Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including all notice and hearing requirements , have been met; that the Council AMB"E, ir=aeRALo ROOOTON has authority to amend the Plan. lot"" WW a neck" O 60 4V Page 5 LM,� g i� 1 W 2 . That Upland Industries Application to amend the Plan was initiated by the Applicant and not by the Commission or the City Council . 3 . That the Council may take judicial or official notice of existing conditions in the City, County and State and of govern- mental actions , policies, and ordinances . 4 . That the function of adopting, amending or repealing a Comprehensive Plan is a legislative function . Burt vs City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65 , 665 P . 2d 1075 ( 1983) . That even though this is a legislative function, the Local Planning Act requires that Findings of Fact and Conclusions be made for any application provided for in the Act. 5 . That the Application itself was previously concluded to have met the requirements of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan and such conclusion is reaffirmed. 6 . That paragraph K. of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan provides in part as follows : "k . Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan may be granted only to correct an error in the Plan or because of sub- stantial change in the actual conditions of an area which results in a material discrepancy or disparity between the conditions in the area and all or part of the Plan. " That this Application has been processed under the above requirement and must be judged on that basis ;. however, it is noted that such a requirement is more restrictive than allowed or required under the Local Planning Act; that the Commission has recommended an amendment .IBROSE, ZGERALD tOOKBTOH '"0"W4 Page 6 "b� B04V dean.MWO CL" iAiaMl to Section K which removes the idea that an amendment may only be granted to correct an error or change in actual conditions and the Council has approved Findings of Fact and Conclusions regarding the amendment; such restrictive requirements was an error in itself sinc it is difficult to plan for the future and make necessary changes when the Commission and Council must be guided by actual conditions . Such is a conflict in terminology and the function of a Compre- hensive Plan to "plan. " 7. That the Plan is what it says it is . It is a Plan. The comment to the Policy Diagram indicates that the Diagram is not "intended to be used as the sole, authoritative means for decision- making" but "is to be used as a general guide for land use decision- making--not as a legalistic, literal and definitive map. " The Plan therefore should be liberally construed but still maintained as the functional guideline for land use decisions . B . That the Commission has the duty, as does the City Council, to continually plan; that the Commission and Council treat amend- ments proposed by private entities as part of that planning duty and function; that Commission and Council cannot, and should not, be the sole initiators of possible amendments ; the Commission and Council treat amendment applications as a means of bringing possible and necessary planning chancres to light. 9 . That the Application pertaining to the removal of the "Rural Residential Reserve" South of Fairview Avenue, should be AMBROSE. adopted to conform the Plan to the fact that the area is zoned Lich ITZOERALG RD°x'T°" Industrial . norlw"Wd :ounNon 0 am 42? Page 7 4401 10 . That since "Rural Residential Reserve" is defined in the Glossary of the Plan at page 58 as : "Areas of the Urban Service Planning Area which are intended for specified future use (residential or industrial) ; . . . " and that Parcees 1 and 2 could easily be found to be located in the Eastern Industrial Review Area, and because there is very sparse residential development in the area and because Fairview Avenue would be a buffer between possible residential development north of Fairview and industrial development south of Fairview , it is concluded that that portion of the Applicants ' Application requesting removal of the "Rural Residential Reserve" from Parcels 1 and 2 should be granted. 11. It is concluded that the fact Parcel 2 is zoned Light Industrial and the land is being developed industrially, that the area surrounding Parcels 1 and 2 is farm ground and only very sparsely used as residential property and then only in conjunction with farm property, and that both parcels could be said to be included in the "Eastern Industrial Review Area, " the applicant has met the requirements of paragraph K of the Amendment provision and Procedures of the Plan and the Application as it pertains to the removal of the "Rural Residential Reserve" from Parcel 1 and 2 and south of Fairview Avenue should be granted. AMBROSE, i TZGEFLU D ADOXSTON l Jorl"S" *WNW" O.SOX 4V s�..z Page 8 t APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions . ROLL CALL Councilman Brewer Voted C Councilman Tolsma Voted (z Councilman Myers . Voted L Councilman Geisler Voted Jze Mayor Kingsford (Tie Breaker) Voted MOTION APPROVED: q DENIED : 0ABROSE, ,TZGERALD RWUMN t . Page o b"ai AW M.WWM uw r.M�-sMa li I BEFORE THE PIE?IDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING CO"P7ISSION UPLAND INDUSTRIES APPLICATION TO AMEND THE MERIDIAN COPAFREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSTCNC The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan having come on for public hearing and the Plan- - nine and Zoning'Commission having held a workshop on said applica- tion and having heard any and all testimony that was siLbritted, including the review of some of the record from a prior Comni-ehen- sine slFtn Amend-rent and Annexation request which concerneel a region al sho-:)ninq center, and having duly considered all the evidence, officially notices: evidence, and facts , the Comprehensive plan itself , the Local Planning Act of 1915 , the Planninj- and 7.oninq Commission makes the following: FINDI14GS Or FACT 1. That the application was submitted by Upland Industries Corporation and is not an amendment proposed by the Cor- ission or the City Council . 2 . That the specific parcels of property to which the applica- tion pertains are the Northwest Quarter of section 9 , Township 3 North, Rance 1 East, Boise Meridian, '%c?a County, Idaho , (hereafter referred to as Parcel 1) which is corinionly knovn as the Southeast - AMBROSE, FITZGERALD Corner of the intersections of Eac le ,toad and Fairview Avenue, and d CROOKSTON Allomeys and Counselors l P.O.Box 427 Pa c7 e = Meridian,Idaho 83842 Telephone 8884481 r 1-/ sft.% the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, (hereafter referred to as Parcel 2) which is commonly known. as the Southwest corner of the inter- section of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue . 3 . That the _two specific parcels included in the application are contained within meridiaW s Area of Impact as recently negotiated between the City and Ada County; the parcels are included within the Urban Service Planning Area and have been in the City limits for over two years . The Parcels. were zoned industrial at t,e time of their annexation and are presently zoned Light Industrial pursuant to the recently enacting Zoning Ordinance. 4 . The Comprehensive Plan Policy Diagram appears to designate the area within which the two parcels are located as beinc in the "Eastern Industrial Review Area" and in the "'.Rural Residential Reserve" of the "North Curve Neighborhood. " The Plan also general- ly designates one site for a regional shopping center, that being at the I-84/M.eridian Road Interchange . In order to develop Parcel 1 as a regional shopping center the Applicant' s proposed amendments pertaining to a regional shopping center raust be approved . Like- wise the Applicant's amendments to remove tie "aural Residentia l Reserve" from Parcel 2 should be approved to allow the proposed industrial development and remove the possible conflict that exists between the Plan and the present zoning of Parcel 2 . 5 . The application has been processed under the Amendment AMBROSE, Provision and Procedures of the Flan as set forth on paces 50 , 55 , r1TZGERALD dCROOKSTON and 56 of the Plan. A"orneys and Counselors 6 , Pursuant to the Amendment 'provision and Procedures of the _ P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 63W Telephone 8884461 P a�i e 2 ' 1 `-f `'' i I Plan, the Application was found to merit further study after the requisite and duly noticed public hearings were held and a Com- mission workshop; the Findings of Fact and Conclusions pertaining to the question of whether the application merited further study are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full hereat; the Application itself was found to meet the requirements of the Amendment Procedures . 7 . Subsequent to the determination that the Application merited further study the Commission held a duly noticed workshop on the Application on September 10 , 1984 , a duly noticed public hearing on October 18 , 1984 , as required by Title 67, Chapter 65 , Idaho Code and the Plan, and held an additional duly noticed workshop on NoverzlDer 1 , 1984 , to consider the matter; that no changes have been made in the Application or Proposed Amendment. 8 . The Application addresses the Amendment requirements under Amendment Provision and Procedures set forth at page 54 of the Plan; the Applicant' s reasons why the Plan should be amended are recited in the Commissior� earlier Findings of Fact when it deter- mined the Application merited further study . 9 . The Application, in general terms , requests that ParCe1 1- be identified and designated in the Plan as a site for a regional shopping center and that the "Rural Residential Reserve" designa- tion of the Plan be removed from Parcel 7_ . "'he Application continues in specific terms to request specific changes to the AMBROSE. Policy Diagram and to many of the -policies and objectives of the FITZGERALD SGROOKSTON various components of the Plan such than. the Plan' s focus on a Atlorneye and Counselors P.O Box 427 Page 3 Meridian,Idaho 63642 Telephone 8884461 single designation of a regional shopping center site is changed to a two site designation focus . Many of the specific requested changes do not deal with the regional shopping center portion of the Plan, but with other components of the Plan that would_ be effected by a two site designation, one at Eagle Road and Fairview and one at Meridian Road and I-8,4 . However, the requested changes are mainly a result of two site designations . The Application, however, requests that even in the event the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue site is not approved for a regional shopping center, that approval be given for removal of "Rural Residential Reserve" designation South of Fairview Avenue so the present Light Industrial zoning is definitely not in conflict with the Plan. 10 . The Application sets forth in paragraph Seven as follows : "It is respectfully submitted that the suitability for a regional shopping center of this location at the intersection of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue in the City of Meridian will be amply demonstrated by the testimony and exhibits to be introduced at the hearings on this cause , which will consist generally of reference to the suitability of the site itself for development, transportation access to and from the site , demographic study of trends for the growth of the City of Meridian and Northern Ada County and the Tranportation Plan for Northern Kda- County, together with Petitioner ' s proposed improve- ments to be made to the property , " The Applicant presented to the Commission no testimony or exhibits at the hearings held on Vais Application along the lines re- presented by the above quoted statement. AMBROSE, 11 . That the Plan, in dealing with Commercial Activity Centers FITZGERALD &CROOK&TON of which a regional shopping center is one , states as follows under Attorneys and Counselors P.O-Box 427 Page 4 Meridian,Idaho 83842 Telephone 8084461 i Commercial Activity Centers at pages 19 & 20 : REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER: As the largest of the Commercial Activity Centers , it is designed to serve Ada County and the surrounding counties which make up the Treasure Valley . ,,,, In all cases , the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and development standards . These standards consider, among other aspects : Traffic Volume and Type Trip Generation Impacts on Arterial Street System Proximity to Other Commercial Development Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas Accessibility of Site Parking Demands Pedestrian Circulation Available Utility Systems Aesthetics (Design Considerations) Drainage Meridian is encouraging the potential development of a Regional Shopping Center near the Meridian/Kuna Road Freeway interchange . When it becomes a reality, it will have a significant impact upon Meridian and has the potential of becoming Meridian' s new Central Business District. The proposed private development program calls for over a million-square-foot shopping center, which will provide a wide variety of retail enterprises and sup- porting commercial uses (such as office complexes , multi- family residential units, medical clinics , motels and entertainment facilities) . POLICIES 1 . It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and support the development of a Regional Shopping Center as the core commercial activity within Meridian' s Urban Service Plan- ning Area, as well as the Treasure Valley. 2 . The evaluation of the Regional Shopping Center development shall be primarily based upon its consistency with the land use policies of ?der-- dan's Comprehensive Plan, as well as the future air quality plan of northern Ada County . AMBROSE, 3 . As the specific plans are prepared and implemen- FITZGERALD tation and construction timetables are established, &CROOKSTON the evaluation and review of the Regional Shopping Allorneye and Counselors P.O Box 427 Page 5 Meridian,Idaho SW2 Telephone 8881481 Center development shall he conc?ucted through an Environmental Impact Analysis procedure . The Applicant in its Application addressed the standard of availa- bility of utility systems and the drainage but did not address the other standards for the location of a commercial activity center . Likewise , the Applicant did not address the effect his application would have on land use policies or the air quality plan of northern Ada County which are stated above to be primary factors in con- sidering the development of a regional shopping center. 12 . The Local Planning Act of 1975 indicates in Section 67-6508 that the Plan should be based on the following components : population, economic development, land use, natural resources ] hazardous areas , public services , facilities , and utilities , transportation, recreation, special areas or sites , housincs, community design, and implementation. At the public hearincs the Applicant did not address how the above planning components *eould be effected by its proposed amendment or whether hose components would be effected at all . 13 . At page 7 of the Plan, the Policy Diagram indicates that a regional shopping center site is designated in the northeast quadrant of the Meridian Road/I-84 Interchange . The Applicati6n - would add an additional site at the southeast quadrant of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road but would not remove the 111eridian Road site . 14 . That the Plan, in many places other_ than in the portion AMBROSE, dealing with the commercial activity centers and the Policy FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Diagram, refers to "the Regional Shopping Center" or "the Proposed Attorneys and Counselor Page 6 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 888-4461 i i Regional Shopping Center, northeast of the 1-84/Meridian Road Intersection" or such other single reference terminology - that the Applicant' s requests would.. change such references to refer to two sites or make the wording such that it would apply to two sites for a regional shopping cneter. 15 . That at the hearing held before the Commission on October 18, 1984 , testimony was presented by James W . Kiser, representing Mr. Nahas and Melvin Simon and Associates who own the *Meridian Road/I-84 shopping center site. that the testimony objected to the adoption of the applicant's proposed Plan Amendment; that Mr . Kiser based his objection on the testimony his client put into the record during the Quong-Watkin Properties Annexation request and associated Comprehensive Plan Amendments hereafter referred to as the 'huong Record. " That it was unclear from "Mr . Kiser ' s statements whether he solely based his objection on the prior testimony submitted or whether he also requested that the Com- mission take official or judicial notice of the testimony he and his clients has submitted in opposition to the Quong-Watkins Annexation and accompanying Plan Amendments . That the Commission members familiarized themselves faith the Quong record including specifically the Findings of Fact and Conclusions ; that the Commission sees some similarities with the Quong-Nahas situation and the Upland Industries-Nahas situation; however, it also sees some significant dissimilarities and additio - AMRROSE, ally sees some similarities between the Nahas site and. the Upland FIT2GERALD 6 CROOKSFON site . Attorneys and Gounaelore P.O.So.427 Page 7 Meridian,Idaho 93642 feiephone 888-44$1 i 16 . The similarities , when comparing the Quong Eagle toad site and the Upland Eagle Road site which might dictate &eniel of the Upland Application, are as follows : a) Neither site is adjacent to the existing retail center of meridian; h) Both sites may require greater service costs for water, sewer, police and fire protection, than the Meridian Road site ; c) The revenues to the City of meridian from a regional shopping center at either site may not offset the expenses to the City ; d) The basic property tax structure has not changed since the Quong Annexation request, 17 . The dissimilarities , or in some cases similarities, hetween the Quong site and the Upland site and the record in each case which might lend support for approval of the present Application are as follows : a) Tile Quong site was not already annexed to the City and zoned, as the Upland site is ; b) The Quong site , to become annexed and a reality required an annexation route that {rent south of the interstate to encompass lands that would not have been serviceC by water and sewer even though annexed. c) Much of t'_he Quong site was not included in the thlen existing Urban Service Planninq Area ; d) Vlater and sewer lines are presently being extended to land adjacent to the Upland site by the Applicant at its cost; e) Police and fire vehicles would not be required to travel outside the City limits when taking the quickest route to the Upland site ; AMBROSE, FiTZGERALD f) The site is already zoned industrial and 2cjacent land dCROOKSTON is presently being developed industrially; Attorneys and ODunselars V.O.sox 427 Page S Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 868-4481 g) The Upland site does not have as much adjacent existing residential property which could be impacted adversely by development. h) The Upland site. iz already serviced by Fairview Avenue , — a four lane principal artereal; i) The Eagle Road intersection at 1-8A is planned to be (aevaloped into an interchange ; j ) The Upland site is a little closer to Meridain's existing retail center and is connected to that existing retail by Fairview Avenue which is likely to be developed commercially as evidenced by the commercial development along Fairview toward and in Boise ; :k) The-Upland site is :closer to Boise where the majority of people in the Treasure Valley are who would use a regional shopping center and yet the upland site is still in Meridian' s City limits . 18 . The similarities and dissimilarities between the Upland site and the Nahas site which might tend to lend support to approval of the Upland Application or at least make it a toss--up as to which site is preferable are as follows : a) Both sites are already in the Urban Service Planning Area and the Citv limits and zoned; b) Both sites will soon have water and sewer services adjacent to the land; c) The City. is already obligated to provide fire and police protection to the sites regardless of cost albeit one may cost more than the other- d) Neither site if developed as a regional shopping center will increase the revenues of the City significantly and for sure not enough to pay for t:'Ie costs of service ; e) The transportation impact on the present downtown of Meridian would be less if the Upland site were develops ; f) The Nab as site has been annexed and zoned anO capable of being developed as a regional shopping center for AMBROSE, almost ten years and yet the major retailers have not ye FITZGERALD decided to locate at that site . d CROOKSTON Attorneys and Coun,elora Page 9 P,O.Box 427 Meridian.Idaho &%42 Telephone 8884401 v 19 . That the above facts pertaining to the Upland site , other I than those pertaining to water, sewer and drainage, have been obtained from the material submitted (Iurinq the nuong Annexation and accompanying Plan Amendment either by the Nahas people or by the Quong people or have been officially or judicially noticed by the Commission; some facts, in addition to those referenced above , which the Commission has taken notice of are as follows , some of which may have already been stated above: a) The Applicant' s land is in Meridian's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area; b) The land is annexed and is presently zoned light industrial ; c) Sewer and water lines are presently being extended by the Applicant to service its industrail ground in the southwest quadrant of the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue intersection and thus water and sewer lines will he adjacent to the Applicant' s proposed site of a regional shopping center; d) The proposed site is serviced by two principal transpor- tation arterials, Fairview Avenue and Ear,,le Road; e) The State of Idaho Department of Transportation has existing plans for construction of an interchange at Eagle Road and 1-84 and designation of Eagle Road from Fairview Avenue to 1--€34 as part of. U.S . Highway 130 ; that there will thus be t�ao interstate interchanges in the Urban Service Planning Area; f) That since the land is already in the City, it has the obligation to provide municipal services to the land, those being specifically police and fire protection and water and sewer - g) There is very limited residential development near AMBROSE, the Applicant's land and what is there is sparse and FITZGERALD limited to farm homes and buildings ; 8 CROOKS70N Atlomaya and Counaelore Page 10 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Teiephone 888-4461 i h) That the industrial zoning of the southwest quadrant of the Fagle Road/Fairview Avenue intersection may be in conflict with the "Rural Residential Reserve" designation of the Plan - i) When the 1973 Meridian Comprehensive Plan was adopted the only suggested site for a regional shopping center was at Meridian Road and I-84 ; also the only inter- change in the Meridian Area of Impact or Urban Service Planning Area was at that site and now there is one planned for Eagle Road and 1-84 ; j ) The Meridian Road shopping center site has been an- nexed and zoned for at least 10 years and has been capable of being developed as a regional shopping center for that amount of time and yet no center has been constructed nor does it appear one will be soon. 20 . That the following goals , policies , and objectives in the Plan are noted: p. 8 "GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Goal 3: To encourage the kind of economic growth and development which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for existinc_, and future residents , reduces the present reliance on Boise and strengthens the City ' s ability to finance and implement public improvements , services and its open space character. " p.9 LAND USE;POLICIES "1_ The City of Meridian intends to plan for the periodic reviewing, monitoring and updating of land uses within the Area of Impact and the Urban Service Planning Area "4 . The following land use activities are not in compliance with the basic goals of the Comprehensive Plan: a . . . . b . Strip commercial and strip industrial" AMBROSE, p . 14 EONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON "Stimulate, encourage and calve perf_erence to those Attorneys and Counselors P.o.Box 427 Page 11 Meridian,Idaho 63642 Telephone 888-W I I i types of economic activities and developments which provide opportunities for the employment of Iieridian citizens and area residents and reduce Vie need for persons to commute to neighboring cities . "The City of meridian and its residents view the economic enterprises of industry , retail commercial and personal services as an integral part of a planned community. The City ' s physical development, economic stability , social stratification and institutional effectiveness for dealing with public needs are dependant upon such economic opportnities . To accomp- lish the above objective , the Comprehensive Flan provides for INDUSTRIAL REVIEW AREAS , COM-111ERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS and rIIN'ED-USE RFVIEW AREAS . "INDUSTRIAL REVIEW ANREAS The Comprehensive Plan intends to prepare for Meridian's business and employment future by reserving land for industrial, retail, commercial and office uses and so removing them from the categories of land on which residential development can be proposed, " p . 26 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, POLICIES 1.2 . Every effort shall he made by the City of merid- ian to encourage commercial and industrial growth and development which furthers employment and economic self-sufficiency and reduces 'ieridian' s present reliance on Boise ' s Metropolitan economic and employment center . " p .53 OTHER PROJECTS "2 . Support and encourage development of Commercial Activity Centers Regional Shopping Center a .� PP g 21 . The following statements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan are noted: p. 1 FORWARD AMBROSE. FITZGERALD CROOKSTON Atiorneya and Counselors _ P.O.Bo:4zr Page 12 Meridian,Idaho &M42 Telephone 888-4461 i f "The Comprehensive Plan is primarily a policy document identifying policies to guide future development with- in and outside of the City of Meridian. The Compre- hensive Plan is recognizably the primary step in identifying the quality of life the City residents desire and relating ctoals to its capacity to achieve particular end results , It Was developed with a broad base of community--wide citizen input and is both sensitive to the changing needs of the community and recognizes a commitment to preserve the values ident- ified by the City residents . NATURE Or THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A Comprehensive Plan is an official document, adopted hy_ local governments and public agencies , which serves as a policy guide for decisions concerning the physical development of a community . It indicates , in a general way, how the community may develop in the next 20 to 30 years . The essential characteristics of the Comprehensive Plan are that it is comprehensive, general , long-- range and represents a process---not a product. Comprehensive means that the plan encompasses all areas of the community and all functional elements which bear on physical development, general means that the 7�11an summarizes policies and proposals and does not develop detailed site plans . Long-ranee means that the plan looks beyond the pressing current issues toward the aspect of problems which the com- munity may face in the future . Finally, as a process (not a product) , the Comprehensive Plan is an ongoing process for directing change that occurs inevitably in a community---not a document that is written once, for all time . " p. 14 "CODUMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS - Retail commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers . Both general catecories often share locational needs and often prove r--iutually supportive . In order to coordin- ate with the supportive areas of residential and industrial developments , areas should he set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided." AMBROSE, FITZGERALD p . 15 "ECONOMIC POLICIES ACROOKSTON Allornaysend 1• The City of Meridian shall make every effort to Gounselon P.O.Box/27 Meridian,Idaho Pa ae 13 83812 - Talephone 886_Wj create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 2 . It is the policy of the City of "leridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrail in- terest and activities are to dominate . 4 . Positive programs should be undertaken to support existing industrial and commercial areas to ensure their continued vitality, such as : c. + Zoning changes to assure d6sired economic development_ 6 . It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into existing residential areas , and plan for new shopping centers as a_rowth and development warrant_ 8 . The City of Meridian intends to establish Commercial Development Design Guides which : a. Provide for the trouping of commercial buildirn on a single parcel of land in such a manner as to create a harmonious , efficient and convenient retail shopping environment: " p. 6 POLICY DIAGRAM "With the anticipation of growth and development pressures during the next decade , the Comprehensive Plan summarizes the potential distributions of land use activities within the Urban Service Planning Area that are based upon policy recommendations , The Policy Diagram attempts to make general designations of appropriate and compatible land use , expresses the ultimate growth of the *Meridian community if all the land were developed, and provides a flexible framework AMBROSE. for further detailed land use decisions . FITZGERALD 3CROOKSTON Page 14 Attorney&and Gounaelora P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone BBa-4461 The Policy Diagram is to be used as a general guide for land use decision-making---not as a legalistic, literal and definitive map. As applications and proposals of lard uses are submitted, the Policy Diagram is not - intended to be used as the sole , authoritative means for decision-making. Rather, it is but one of the many tools which are available for public officials as they exercise their responsibility regarding the health , safety and welfare of the general public. p. 50 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW If the Comprehensive Plan is to be useful and effective , it should not be filed away but should be continually reviewed and updated. The recom- mendations within the Comprehensive Plan should not be interpreted as unalterable commitments , but rather as a reflection of the best foreseeable direction at a given point in time . It is recommended by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission that at least a yearly review shall be held of the Comprebensive Plan to upCate and/or reaffirm the Plan to fit the changing needs as well as unforeseen planninq problems and opportunities . 22 . That there was no testimony at any of the public hearings contrary to the Applicant' s request except at the last public hearing when James W. Kiser, representing the owners of the Meridian Road site spoke in oppositions that no public comment was received from persons not having an economic interest in either the Meridian Road site or the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue site . CONCLUSIONS 1 . That all the procedural requirements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, hereafter refered to as the Plan, and of the Local Planning Act, Title 67 , Chapter 65 , Idaho Code , in- AMBROSE, cluding all notice and hearing requirements , have been met; that FITZGERALD 6CROOKSTON the Commission has authority to amend the Plan. Attomeya and Counselors 2 . That Upland Industries ,Application to amend the Plan was P.O.Box 427 Merldlan,Idaho &3642 Pace 15 Telephone 8884461 i initiated by the Applicant and not by the Commission or the City Council . 3 . That the Commission may take judicial or official notice of existing conditions in the City, County and State and of govern- mental actions ,, policies , and ordinances . 4 . That the function of adopting, amending or repealing a Comprehensive Plan is a legislative function. Burt vs City of Idaho Falls , 105 Idaho 65 , 665 P. 2d 1075 (1983) . That even though this is a legi§lative function, the Local Planning Act requires that Findings of Fact and Conclusions be made for any application provided for in the Act. 5 . That the Application itself was previously concluded to have met the requirements of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan and such conclusion is reaffirmed. 6 . That paragraph K . of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan provides in part as follows : "k . Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan may be granted only to correct an error in the Plan or because of sub- stantial change in the actual conditions of an area which results in a material discrepancy or disparity between the conditions in the area and all or part of the Plan. " That this Application has been processed under the above require- ment and must be judged on that basis ; however, it is noted that such a requirement is more restrictive than allowed or required under the Local Plannina Act : that the Commission itself has recommended an amendment to Section K which removes the idea that AMBROSE, FITZGERALD an amendment may only be granted to correct an error or change 8 CROOKSTON Attorneys and Page 16 Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho UW2 Teiephone 888-W1 in actual conditions ; such restrictive requirement was an error in itself since it is difficult to plan for the future and make necessary changes when the Corxiission and Council must be guided by actual conditions . Such is a conflict in terminology and the function of a Comprehensive Plan to "plan. " 7 . That the Plan is what it says it is . It is a Plan. The portions of the Plan set forth in Finding number 21 reflect that the Plan "summarizes policies and proposals and does not develop detailed site plans . " The comment to the Policy Diagram indicates that the Diagram is not "intended to be used as the sole , authoritative means for decision-making" but "is to be used as a general guide for land use decision-making---not as a legalistic , literal and definitive map . " The Plan therefore should be liberally construed but still maintained as the functional guideline for land use decisions ; i .e . , the Plan policies and objectives cannot be willy-nilly disregarded when there is an apparent conflict between the Plan and a proposed use . 8 . That the Commission has the duty , as does the City Council, to continually plan; that the Commission treats amendments proposed - by private entities as part of that planning duty and function; the Commission cannot, and should not, be the sole initiator of possible amendments ; the Commission treats amendment applications as a means of bringing possible and necessary planning changes to light. AMBROSE, 9 • At the time the Plan was initially adopted there was only FITZGERALD 3CROOKSTON one interstate interchange and now there is an additional one Attorneys and Counselors planned for the Fagle Road/I-84 intersections also at the time of P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho &U42 Page 17 Telephone$88-4481 i initial adoption of the Plan the Eagle Road/Fairview Avenue area was not in the City limits and some of it not in the Urban Service Planning Area; likewise , sewer and water was not to or adjacent to the land owned by the Applicant. It is condluded that these changes and others noted in the Findings , are a substantial change in the actual conditions of the area, and even of the entire Urban Service Planning Area, which has resulted in a substantial change in the actual conditions of the area which resulted in a material discrepancy or disparity between the conditions of the area and all or part of the Plan sufficient to meet the requirements of paragraph R . of the Amendment Provisions and Procedures of the Plan 10 . It is likewise concluded that the above referenced changes warranted a review of the Plan, and amendment of the Plan if deemed appropriate , regardless of whether the Applicant had submitted its Application. The Application brought to light and focused in on the need to review the Plan. The Commission now is required to assess not only the Application but also whether those chancres abcV warrant adopting the proposed amendment and whether the changes of the Application itself are in the best interest of the Plan and the City , and whether they are desireable . 11 . That the part of the Application pertaining to a regional shopping center would have to be adopted to allow the development intentions of the Applicant as set forth in the Application; that the Application pertaining to the removal of the "Rural Resident- AMBROSE, ial Reserve" south of Fairview Avenue should be adopted to conform FITZGERALD dCROOKSTON the plan to the fact that the area is zoned Light Industrial . Attorneys end Counselors P.D.Box 427 Page 18 Meridian,Fdeho 83642 Telephone 8684481 �- �, 12 . That since "Rural Residential Reserve" is defined in the Glossary of the Plan at page 58 as : "Areas of the Urban Service Planning Area which are intended for specified future use (residential or industrial) ; . . . " and that Parcels 1 and 2 could easily be found to be located in the Eastern Industrial Review Area, and becuuse there is very sparse residential development in the area and because Fairview Avenue would be a buffer between possible residential development north of Fairview and industrial development soVth of Fairview,_ it is concluded that that portion of the Applicants ' Application requesting removal of the Rural Residential Reserve from Parcels 1 and 2 should be granted. 13. The main focus of the assessment of that part of the Application pertaining to the designation of a site for a regional shopping center is dictated by those factors mentioned in Findings of Fact, paragraph 11 and 12 , the Application itself, the facts presented in the hearings or officially noticed, and the goals , objectives , and policies of the Plan as it exists and if it were amended. 14 . The Application and the testimony in its favor dealt with sewer, water and drainage ; it dealt with the fact that fleridian has an existing regional shopping center location but yet it has not been developed as one for probably over ten years ; the Application concludes , without support, that the Applicant' s Parcel 1 is "amenable to development of a Regional Shopping Center" and AMBROSE, makes conclusionary remarks as to the public need and benefit from FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON its proposed Plan Amendment. The Application states that the Attorneys and Counselors "suitability of the Eagle toad/Fairview Avenue as a regiona P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 812 Page 19 Telephone 888-4461 shopping center site will be amply demonstrated by testimony and exhibits to he introduced at- the hearings . " No such testimony was subitted. However, the process of this Application is not completed in that the City Council must consider it and at least one hearing must be held at which time such testimony could be presented. 15 . Other than those items mentioned in paragraph 14 above , the Applicant did- not address the standards for the location of a commercial acitivty center contained in Finding No. 11 , nor were the Planning Components of Section 67-6508, Idaho Code, addressed. 16 . That the representative of the owners of the Meridian Road/1-84 site objected to the approval of the Application based on the testimony those owners had submitted into the Quong record. The Commission concludes that while many of the costs objections to the Quong Application apply to Upland Application they also apply to any regional shopping center that is developed in the City limits . Certainly , the costs are greater the farther the development is from the existing services or means of service . However, the significant differences between the Quong Application and this Application and which make comparison difficult and in many cases useless are ; 1) Uplands ' land is already annexed, 2) the City must provide municipal services regardless of the nature of the development, and 3) sewer and water are or will be AMBROSE, adjacent to the site , all three of which were differences in the FITZGERALD dCROOKSTON Attorneys and Pane 20 Counselor P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Te$aphone 888i481 II 4 1 comparison between the Quong site and the Nahas site which were felt to make the Nahas site more desireable when comparing those two sites and are not reasons to deny this Application, but stqDporti Additional differences are that the Upland site is a little closer to existing Meridian retail, the site is located on Fairview Avenue which has historically proved to be a good location for commercial activity as evidenced by development in Boise and at Cherry Plaza in Meridian, the site is already served by two principal arteriels , and there would be little if any impact on residential areas . 17 . it is thus concluded that the Quong record does not dictate deniel of the Application but may lend evidence for approval. 18 . That one of the major themes , if not the most prominent theme, of the Plan is that Meridian wants growth and development which is orderly and balanced . This is evidenced by Pinding 20 . Likewise , it is evidenced by the Plan at pare 2 "The goals , objectives and policies herein expressed underlie and shape the character and orientation of Meridian ' s Comprehensive Plan. They deal with three major concerns of the people ofIeridian: 1? Orderly _growth and development; 2) Economic growth and balance; and 3) Improvement of the quality of life . " 19 . That throughout the Plan the theme and desire for economic growth and jobs and self-sufficiency is repeated. One of the major means the Plan states as achieving the al.)ove was , and is , the development of a regional shopping center in '9eridian. "such of AMBROSE. L, FITZGERALD the Plan ' s focus is upon a recional shopping center. The Plan CROOKSTON Altorneys and Counselors Wage 21 P.O_Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone8884461 specifically located the site for such a center as the Meridian Road/I-84 intersection. This site designation may have been con- trary to the idea that the Plan is a general guideline and not a legalistic, definitive document but at the time of adoption of the Plan it was the only "site" in "sight. " The area has changed. The development of an additional interchange, the extension of the Urban Service Planning Area and the extension of water and sewer lines make re-evaluation of the Plan, and possibly the single designation of a regional shopping center, appropriate . However, we they there is one site designated or two or more, the desire of the people of Meridian is for a shopping center and the fact that the Plan strenuously endorses a regional shopping center as a means to achieve economic growth , jobs , and self-sufficiency cannot be easily disregarded and any proposal that would, in fact, be developed as a regional shopping center must receive serious consideration at the Planning and Zoning Commission level and the City Council level. Thus , while the evidentiary presentation was i E lacking before the Commission, the Application and the Applicant must be sent to the Council . 20 . It can be , and is , judicially noticed that the people'of the City of Meridian would like to have a regional shopping center located in Meridian. It can likewise be judicial noticed that there are and will be differences of opinion as to where such a center should be located or what site has the better likelihood of drawing tenants and of actually being developed. AMBROSE. P[TZGERALD &CRO0KST0N Page 22 Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 TeWphone 8884461 I 21 . Other than the designation of an exact site for a regional shopping center the Application meets the general approval of the goals , policies and objectives of the Plan as it exists . Of course , if the Amendments were approved it would then fall more completely in line with the goals , policies , and objectives of the Plan . There could be some objection that the designation of a regional shopping center at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue would not entail orderly growth but since no specific evidence was put forth in that regard such is not concluded, and in any event that one factor alone would not necessarily be grounds to deny the Application. The Application must be held to a balanced review without singleling out one or more factors . 22 . It should be noted at this juncture since in the above paragraph mention is made as to how the proposed amendment would fit into the Plan, that the Conunission concludes that, even though the Applicant' s proposal pertains specifically to two parcels , the Application effects the entire Plan. The change from a single site designation of a regional shopping mall to a two site designation would effect many of the components of the Plan and their policies . - The original Plan is so oriented to the present Meridian Road/Z-84 site that a change to add an additional site would, and sould, ripple through the Plan. 23 . The Commission ultimately concludes that the facts pre- sented by the Applicant and the officially noticed facts contained AMaflosE, in the Findings , particularly Finding 110 . 19 , are sufficient to FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON meet the requirements of Paragraph K of the Amendment Provision and Attorneys and Counselom P.O.Box 427 Page 23 Mend ion,Idaho 83642 Telephone 8138-401 1 Procedures of the Plan to amend the Plan ; that the facts , part- icularly that there has been a site designated for a regional shopping center for some time and vet it has not developed, that the Upland site is serviced by two principal arteriels , that there will soon be an Eagle Road/I-84 interchange, that sewer and water are or will be available to the Upland site , that the Upland site is connected to Meridian' s existing retail by means of Fairview Avenue , an historically well developed commercial arteriel, and that the site: is already annexed and must be provided with munici- pal services regardless of how it is developed, present cogent reasons for looking further into the designation of the Eagle Road/ Fairview Avenue site as a regional shopping center site ; that the Applicant has , however, failed to address how his proposal would effect the planning components contained in Section 67-650R or why the site should be designated as a commercial activity center, regional shopping center, when held to the standards at page 19 of the Plan and recited in Finding 11 for determining the location of a commercial activity center and thus the Applicant has failed to show that the location of a regional shopping center at Fairview and Eagle Road is the appropriate way to amend the 'PlLn even though there are changes in the area which justify an amendment if that amendment itself is deemed beneficial and ap- propriate . In short, the Applicant has r:et the requirements to amend. AMBROSE, the Plan but has failed to show that its amendment is appropriate FITZGERALD dCROOKSTON or how it would effect the other Planning Components . Attorneys and Counselors Page 24 P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 63642 Telephone 8884451 • I 24 . It is concluded, however, that since the people of Meridian desire a regional shopping center, since the one site capable of being developed has not developed, since the Plan states that a regional shopping center, regardless of location, is a means of economic growth and would provide jobs and allow !`Meridian to be self-sufficient and not have to rely on Boise , since the Commission is a recommending body since the Plan is a planning document and device and this amendment procedure is part of the planning process , and since this is a legislative process and the governing body should have an opportunity to review the matter, and since the Applicant has an opportunity to have one or more additional hearing before the City Council and thus an opportunity to present additional facts which may justify approval of the location of a regional shopping center at Applicant' s site , that the Application should be forwarded on to the City Council with the recommendation set forth below in the Recommendation. it is , of course , realized that the Council may den, the Application or take action as it deems fit but it is felt the City Council should have an opportunity to review it without the "sceptor" of a deniel hanging over its head. 25 . That there was no evidence that even if Applicants proposed amendment regarding a regional shopping center were approved that it would be constructed; that the Commission does not like to change the Plan solely to fit particular land use proposals that may not be actually constructed; and that since Parcels 1 and 2 were annexed prior to the adoption of the Zoning and Development AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON ordinance on April 2 , 1984, and therefore Parcel 1 is not sd:)ject Attorneys and Page 2 5 - Counselors P-O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho 83642 Telephone 8884461 I I to Section 11-9-616 which requires development to take place within a certain time , that there should be some means to condition approval of Applicant's proposal or tie approval to the actual development, assuming, of course , that its Application receives ultimate approval by the City Council. 26 . It is finally concluded by the Commission that any change in designations of or for regional shopping centers in the Plan is not to be interpretted in any fashion as a rezoning or doi,.,n- zoning of the Meridian Road/I-84 site , that that site is still viewed -with support and adoption of the Applicant's proposal, if accepted, would not change the ability to develop that site . AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON Paae 26 Attorneys and Counselors P.D.Boa 427 Merldien,Idaho 83642 Telephone 888 4"1 APPROVP,L OF FINDINGS OF PACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of Fact and Conclusions . Roll Call Commissioner Morrow Voted R Commissioner Alidjani Mote o Commissioner Johnson Vote � Commissioner Shearer Vote e Commissioner Cole Vote Chairman Spencer (Tie Breaker) Vote AMBROSE, FITZGERALD 6 CROOKSTON Attorneys and P a ae 2 7 Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho B8842 Telephone BB8.a481 i RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council as follows : 1) That the Applicants ' proposed amendment to remove from the North Curve Neighborhood the "Rural Residential Reserve" designation from the entire Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, of the Boise-P4eridian, Ada County , Idaho and South of Fairview Avenue , be adopted. 2) That the Applicants ' proposed amendment to provide that the entire Northwest Quarter of Section 9 , Township 3 North , Range 1 East; of the Boise-1,1eridian, Ada County, Idaho be designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a site for a Regional Shpooing Center but subject to conditions to be imposed at the time of proper zoning of the property, be adopted. APPROVED Ljeg DISAPPROVED AMBROSE. FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON Page 28 Attorneys and Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian.Idaho 8W2 Telephone 888-4461 I y BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING CO',rIISSTON PLANNING AND ZONING C01111ISSION'S APPLICATION TO AMEND MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as it pertains to the Amendment Procedure , the Meridian Urban ,Limits Functional Transportation Map, ar.c. the possible adoption of a new Area of Impact for the City of Meridian having come on for public hearing and the Pl&nnina and Zoning Conunission having heard any and all testimony that was submitted and having duly considered the evidence and its own opinions and the matter, the Planning and Zoning Co=, isssion makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1 . That notice of the public hearing on the application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for October 18 , 1984 , the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the October 18, 198d , hearing and was Op137 considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission; that copies of all notices were available to newspapers , and radio and television stations . 2 . (a) That the proposed amendment on the Comprehensive Plan AMBROSE, FITZGERALD amendment procedures shortens the sequence of events in the 6 CROOKSTON A„orneysand page I Counselors P.O-8a x 427 Meridian,Idaho B3"2 Telaphone 888-4487 `� -T � \/ amemdment process and enables the Commission and the City Council to process Plan amendments in a more timely and efficient manner; that the existing procedure requires amendments to be submitted six months prior to being finally acted upon, that a copy of the proposed procedure is on file with the City Clerk , and is hereby- incorporated herein as set forth in full . (b) That the proposed amendment pertaining to the Meridian Urban Limits and Functional Classification Transportation Map is a housekeeping amendment to update the Transportation Classifications A copy of the map is on file with the City Clerk and is hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in -full.` . - (c) That the proposed amendment pertaining to the Area of Impact is an amendment which is necessitated by the fact an Area of Impact has been negotiated by the City Council and the Ada County Commissioners , that the Area of Impact is as filed with the City Clerk and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full . 3. That at the public hearing held October 18, 1984 , at 7: 30 o' clock p .m. , there was no public comment, either oral or written, on the application. There was one written statement submitted at a prior hearing on the Area of Impact which was against the adoption of the Area of Impact . 4 . That these amendments have been proposed by the Commission itself, 5 . That the proposed amendments are , or will be , of a house AMBROSE, FITZGERALD &CROOKSTON cleaning nature . Attorneys and Counselors Page 2 P.O.Boa 427 Meridian,Idaho V642 Telephone 6884461 i CONCLUSIONS 1 . That the City has authority to amend its Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65 , Idaho Code , and pursuant to the Amendment Provisions and Procedures of the Comprehensive Plan of Meridian, as amended April 2 , 1984 . 2 . That all notices and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67 , Chapter 65 , Idaho .Code, the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and the Comprehensive Plan have been complied with . 3 . That since the proposed amendments are proposed by the Commission and are, or will be , of a house cleaning nature , the technical requirements for an amendment application may be waived, are hereby waived. 4 . That the Commission may take judicial notice of governments statutes , ordinances , and policies , and of actual conditions existing within the City, County, and State . 5 . That pertaining to the amendment procedures the existing six months or more, from application to decision by the Com- mission is concluded to be too long for most amendments . 6 . That all the amendments are concluded to be required_by_ an error in the Plan or by a change in the actual conditions of the_ area . 7 . That since the proposed amendments are tec}'inical in nature and generally are , or will be, house keeping measures , the proposed amendments are hereby cor.luded to be in the best interest AMBERS£,FITIGERALD of the Plan and the City . BCROOKSTON Anorneysand page 3 Counselors P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho a.'l842 Telephone 889.4011 r �I �r APPROVAL OF FINDINGS O" FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of. Fact and Conclusions . Roll Call Commissioner Morrow Voted pS Commissioner Alidjani Voted �s Commissioner Johnson Voted Commissioner Shearer Voted Commissioner Cole Voted �[�s Chairman Spencer (Tie Breaker) Voted RECOM_-MENDATION The meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Planning and Zoning Corimission' s proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments pertaining to 1) the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure, 2) the meridian Urban Limits Functional Transportation Trap , and 3) the Area of Impact IRA r- b,, ,4 7; C.'r t%,u I APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMBROSE, FITZGERALD A CROOKSTON Allomeys and _ Counselors Page P.O.Box 427 Meridian,Idaho &*42 Telephone 888-4481 Boise, Idaho December 5, 1984 Meridian City Council Meridian, Idaho 83642 Gentlemen: I take my pen in hand again to attempt to influence you to refuse a land developer, I call them land despoilers, the privi- lege of building a shopping center outside the city limits of Meridian. These foreigners from Chicago do not care a hoot about what this will do the city of Meridian or the desecration of several hundred acres of this valley' s fertile farm land. I laughed scornfully when I read the article in this morning ' s Statesman which quoted the spokesman for Upland and Homart as saying that their development would not have an "adverse impact" on the retailers in Meridian. What a stupid statement. of course it will hurt the Meridian retailers ! Meridian will be a ghost town. I do not think that anyone in Meridian is suffering for lack of a shopping center 2 miles from their city. Who thinks any more shopping centers are needed in this valley? Only the developers . With the exploding world populations and the ever conti- nuing need for more food in Africa, in a very few years there will be a demand for all the food our nation can produce. What other nations can increase their food production substantially? It is a crime to allow any more of this valley' s fertile farm land to be covered with shopping centers and subdivisions, which take that land out of production forever. These so-called developers boast of the number of employees their proposed project will require. That won' t make a bit of difference in the overall picture. It takes so many employees to service the population, whether they are working in stores in Meridian and Boise or in a shopping center out in the boonies. I hope you will consider these facts when considering approval, of this unneeded project. Very truly yours, 1� C. V. Rutledge ��c eJAMES W. KISER ATTOR.YEY AT LAW 5000 FAIRVIEW AVE. (FAIRVIEW AT MTV.VIEW DR.; BOISE, IDAHO 83706 209 376-3 l00 November 15, 1984 Mr. Jack Niemann City Clerk Meridian City Hall Meridian, ID 83542 Dear Jack: Please forward to me a copy of the Planning and Zoning Commission 's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law eg ding the Meridian Comprehensive Plan changes and amen ments regarding Upland Industries application. Since ely, Jam Kiser JW a .. .' .. FJ �iJ. .iQ ?:9111 .1 ply .� ...,=�.J y=.:J TJ ASSOCIATED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, INC. A Division of Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. ASSOCIATED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, INC. One North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60602 (312) 641-0600 ASSOCIATED REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, INC. INTRODUCTION Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc., a division of Melaniphy & Associates, Inc., is a full service real estate appraisal firm. This appraisal company was recently acquired to complete the comprehensive set of services offered by Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. in the area of real estate evaluation, investment, acquisition and disposition. Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. (AREA) is qualified to inspect, analyze and determine the value of a specific property or group of properties anywhere in the world. AREA specializes in real estate appraisals of all types, including residential, commercial, industrial, public facilities, mixed use developments, condemnations, rights-of-way, foreclosures, properties in various stages of construction, vacant land and others. Appraisals, analyses, and counseling have been utilized by both the private and public sectors involving the development or disposition of property. In addition, the firm can generate computerized financial analyses and pro formas con- sidering alternate uses and values. The co-ordinated team of real estate economists, appraisers, urbanologists, and market analysts enables Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. and Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. to provide a complete range of consulting services to clients. The highest professional standards are maintained while conducting studies and appraisals in the most cost-effective manner. Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. OFFICERS President John H. Pittroff, Jr., M.A.I., S.R.P.A., John Pittroff has over thirty years of professional appraisal experience. In 1949, he joined Real Estate Research Corporation and served as real estate analyst with broad exposure to appraisals of all types of real estate. Additional assignments included retail studies, housing market analyses, and space studies for a number of municipalities. Other types of studies included over two years of appraisal, analysis and counseling with the Chicago & North Western Railway Company. Additionally, Mr. Pittroff functioned as chief appraiser for the Exchange National Bank. Since 1969, Mr. Pittroff headed Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. The corporation conducted appraisal work for a wide variety of real estate across the United States and has provided expert testimony. Professional Memberships: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, #4127; Senior Real Property Appraiser, Society of Real Estate Appraisers; Real Estate Broker, State of Illinois; Chicago Real Estate Board, Urban Land Institute. Vice President James J. Schroeder, M.A.I. James Schroeder has over twenty-five years experience in professional appraisals. He has independently conducted appraisals in all types of real estate developments in addition to insurance appraisals of improvements to properties and machinery and equipment appraisals. Testimony has also been given in various courts throughout the country. Mr. Schroeder was Vice President of Real Estate Research Corporation in charge of the Appraisal Department. He was also President of Financial Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. Professional Memberships: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, #4319, Past President, Illinois Chapter #6; Chicago Real Estate Board, Past Chairman of Appraisers Division; Southwest Suburban Board of Realtors. Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AVAILABLE Appraisal for Ad Valorem Taxes • Complete analysis of property valuation utilizing the three recog- nized approaches (cost, market and income) • Comparable assessment analysis • Study of assessment ratios by classification Appraisal and Real Estate Anal sis • Appraisal services for use in mortgage lending, acquisitions, fore- closure, and arbitration matters • Valuation and counseling for the acquisition and liquidation of real estate assets • Assistance in estimating net realizable value for financial institutions • Special appraisal problems: Air rights valuation, price allocation and investment value estimates • Valuation of planned unit developments and condominium projects, considering retail value estimates, development expenses and ab- sorption analyses • Periodic valuation for trusts and corporate profit sharing/pension plans • Valuation of recreational and resort properties Investment Analysis • Assistance to developers in the formulation of proforma statements • Valuation of investment alternatives by use of mortgage-equity techniques • Mortgage and property portfolio analyses Feasibility Analysis • Analysis of properties concerning highest and best/optimum use • Cash flow, marketability and feasibility analyses (judgements relative to the economics of prospective developments) Machinery and Equipment Advice on the optimum use of fixed assets, machinery and equipment, along with obsolescence created by advancements in technology Condemnation and Eminent Domain Establishment of just and equitable compensation for losses from total or partial takings of land and/or buildings Insurance Valuations Determination of insurable value and evaluation of losses Associated Real Estate Appraisers, Inc. SELECTED LIST OF CLIENTS Albany Bank a Trust Company Harris Trust and Savings Bank Allis Chalmers Company H. F. Phillipsborn and Company Alsip Bank Heritage Bank of Oak Lawn Alsip Park District Illinois Housing Development Authority Amalgamated Trust & Interpoint Corporation Savings Bank Jenner & Block American National Bank Kirkland & Ellis Amoco Realty Company Kendall College Amsted Industries Kohl & Madden Ink Company Beverly Bank Levy & Erns Borden's Inc. Manufactured Housing Institute, Catholic Church - as Consultant Archdiocese of Chicago McDermott, Will & Emery Chicago & North Western Metropolitan Bank 8- Trust Company Transportation Company Metropolitan Bank of Addison Chicago Board of Education Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago Department of Greater Chicago Public Buildings Minneapolis-Honeywell, Inc. Chicago Ridge School Milex, Inc. District No. 127 Mobil Oil Corporation City of Blue Island Northern Trust Bank City of Chicago Ridge Oak Brook Bank City of Cincinnati, Ohio Olympic Savings & Loan Association as Consultants Palos School District City of Wisconsin Riverdale Bank Rapids Housing Authority Rubloff & Company Commercial Bank of Korea School District 207 (Park Ridge) Continental Grain Company School District 21 (Wheeling) Continental Illinois Standard Oil Company (Indiana) National Bank Texaco Incorporated Cook County Housing The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Authority Company De Paul University 3M Corporation Exchange National Bank Uptown Federal Savings A of Chicago Loan Association Federal Reserve Bank United States Army Corps of Chicago of Engineers First Federal Savings A Loan United States General Services Association of Chicago Administration First National Bank of United States Postal Office Highland Bank USI Properties Corporation First National Bank of Western Electric Company Oak Brook Whiston & Company Ford City Bank White Hen Pantry Wilmette School District Expert Testimony Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois Circuit Court of Will County, Illinois United States Federal District Court (Chicago and St. Paul) Deptford Township Planning Board (Gloucester County, New Jersey) Worcester County Zoning Board, Maryland U PLAN D S,r i�.ry JQlar.c Industries Corporation 110 North lath Street, Suite 1000 Omaha, NE 68102 4D2 271 4344 L. EOlson The Honorable Grant Kingsford November 29 , 1984 Assistant Mayor of Meridian Vice President Idaho 83642 Sales and Meridian, Industrial Developmr,rl Dear Mayor Kingsford : Upland Industries Corporation respectfully submits the attached testimony in support of its application for an amendment to the City of Meridian' s Compre- hensive Plane This report is the work product of several consultants hired by upland to objective- ly evaluate Upland ' s site in regard to its potential for the development of a regional shopping center and the imroacts such a center at this location will have on the City of Meridian. In this document you will find that Upland has addressed all of the concerns raised in the Meridian City Attorney' s Findings of Facts and Conclusions that followed the Planning and Zoning Commission' s positive reco=endation to the Council for adoption of the amendments . Upland will formally present this report to the City Council during its scheduled meeting on the evening of December 3 , 1984 . Upland and its consultants will be prepared at that time to address any questions , comments or concerns you or the City Council may have. Very truly yours , Enclosure cc : Mr. Bill Brewer Mr. Bob Giesler Mr. Bert Meyers Mr. Ron iolsman Mr. Wayne Crookston Mr. Jack Niemann I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MARKET ANALYSIS Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. 's evaluation of the Boise market and that of the Department of Research and Market Analysis of Homart Development Company, both indicate that the site located on the southeast corner of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road (Idaho 55) represents an excellent location for the development of a major regional shopping center. An abbreviated version of their market findings follows: - The proposed location, recently annexed to the City of Meridian, is well located to serve the residents of Meridian as well as those residents in the western portion of the Boise urban area. - The primary trading area of the proposed regional shopping center is identified as Ada County. The majority of sales will originate from the residents of Ada County. This primary trading area will have a 1985 population of approximately 197,000, compared to the 1980 figure of approximately 173,000. - The regional shopping center will attract customers from beyond Ada County. The entire trade area will have approximately 286,000 people in 1985. - Per capita income for the primary trading area (Ada County) in 1985 will amount to $12,000, 41.5 percent above the 1980 figure of $8,483. The total trading area will have per capita income of approximately $10,900 in 1985 or 40.5 percent over the 1980 figure of $7,760. - Shopper 's goods expenditure potential in the primary trade area was found to amount to $190,822,000 in 1980. By 1985, these expenditures will amount to $283,600,000 and by 1990, to $395,600,000. - The total trade area in 1985 is estimated to generate $375,700,000 in shopper's goods expenditure potential. By 1990, this total ig expected to rise to $510,600,000. - Meridian and the entire Boise Metropolitan Area are currently exporting a significant portion of their shopper's goods expenditure potential. - The existing competitive facilities in the Meridian/Boise area are extremely weak for the size of the market. - Accessibility to the subject property for residents of the trading area is excellent. I-1 ACCESSIBILITY (Continued) i I. The site must be convenient to reach over roads with enough unused traffic capacity to avoid high levels of congestion. 2. Ingress to and from arterials must be safe and easy. 3. The location must be a dominant position within the trading area, situated in such a manner to serve both the present and future market. 4. The site must have easy access from expressway/interstate interchange points, within one-half to one mile. Note, however, that when high activity centers such as a busy regional center have side access points too close to freeway interchanges, traffic is likely to be severely congested under peak hour conditions. Shopper traffic interferes with the flow of through traffic, thus resulting in an intensification of congestion and heightened accident potential. 5. Direct access from the primary traffic artery with adequate traffic signals and turning lanes is most desirable. Locations fronting on limited access ex- pressways are good for visibility, but inadequate for access. 6. Good visibility of the location from access routes allows drivers adequate time to prepare for turns. Once again, in all of the above, the subject site is in an excellent position to meet the accessibility standards of a major regional shopping center. B. POPULATION BASE Both Urban Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers define the trading area for a major regional center as one that contains a minimum of 150,000 people. Additionally, the primary trade area is often defined as that area within ten minutes travel time, while the secondary trade area, generally doesn't exceed 20 minutes. The tertiary or fringe portion of the trading area (if one exists) generally does not exceed 30 minutes. Distance and total population are not the sole criteria for determining-a center's trading area. The quantity and quality of the competition is extremely important, as is the age structure of the population and the distance to other major markets. In Boise, there are no regional size malls within Ada County to provide competition to the Upland site. The larger neighborhood centers, downtown Boise and strip commercial projects will provide competition, but not to the extent that they will affect the drawing power of a regional shopping center. Additionally, the age structure of the population is often more important than the total number of people within the trading area. This will be discussed in a latter portion of this section. III-2 POPULATION BASE (Continued) The population of Ada County (the primary portion of the proposed Upland Regional Shopping Center's trading area) contain 173,036 persons in 1980 and is estimated to have 196,764 persons in 1985. By 1990, this is expected to rise to 223,745 persons. Thus, Ada County contains an adequate number of people for a regional shopping center's trading area. Added together with the fact that there are no regional shopping centers in Ada County further compounds the opportunity for the development of a major regional shopping center at the subject site. C. TOTAL TRADING AREA - 20-MINUTE DRIVE TIME Trading areas are a function of time and distance and the interrelationship to competitive facilities. Trading areas are affected by physical and psychological barriers, as well as the mix of stores and the mix of merchandise presented to the consumer. The trading area of the proposed regional shopping center has been developed by analyzing the forces of attraction and resistance. Through this analysis, we have concluded that the primary trading area will cover Ada County, contain adequate population and income resources, as well as a dearth of competition, and provide more than adequate potential for a successful major regional shopping center. D. RELATIONSHIP WITH EXISTING RETAIL FACILITIES The development of a regional shopping center on the subject property should not have an adverse impact on the retail facilities located in Meridian, nor should it have a significant impact on the balance of the retail facilities, mainly, shoppers goods stores. in Ada County. As previously pointed out, there is only one competitive mall in Canyon Countyand one major downtown with aging and inadaquate facilities - downtown Boise. Moreover, Ada County has been exporting shoppers goods dollars to other major cities because of the lack of modern, exciting well-stocked and merchandised shoppers goods stores in Ada County. Thus, consumers are traveling to Salt Lake City and Portland to make major shoppers good purchases. Moreover, at a time when the growth of GAFO store sales ought to be increasing, it has in fact been declining; a further indication of an exporting of important shoppers goods dollars. 1. Karcher Mall Karcher Mall, which contains a tptal of 570,000 square feet of retail facilities, is an enclosed heated and air-conditioned facility located in Nampa, and is 17 years old, relatively unattractive, with three major magnets. The Bon Marche department store in the Karcher Mall contains approximately 60,350 square feet. Additionally, J. C. Penney operates a store in the Karcher Mall, containing 127,670 square feet along with a Falk's, of approximately 15,000 square feet. III-3 VIIL DESIGN k The site plan on the following page illustrates the preliminary design concept for the proposed mall on the subject property at full build-out. The key issues of concern to the City of Meridian are discussed below: Ingress and Egress: Ingress and egress to and from the site should be excellent. Persons entering the site from Eagle Road will have two ingress points, while those entering from Fairview Avenue will have three ingress points. It is assumed that two signalized access points would be constructed, one on Eagle Road and one on Fairview Avenue, allowing traffic to turn left across through traffic on both major arterials. On—Site Circulation: As illustrated, the development will have a ring road allowing easy on-site circulation. Peripheral land users (free-standing establishments fronting Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road) will benefit from this road as well. Pedestrian Access: Visits on foot to the mail by trade area residents are projected to be very low because of the limited population base within one mile of the site. Population within mile of the site is projected to be nil. f a r VIII-1 1 PROPOSED MALL SITE PLAN Meridian, Idaho f;AW%%Y AWVM MAL M{iwRlgw Lu. Ia{lW I A 9"� / ' � I A, CID 0 0 <t t All r �.-____ STEPHEN J. GLEDHILL ATTORNEY AF LAW TELEPHONE 1208) 3d6-7B11 FIRST INTERSTATE BUILDING,SUITE I I10 LAW OFFICES ?DC WEST IDAHO CLEMONS. COBHO a HUMPHREY, P.A. BOISE- IDAHO 83702 December 3, 1984 Mayor of the City of Meridian City Council of Meridian Meridian, Idaho RE: Upland Industries Application to Amend Meridian Comprehensive Plan Gentlemen: The undersigned is an owner of certain real propery located within Meridian' s area of city impact, and specifically , on Eagle Road, adjacent to the Interstate. I wish to specifically object to the proposed Amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The Amendment ignores all of the basic principles of the Local Planning Act of 1975 , established policy of the City of Meridian, and is , and would be, arbitrary and discriminatory. There are no facts in the record which justify or could justify this proposed Amendment. For all of these reasons , I respectfully object to the adoption of the proposal . Very truly yours , Edward L . Bews 5206 Sorrento Boise, Idaho 83704 7C 2- December 3, 1984 Mayor of the City of Meridian City Council of Meridian Meridian, Idaho RE: Upland Industries Application to Amend Meridian Comprehensive Plan Gentlemen: The undersigned is an owner of certain real propery located within Meridian' s area of city impact, and specifically , on Eagle Road, adjacent to the Interstate. I wish to specifically object to the proposed Amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The Amendment ignores all of the basic principles of the Local Planning Act of 1975 , established policy of the City of Meridian, and is , and would be, arbitrary and discriminatory. There are no facts in the record which justify or could justify this proposed Amendment. For all of these reasons , I respectfully object to the adoption of the proposal . Very tru yours , Edwa L. Bews 5206 Sorrento Boise, Idaho 83704 December 3 , 1984 Mayor of the City of Meridian City Council of Meridian Meridian, Idaho RE: Upland Industries Application to Amend Meridian Comprehensive Plan Gentlemen: The undersigned is an owner of certain real propery located within Meridian' s area of city impact, and specifically , on Eagle Road, adjacent to the Interstate. I wish to specifically object to the proposed Amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive plan. The Amendment ignores all of the basic principles of the Local Planning Act of 1975 , established policy of the City of Meridian, and is , and would be, arbitrary and discriminatory. There are no facts in the record which justify or could justify this proposed Amendment. For all of these reasons , I respectfully object to the adoption of the proposal . Very tru y yours , Ed Bews 5206 Sorrento Boise, Idaho 83704 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LISTOF FIGURES AND TABLES .. . . . . . . . .. . .... . . . . . . . . . ... .. . .. . . . .. . iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . V INTRODUCTION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . vi I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .. ... . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . I-1 " II. MARKET ANALYSIS . . ... . . ... . . . .. .... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 Summary . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 Retail Competition . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . II-3 Meridian/Boise - Ada County Trade Area II-4 Development Potential ... . . .. .. .. .. . 4 . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-5 _ III. SITE SUITABILITY .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 4 . . . . . . . III-1 Accessibility .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .4. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . . III-1 Population Base . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . III-2 Total Trading Area - 20-Minute Drive Time III-3 — Relationship with Existing Retail Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-3 Demographics .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . III-4 Proximity to The Retail Corridor . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-5 Visibility .. . . . . . .. . ..... . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . III-6 Interstate 84 Not Crucial Due to the Lack of Competition . . . . . . ... III-6 The Ability to Build on the Site .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... . . . . . . . . . III-6 IV. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . . .6 . . . . . . . . . IV-1 The Shopping Center Development's Impact on Meridian . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-1 Benefits Realized from Industrial Use (Future) in Relation to Retail/Commercial. Use Today ... .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .4 . . . . 4 . . . . . . IV-3 V. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 Transportation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . V-1 Existing Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . .4 . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . V-1 Level of Service . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . V-3 — Site Trip Generation . .. . . . .. .... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . V-6 Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-8 Traffic Assignment .. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . V-10 Level of Service with Site .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . . .. .. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . V-10 Intersection Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . V-14 System Improvements V-20 Summary of Findings and Recommendations V-22 ii Page VI. COMMUNITY IMPACTS .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... . VI-1 _ Air Quality . . . . ... .. . . ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . VI-1 Impact on Neighborhood Residential Areas . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. ... . . . . . VI-3 Impact on Adjacent rises and Land Use Changes . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . VI-4 _ Community Patterns . . . . . . . .. .. . .... . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . VI-4 Comparisons with Other Communities . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-5 GeneralEconomic Impact on Meridian . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-7 Quality of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . VI-9 Bibliography of Information Sources . . .. . . . .... . . . . .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . VI-11 VII. ENGINEERING . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . VII-1 Storm and Irrigation Drainage . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . VII-1 Utilities . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-1 Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-2 VIII. Design . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII-1 _ ili LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Page Figure 5.1 Year 1988 Daily Traffic Volumes .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 Figure 5.2 Year 1988 Planned Lanes and Level of Service . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . V-4 Table 5.1 Level of Traffic Service . . . .... .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .... .. . . . .. . . . . V-5 Table 5.2 Trip Generation Rates . . ... .. . . .. .. .. . . . . . . ... ... 0 .. . . . . . .. . . V-6 Figure 5.3 Year 1988 Lanes Required for Stable Flow . . . ... . .. .. . . ... . . . . V-7 Figure 5.4 Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . ....... . . .. V-9 Figure 5.5 Year 1988 Daily Site Traffic . . . . . .. .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-11 Figure 5.6 Year 1988 Combined Daily Traffic . .. .. . . . . ... . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . V-12 Figure 5.7 Year 1988 Projected Lanes and Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-13 Figure 5.8 Peak Hour Traffic - Fairview Ave. & Eagle Rd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-15 Figure 5.9 Peak Hour Traffic - Site Entrance . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-16 Figure 5.10 Typical Geometry - North Entrance . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-17 Figure 5.11 Typical Geometry - Pine Rd. Entrance . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . V-18 Figure 5.12 Tentative Geometry - Fairview Ave. & Eagle Rd. .. . .. . . . . . . . . V-19 Table 5.3 Intersection Level of Service . . . ... .. . . . . . ... .... .. . . . . . . . . V-20 iv T LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Follows Page Regional Location Map ... . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .... ..... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . II-1 Major Competition in the Boise Area . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . II-3 Population Growth 1980-1990 .. .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . II-4 Primary Trade Area . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. 1I-5 v INTRODUCTION This report is presented to the Meridian, Idaho City Council as testimony in support of a proposal by Upland Industries Corporation to amend City's compre- hensive plan. The amendments pertain to the comprehensive plan's designations of a 320-acre property owned by Upland on the south side of Fairview Avenue and bisected by Eagle Road (NEC Section 8 and NWh Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian) , within Meridian city limits. The desired changes are to designate the 160-acre portion in Section 9 as a site for a "Regional Shopping Center" and to remove from the 160-acre portion in Section 8 the desig- nation of "Rural Residential Reserve. " The latter change is merely a matter of "housekeeping", as there is ongoing development of an industrial park at this site. This report focuses only on the change in designation of the east 160 acres to "Regional Shopping Center.' This document addresses all of the concerns raised in the Meridian City Attorney's Findings of Facts and Conclusions that followed the Planning and Zoning Commission's positive recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the amendments. Also, all areas of concern which are identified on page 19 of the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan and in Sections 67 and 68, Idaho Code _ have been addressed. This testimony will be formally presented to the City Council and entered into the public record during its scheduled meeting on the evening of December 3, 1984. This report is the work product of Upland's in-house staff and several independent consultants hired by Upland to objectively evaluate the eastern 160- acre parcel in regard to its potential for the development of a regional shopping center and the impacts that such a center will have at this location on the city of Meridian. — The services of Upland's consultants are recognized here with the acknowl- edgment of the timely and professional manner in which they have performed. The following discussion identifies the involvement of all parties: T Melaniphy & Associates, Inc., a Chicago based organization, is a firm of real estate economist, consultants, urbanologists and market analysts that are specialist in the determination of market potential for shopping center develop- ment. Melaniphy & Associates were responsible for the market analysis, site suitability, and fiscal discussion sections of the report. Henningson, Durham & Richardson (HDR) of Omaha, is well known in the field of transportation planning, traffic engineering and transit studies. The firm currently employees over 400 professionals located in 15 offices throughout the United States. HDR was responsible for traffic analysis. vi Smith & Associates is a local (Boise) firm specializing in project manage- ment, resource analysis, community affiars and analysis of government regula- tions. The community impact section was the responsibility of Smith & Associates. The design section of the analysis was provided by Homart Development Company, a division of Sears, Roebuck & Company. Upland Industries' in-house staff developed the utility and executive summary section of the report. vii I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MARKET ANALYS I S Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. ' s evaluation of the Boise market and that of the Department of Research and Market Analysis of Homart Development Company, both indicate that the site located on the southeast corner of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road (Idaho 55) represents an excellent location for the development of a major regional shopping center. An abbreviated version of their market findings follows: - The proposed location, recently annexed to the City of Meridian, is well located to serve the residents of Meridian as well as those residents in the western portion of the Boise urban area. The primary trading area of the proposed regional shopping center is identified as Ada County. The majority of sales will originate from the residents of Ada County. This primary trading area will have a 1985 population of approximately 197,000, compared to the 1980 figure of approximately 173,000. - The regional shopping center will attract customers from beyond Ada County. The entire trade area will have approximately 286,000 people in 1985. - Per capita income for the primary trading area (Ada County) in 1985 will amount to $12,000, 41.5 percent above the 1980 figure of $8,483. The _ total trading area will have per capita income of approximately $10,900 in 1985 or 40.5 percent over the 1980 figure of $7,760. - Shopper 's goods expenditure potential in the primary trade area was found to amount to $190,822,000 in 1980. By 1985, these expenditures will amount to $283,600,000 and by 1990, to $395,600,000. - - The total trade area in 1985 is estimated to generate $375,700,000 in shopper's goods expenditure potential. By 1990, this total is expected to rise to $510,600,000. - Meridian and the entire Boise Metropolitan Area are currently exporting a significant portion of their shopper's goods expenditure potential. - The existing competitive facilities in the Meridian/Boise area are extremely weak for the size of the market. - Accessibility to the subject property for residents of the trading area -- is excellent. I-]. - Initially, the market will support a regional retail complex containing three department stores totaling between 400,000 and 450,000 square feet, and an additional 250,000 to 300,000 square feet of gross leasable area. - By 1990, there will be a market for the development of a major regional — shopping center containing approximately one million square feet of building area capable of generating approximately $160,000,000 in sales. The envisioned center will contain five department stores, totaling 660,000 square feet, with an additional 340,000 square feet of gross leasable area. SITE SUITABILITY The Urban Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers have published numerous documents discussing the many attributes which make a site suitable and desirable for development of regional shopping centers. These organizations are recognized as two of the most outstanding in the field of real estate development in the United States today. Upland's site has been evaluated in light of the ideals expressed by these groups with the following findings. - A regional shopping center must have entirely adequate access, plus ingress and egress from at least one major traffic artery. The suitability of Upland's site from an accessibility point of view is excellent. - The trading area for a major regional center is defined to contain a minimum of 150,000 people. Ada County contains an adequate number of people for a regional shopping center's trading area. This taken together with the fact that there are no regional shopping centers in Ada County further amplifies the opportunity for the development of a major regional shopping center at the subject site. - The demographic statistics of age and economic status of the primary trade area's population for the proposed shopping center are very positive factors in the market considerations observed in measuring the feasibility of this development. - Developing a major regional shopping center on Fairview Avenue fits well T into what already exists as a common retail pattern in the Boise/Meridian Metropolitan Area. - The location at Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road enjoys excellent visibility from both Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road. I-2 - The subject property meets all other requirements necessary for the _ development of a major regional shopping center complex based on the concerns of developers in relation to size, shape, topography, drainage, and subsoil conditions. — FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The fiscal impact analysis considers the benefits to be derived by the _ community, as well as the cost involved in creating those benefits through the development of a regional shopping center. This section of the report discusses fiscal ramifications of such a development. - The Upland property has already been annexed to the City of Meridian and thus, the City has agreed to provide city services to the site. - The forces of supply and demand in the marketplace will best decide which location major department and specialty stores will choose as the best opportunity for them to serve Meridian and the Ada County market. - The development of a major regional shopping center on the Upland property will create both full- and part-time jobs after completion amounting to between 2,500 and 3,000 jobs with an annual payroll of over $20,000,000. - The administrative costs which the city might be expected to bear are no — different than those for an industrial development and thus, it is not anticipated there will be any additional administrative charges. - Major regional shopping centers operated by professionals have their own security force and thus call upon the local police only in unusual situations. - A major regional shopping center is developed with fire protection in mind. Such center have, perhaps, the best fire and safety records of any commercial development type. - Sewer facilities required for a shopping center of this magnitude are currently in the process of being provided by Upland, at its own cost. -- Water facilities required for the proposed regional shopping center will also be provided by Upland at Upland' s cost. - While at the present time, the sales tax and major additional property taxes will not accrue directly to the City of Meridian, the significant retail sales to be generated by the mall ($160,000,000 by 1990) along with the value created from a major one million square foot shopping center will positively affect the taxes collected by the City of Meridian over time. Additionally, these taxes will be far in excess of the taxes to be created by the development of an industrial park. z-3 TRAFFIC A number of recommendations related to the efficiency of traffic opera- tions were identified in this report. They are summarized in this section. - The existing street system will need to be improved to adequately serve the projected traffic volume increase in this area in the near future. This increase is directly a result of an increase in population and a travel demand shift created by the new interchange at Eagle Road. - The interstate system, although decreasing in level of service, will be able to adequately serve the additional site traffic in 1988. - To achieve stable flow along Eagle Road, between I-84 and Franklin Road six through lanes will be necessary. - To maintain an adequate level of service on Fairview Avenue six through lanes will be necessary by 1988. - Two signalized entrances will be necessary to provide adequate access to the shopping center. One entrance should be Located on each major street adjacent to the site. To minimize conflicts, these entrances should be located no closer than 1200 feet to the next intersection. - Three unsignalized entrances should be included to provide alternative points of access and to relieve demands on the signalized entrances. - The intersection of Fairview and Eagle will need to be developed as shown in Figure 5.12 as a minimum. A design of this type is included in the 1986 improvement plans for Eagle Road. COMMMUNITY IMPACT - These elements have been derived from the text to illustrate the antici- pated community impacts of a regional shopping center on Meridian at this location. These are further expanded in the text to demonstrate how the elements preserve the intent and purpose of Meridian' s comprehensive plan. - Regarding air quality, it is not likely that development of a regional shopping center at Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road will negatively impact the plan for air quality attainment in northern Ada County. - Residential development of all housing types and resale values of existing properties will be enhanced by the construction of a regional shopping center in Meridian. - Major commercial development is compatible with light industrial use such as that which exists to the south and that which is being developed to the west of the site. I-4 - Rural lands east and north of the site provide an excellent means of — preserving an agricultural buffer between Meridian and Boise, regardless of the site's use - commerical or industrial. - DesignatingUpland's site as a regional shopping center creates a better balance of land use within Meridian which is essential for economic self- sufficiency within the community while discouraging undesirable "strip" development. - The construction of a regional shopping center in Meridian is not viewed as damaging to other commercial activities in the city, as there are currently no such activities which are truly regional in nature. - The same impacts felt by Nampa and Caldwell with the development of Karcher Mall are not foreseen in Meridian due to the much larger popula- tion base of Ada County. _ - A similar shopping center in Chubbuck, near Pocatello, is seen by public officials from both cities as having almost no adverse impacts on existing commercial development. - Economic stimulus will be felt in Meridian from jobs created by construc- tion and permanent employment. A multiplier effect of 1.5 to 1.7 is estimated for further job creation. - As measured in a recent survey by the Boise Future Foundation, there appears to be a desire for improved retail opportunities by the popula- tion of the Boise metropolitan area. The willingness by some to travel as far as Portland, Salt Lake City, Seattle, or Spokane in order to shop further underscores this point. ENGINEERING All utilities are adequately sized, and in the immediate vicinity, to meet the needs of a regional shopping center. These utilities have been extended at Upland's expense. The present Phase I construction west of Eagle Road has a built-in allowance for storm drainage that would result from the development of a regional shopping center. Soil deposits are conducive to development and will support moderate to high bearing pressures. DESIGN The site is of adequate size and dimension to meet all performance and development standards to satisfy pedestrian and internal circulation concerns. z-5 II. MARKET ANALYSIS Melaniphy & Associates, Inc. has inspected the subject property, made a reconnaissance of the Meridian/Boise market, collected data pertaining to population and population growth, socioeconomic characteristics, present and future traffic plans, inspected the existing competitive facilities, reviewed existing shopping habits and patterns, and examined the existing zoning of the proposed regional shopping center location. Homart Development Company, a division of Sears, Roebuck & Company has also evaluated the subject site for development purposes. The studies arrived at similar conclusions and thus have been utilized in this report presentation. r A. SUMMARY Our evaluation of the Boise market and that of the Department of Research and Market Analysis of Homart Development Company, indicates that the site located on — the southeast corner of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road (Idaho 55) represents an excellent location for the development of a major regional shopping center. The various aspects of our findings are as follows: 1. The proposed location, recently annexed to the city of Meridian, is well located to serve the residents of Meridian, as well as those residents in the western — portion of the Boise Urban Area. 2. The primary trading area of the proposed regional shopping center includes Ada County. While the regional shopping center will attract customers from beyond the Ada County corporate borders, the majority of sales will originate from the residents of Ada County. Moreover, based on frequency of visit to the proposed regional mall, Ada County's residents represent the primary support for the mall. The primary trading area will have a 1985 population of approximately 197,000 people. This compares to the 1980 figure of approximately 173,000 people. The entire trade area in 1985 will have a total of approximately 286,000 people. 3. Per capita income for the primary trading area (Ada County) in 1985 will amount to $12,000, 41.5 percent over the 1980 figure of $8,483. The total trading area in 1985, will have per capita income of approximately $10,900 or 40.5 percent over the 1980 figure of $7,760. 4. Shoppers goods expenditure potential (the types of stores most often found in major regional malls) was found to amount to $190,822,000 in the primary trading area in 1980. By 1985, we estimate that these expenditures will amount to $283,600,000 and by 1990, to $395,600,000. The total trade area in 1985 is estimated to generate $375,700,000 in shoppers goods expenditure potential. By 1990, we expect this to rise to $510,600,000. REGIONAL LOCATION MAP Mew Form low - t� ` � {{jj`77•Orn. rf �. A ! •`M[I'1111 hKrrn•r rrt' ��. Slrfimh V Arv.r •„ 1 ' � �` '-,U"d,IT• ulwln J r I Nrr7- 'lwlk«f far. I r IE«t r! ! ..err f11 OennMy 1 � flrrrnr•M• /� I 'A,� 'n r a Bern I 041*1 ,« ... ... tamer+ t r I V A I t.IFv 1 oe At -i r i,p ...... ` �• L r e �' I 1 /rr,.rp r.ru. L T � Mlnrsfr r•� (JI I XlhOns! rr �•4r IA;file 1 1' XAtrOnl! �,t,f i ll "'.•..•f•r r, -...-' I i r.n.n..rr• ^ rr / _1 7 ! j ••R ,� � „� `r. 63 _ 'i1 � dfifY I ter. rr rw+r Hunpngt�n 1 L Mmn FOrtT{ Iln"m T.� i..rr:^ .,.. L ►J� Nart. �r j 1 s 1 lnrrsr Y.w , ! Wryrl I r 'Srlrthj 7 .n 1<.. :;;tre � ry I ! Fend J I 1, I:rL Cl.rlrr^A / all ` •• -" PAYT TTElA 11 r •` S�wtoorh M„IIM �� IT r Ge.[h r A j1 T- 1' r...k T. Pbyeth I UrrMn s { 1 e Y.reY 37 lewmwr S.rrenorAr. r.rnr n., ilL•1-la.'';i Ivillbn6/ter i• crM 1 .. 1 �� � �: f f / X.rrt. rl nrrrr . : 1 r I- f�.r. S,e.f1 � I •,� 1 ' ti or„marr` , A r �.,r> YY ymn4rlhw'ry.l) a Oerdrne j- r Art ��� [Ihner.n Rt[. M r � s}, rleter4ill� �ren•frvinr ! � � � pryStl`� ier e 7,� M n1+ ,lar shoe' GnNrraN f ;'P1 Ilr►r 1 _-'rr..ti' r•-• :, jr t 't'T�-• ^ ..r 1 'yT ..� r.r •r rrrr Palmb ?� Emlrlett r �5 f Cee,evr t , 71 it n 4Fl r ' c•Ir,.n•..• ' a •liwf�irl � _ � - --�- - � �L� J ! ,A r.�r. GNrna r� , k. Area s►. '4 1..1 JMid Ov a. } • r T W l �- dr iZ�rw rE qle L .f� :1N,w♦� r~do�r l ._.. - • 9Q1 ° X, `40«11Ffor falQwrll ;dl: :�r��� ,,,,xNofferim ,� 1 r n.rr , , S,nwnnrh A'adan.fr 0Ct ff vrrlre4 J [hlern ale P �}[. . }I � � Feelfifrv,n _ f � \ Al i s`M Unit tx t�•8y ,/�� eNle /me rr 1••.nr! p r c !1 + ifecrrtnl {K t srww A t)A f�• f DMA forts f f n n s 1� / 6rlrrrnr AprSy� ,r" �', , . I I . ," Ff•r1is1A 1' - ] Nrll {\ MrerlhY •. A ,�! Ili91i Mrr,—� .. •F...:11. F I I .5 f1 wrr �• vuntaln� _J Hum / "� �• G.fMa� I •I r ..... 11 .r11M1.,.rhq '� r ■ I f. n,..^•. 1 SS TnNa[rrr �� �4 .•.,r �u1reKla r }1 -f KmqMfi, r r.r •r ���."' �` r„ ! xs din rflnq n 111 ,«.d""FIlny l p -t N Shnlhnrw �, . f v,uu eN,i ,.,A,•Flrt Bf ha' ' rxnr!lr.r f fart} 1fY .... S 1 �1� iillflf rAMI � Y�Tlrergla 6Ynnr jp. I .,.,r,1I +r 1 � r w . , NeT Spyf l— _ _�_ _ _•�cr,,r ` \S Wendell Will OWYNEE -1-1t!! Fallc 1 1 Ie•rr 1.U•� r�l'r !� •�. •v }IIIfiF �- ' , r r rrpr • N � � Frkr. If' - ' IN0I111711FI.00ALIYFORCUnnFNT t •°' G.flflnrr, ,Yrf Aum!-rn�M. CONDIIIONS REFOnr OnIVINO E51 r_ f ()N tINIMPr10VFo ROADS SHOYM - 1 ON THIS MAP Grrrenwr i r' 111 _ � I■ i � 70 -- - 4, _ r1Ae �' �•.I i rrr [lalif.rlr��•1� .. � ! I VIII6�' / �.{h, I c IA 71 ��V ApA •• .. r.r .. ... MI11/k1I/M rlTrr /' i H rarrru I tlwyhF�.�,_�.• 1 ! nfanl Mdi�n�f I .,.. 1� }I iia�Ileriir r • , � �dT: r! • � 1� I M le r, wmrlllNn trlY ,\ If r Irern••r•er.rAr� 1� 10 10 fn fe Jove SUMMARY (Continued) 5. The Meridian area is currently exporting a significant portion of its shoppers goods expenditure potential. This is the result of a lack of modern and new major merchandising facilities, not only in the Meridian area but also throughout -- the entire Boise Metropolitan Area. As a result, residents are traveling to Salt Lake City and Portland for major purchases. 6. The existing competitive facilities in the Meridian/Boise area are extremely weak for the size of the market. The only shopping center of any size is Karcher Mall which is old, unattractive, and not easily accessible to Boise _ residents. Conversely, downtown Boise is aging and inadequate to serve the rapidly growing market. Plans are being formulated for a commercial redevelopment project in downtown Boise. However, it appears that only limited land is available to create a significant major regional mall complex in downtown Boise and it will be a very slow Process. 7. Accessibility to the subject property for residents of the trading area is excellent. Fairview Avenue is a major east-west traffic artery which extends from the area near downtown Boise to Meridian Road in Meridian. For the most part, Fairview Avenue is a four-lane traffic artery with turning lanes at major intersections. Moreover, Fairview Avenue is identified as a commercial artery by the very nature of the commercial developments which proliferate its extension through the Boise Urban Area. Eagle Road is a two-lane traffic artery, extending north and south from the subject property. Recently designated Idaho 55, Eagle Road provides local north-south access. At the present time this access is sufficient to meet the shopping center market. Nevertheless, with completion of the interchange on Interstate 84 approximately one-mile south of the subject property, Eagle Road will become a far more significant traffic artery and provide convenient access to Interstate 84, thus reducing driving times for those persons using Interstate 84. 8. Our analysis indicates that by 1990, there will be a market for the development of a major regional mall containing approximately one million square feet of building area. This complex will be capable of generating sales of approximately $160,000,000. The envisioned shopping center will contain five department stores occupying approximately 660,000 square feet, with an additional 340,000 square feet of leasable mall space. Initially, the market will support a complex containing three department stores with between 400,000 and 450,000 square feet. The analysis indicates that the leasable mall space will initially command between 250,000 and 300,000 square feet and rise to 340,000 square feet by 1990. 9. Parking will ultimately be provided for between 4,000 and 5,000 cars. I1-2 B. RETAIL COMPETITION Boise is one of the few major trading centers without a first-class regional shopping center. The city of Boise and Ada County officials have established a policy of preventing the development of regional shopping centers in outlying areas and instead, promote a program of revitalizing downtown Boise through the development of a major complex there. As a result, there are no significant major outlying regional shopping centers. _ The largest shopping center that has been built is Karcher Mall, a 570,000 square foot enclosed mall facility, located in nearby Nampa. The shopping center contains a Bon Marche, Sears, J. C. Penney and Falk's. The shopping center is 17 years old, relatively unattractive, and serves the western portion of the market (Canyon County). Downtown Boise is anchored by older facilities occupied by Bon Marche, a smaller J. C. Penney softline store, and two limited line department stores operated by the Bazaar and Falk's. In addition, there are six discount department store units located in small centers or in freestanding locations throughout the Boise Metropolitan Area. K-mart operates three units, two in Boise and one in Nampa, while Grand Central operates three units in Boise. The sizes of the major facilities located in downtown Boise and Karcher Mall are depicted below. Downtown Boise Estimated Size (Square Footage) Bon Marche 55,000 square feet Sears 96,160 square feet J. C. Penney 46,000 square feet T The Bazaar 20,000 square feet Falk's 25,000 square feet Karcher Mall Bon Marche 60,350 square feet J. C. Penney 127,670 square feet Falk's 15,000 square feet II--3 T 44 -re Idb+SO'br D j Tc 1 w7f, 1.,.. 11 Fr1t (RE I 'f co t '� al '►�. Viol tl - �' ❑ g , 'o (o) rf , r-e.lt c m i Oil •� p� J w ' .r Ip ��e L1J cl:f EQ 1 ; i 4 D1VOY]AOI3 � s 3 LSE i C) �+ r-� IL j tl i ��` !vWlafli3W to IL LU FL a, aJ h O � N _ o O D •C pL D �— a I-- hez ,n O I — L U w p i r y Cl- xU R ey I o r+ 4 E q a M ( OA TR ` 0 D b V C'i 1 �' )gISHl.f�74 Z N n O N V M C G n N Q r C G m u a` c d a y E D N INNvaij 0 en m � U- c ! OVOY I+O13lOaiw LI JAV kk ►� + R ! JAY HLOI sID �p rn u RETAIL COMPETITION (Continued) The total square footage operated by each of the major general merchandise units is as follows: •- Bon Marche 115,350 square feet Sears 96,158 square feet J. C. Penney 173,672 square feet The Bazaar 91,800 square feet Falk's 60,000 square feet K-mart 284,000 square feet Grand Central 172,000 square feet Grand Total 992,970 square feet Sources: Field Research; Shopping Center Directory; Department Store Directory; Discount Store Directory; and Homart Development Company, C. MERIDIAN/BOISE - ADA COUNTY TRADE AREA As previously indicated, the primary trading area of the proposed shopping center is coterminous with Ada County. The primary portion of the trading area is that area from which the most frequent visitors to a major mall originate. In fact, they are the ones that determine the extent of a market of a shopping center and more practically provide the support that makes such a development economically feasible. An examination of the primary elements of the trade area are as follows: t. 1. Demographics The primary trading area (Ada County) has grown significantly since 1970. In 1970, the population stood at 112,230 persons which grew by 4.4 percent to 1980. The 1980 population stood at 173,036 persons. Current estimates indicate that by 1985, the population of Ada County will amount to 196,764 persons, an increase from 1980 to 1985 of 2.6 percent. Further forecasts prepared by the Ada County Planning Commission indicate that the population can be expected to rise by 1990 to 223,745 persons or 13.7 percent. Meridian had a 1980 population of 7,596. Current estimates indicate that by 1990, Meridian will have a population of 13,649 persons according to the Ada — Planning Association. I1-4 POPULATION GROWTH -- 1980-1990 ""'0" ADA • 1980 Population • 1980-1990 Population Growth EACH DOT EQUALS \ 219 «ter 102 1,000PERSONS � � o • 1 • • . ; • ;.,�o.r•, EACt F • �� • _2ZIIle `\ 212 • ° • • • ® � �� 101 \ e otdi 218 103.02 6,0 'wow 11- • • • • • • • o�oi • • 210 ° ° • f •• •••e•a see * • _ Ms� • •I •• O � • Y7.�2 •.t,�..,e Karcher Mall " • •�bT� •° b.�., !� '23 111 ��o • • • i .• ",' +" " • ! f• 26i� •�� • v o , to • • 6 • • • •• L o • 207 • 2.01 • • • • • •• •: °'� / • • 741'Z/ 103,01M lJ 5 :F �X • e- •e • n • :•�•� o •g•° 6 • 1 ,r 20g ry�roa ° �•� 223 104.0Z` gg 104.01 • ° r - - 224 ems. • 105 c • l 7 7 g p U.." MERIDIAN/BOISE - ADA COUNTY TRADE AREA (Continued) It should be pointed out that the greatest amount of growth in the primary trading area of the shopping center will be located to the east of the site in the western Boise suburban area. Thus, in time, the extension of suburban Boise westward toward Meridian will fill in much of the land between both communities. 2. Income The 1970 Decennial Census of the United States, conducted by the Bureau of the Census, United States Department of Commerce, found that residents of the trading area of the proposed mall had per capita incomes of $2,905. The 1980 census reported that income had grown to $7,101 or an increase of 144.4 percent. While income will continue to grow, it is anticipated that the growth will be at a decreasing rate. Thus, by 1990, per capita income is expected to rise to $14,517 for the trading area as a whole. — The primary trading area (Ada County), had per capita income as reported in the 1970 census of $3,135. The 1980 census reported that this income had risen on a per capita basis to $7,749 or 147.2 percent overall. In 1985, we estimate that the per capita income will amount to approximately $12,000 and by 1990, $16,072. Thus, between 1980 and 1990, we expect per capita income to increase by 107.4 percent. All of the estimates are in current dollars. Thus, between 1980 and 1985, income has been increasing at an annual rate of 7.2 percent which, between 1985 and 1990, would be increasing at a 6.0 percent annual rate. D. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL Shoppers goods-type merchandise include: general merchandise, apparel and accessories, furniture and household furnishings and other shoppers goods-type stores are included in these categories. They are often referred to as GAFO. GAFO merchandise sales generally represent approximately 90.0 percent of the sales captured in regional shopping centers and more particularly, those regional shopping centers developed by Homart Development Company. Given the increase in population and per capita income, it is rather startling to recognize that growth in shoppers Foods sales in Ada County declined between 1977 and 1982. This decline is a reflection of the limited shoppers goods facilities available to residents in Ada County. Therefore, consumers are spending a considerable amount of their shoppers goods dollars in other markets and thus, expenditures are being ex. xeornted outside of Ada County. Conversely, this is reflective of the unrealized expenditure potential available at the subject site, given the development of a three to five department store complex, along with a full complement of specialty stores. 1I-5 • • . , • . • j . • • • i 1■■�� mpg Caw .��FIN iid�� ls�=ON■Us ■■ �� lot 'mod■ �.. WA VA low W. .� mom __�• Imp -.- a ``� ' ■■■�\■ ■�'ZE r► ■ �..� ■1"u■r':'�■� ■AIM` T I PRIMARY TRADE AREA M adorn 41nr r�.r. . „I y 1 1 arnir Mr, `HeN' r,1, Foml } �Sata•'• Hill" �4 ADA PAS ado f rr—ir.nan. slam 1. A ! " hdCCBH i� Strhnrte Alp" ti Tarn ` / _Y. 1 He'^ r9,ni f _M - ! N�j riii�rr , �.•.rn n:rr ,." -S1 ..t rr n t r 1,1�� . `� rr.u,r. war.• .� Bd�{ 1 + /I, +rm n.r rfP♦ 4 R,thrand� r � ,� t ,' r 'u r,nr• _ ' � je .xr I d th rClf ClomrWy oenarr Fr �.. r n tM�+ Ir� rj Boise 37 s i r�l -f •Camhr' Vail t 7trx VALLEY Rain rnn ne n r l I ,�1 ° National rr r,rrr: rar RY=7 � MlMalf - � I / Cascade I , Ndt1(,Rar ArNr � -Fh violev~ r�.Y rrrrr 3, r yy " -'�• WASHINGTON hoop `r 6; e.rr� rrr i NfF _1 • "' '.6 Orn Cap C Flom Clooff � 7, NUlet+nSlt)n n i r!. I Xar7 1 � c vaclrvc riert a..r rrr �' Forests e fnrrfT n,,,.... I I'r+iiA'.AI•hTrMf 1+ � I far.l ' r f � ••rtrvn�ppr sit) n 3 Ylltllef _ f I 1` Fwyl " I 67 s^ Srrnp.am •,tr!r' fIS71 I J '�� 71 'LlrYtnn / 7a lamielnn , 7 t r/ i t, e rvr rrr 70t 5`__ n.r 'Ola 1 I jai SA 2 �•: Saw7oalh I �-- W,tittw A 77 •'� PAYETTE i ICrouch IA ,' .71 f�f +� . 1 Garden A t'. • Crank N �PlYln! ;3 topmm 'w k,n �SaeeYonMl r.tr1,141I. -•r. Hnlarin ruilland/ GEM I ` r _,. 15 Na17. rr,nnrrr Vale r x, 70 .nf t4 AQISEA A �) i I A -^- ' i t7 8 �• n:r. I J WrmrtM >, 'yam e N w mOUsh ....7 GNdrntr a"� I- �/ Ohsrdian Rec. 70 70, r( Y +,r..r. � 57• racmliRK� �annrrilk -4 1 � ` I�,{l . _ 7l Nyssa,• la 5? ? I_' M n e:' 'I' GnMrrl7k i 39 i�yh? r r�i rn 1 r••• a ss I C1alarr�d 71 tl BClJle - I� Parma' �IlklFlett // r� 7 ll 73 J . 1 ,r r rlr n `t A•s• q.r,..a,.r.. • ,a r•r r Galena i• to pyu;A .,, is 7� Idaho Atlanta - 1 Arw { Ad an 17 OIL Middle I City '� ty �� 4 71�H 1�• Older i•ton t tar ]Eagle � A 75 � � � are tmr) lay 39 11 14 i _. 'R n" flaky Bar rr rrrlr• I lt. Hafional:' ."� aldwEli.; �•r rids *'"� ''� Nallonaf / $ I Lg II 'e CAN � rmrrrrra . a. lt,r 1 S' re.#,rvr ,�$awfoo(h shams / e — -tit1''K r F 'r r 1 Mat m V a� 4" ptj0 sing Ku 75 {� .�'36 Fwr4 77 �� t J + Hot Stxitpa as A DA 70 �, forest 1 y ° 'r-n r,,n 5 r / sellevur 37 —�_� f to _r �AY r , _ fi as r I M^� ` chard n.J I I - I rHdtla ianirrinY• m ,,INS ^ .- .a. Murphy I M CrtY ,5 FF rlrrrl •� Shrawll. ' 47 9Unlaen \ �� T s>.r,.n•r i •,rr a. Horne ELMORF 1 I Ilar lrrrl.r,R 7 aP inr irn r .lxY' orein� �i ♦ l,i ll,i rr r, �,'• Y"r n, r v Ilry r o i rpraM„relrr I l R yr A "55 SN Y/,frrr r r 6�1 Kmy'Hdlr I I x . NRFMrlfr.f! 73 pannrr el•. � Gfand Vlew r�~' l i t �� - r.•'3"'rt t�iZi>f��GoQ rlIn44 "rf H $lenns r a:vrr.r matt 'r'r',r,••"Ferryvk- Wendell.frnlrr!aw mr,Ii Fr`. �e9e'°^ rr, ' rI rr•r'r Inrr.n - '� 7. !- F si • Frlrrrr .s�., 1 1V111 tF uRl `� rr f '!. OWYHFF ds lc. p •I• �r 1 �lll•,rlrn� ��lsf � r,y Eery 1rArf r ! PA rr l IC l,Rf/ - -- - --- --� N �� �Iler,e R *- iNOUIRE LOCALLY FOR CURRENT ' r jCasn,r,+� 74 (7ert! 'n H,, CONDITIONS BEFORE DRIVING 3"/ •Ik,H { 'I °' ON UNIMPROVED ROADS SO4OWMN M �1 ON THIS MAP Gru,.•er: - ` f / ✓; Hnmsrn T.',IN 77 L FALLS 20 � r'� { 4 Anprrinn rI t Duck !I Valle I ME VAOA -- __ _j et - `r-j _ r•NOUA'TAIN TfM( %���_ .. _ _ mk r I f7i c FfAFF L FfAff Fe agora I Indian F�tryhK rrrl' • rI w,srn pa I 171 It#,Farr W ., ` Ip in �a r Mnunh+n City ` r 16 10 R as$[rt in Xdnrnrivi PRIMARY TRADE AREA . utadriwe- NY* , YaffOf Mrf �, 1 °A• Rw 7 rus rr Ame i n� ti � IaY I-.A r h11CCa11 Sl1hn 1f / -f 1 rr .� eYr auaMn.r rr�-` -- r 'U{ N r PirN - - 25�'_ 1 �, re rrnrr �rurre 94"Ari la H6 efelMt!! - l r LN[ 4 rt f+rfrr re r+urr II oAM.� rf HAr7 FruihaN {o,•�I_' F°FY I Frc eAlor Richland y #L#Aj t'1 r t GOtl�ridl I Rtil I Donnelly�1 I tte frAn � - i sYrtwfG rar.rrA� �ant oui mrq r i f r too _ I 71 1 TJ Bois! r �J J Ouraae ♦ I .� i LYtallit fr owl' r� it i iarlThri 9S rf vilin 11 e" CAfrAnt 1`. 7 V A,.L r � ~ 9jLF9 WON,. . r .��- - 1, +_-i � wr J I furrrfc•rt.r 4r0 q rnrr� - r}• 2 ^y MidvNe I -1C d ! IYa11Q11� to f.nrr Narrnnal &*, Ch, 14 F MAffc.ffe L,A 1 rr X7.nrf 4--t�� 7 r +rrc AREA ... ..,rt<:Tr)r1 Berne `� �j r� 63 tA�v4 Or* rt .a rrurr Huntington �., e CMeIlern ! t'AClfrc Tl_ TAf rwil#for 1 NeIT. �' I Ftl/1Ttf 'y �r format ri A�n rr+�r _ �trArE nAr .� IIVUNrArrlr RMr �• - �. . I � `J r 1 r *+ der_^ lf0nM111 Breen 1 Welaer ,� .i f Smiths 67 * �� rvrrr+ron�01(7_ r Su-tq rr f/17rr t5 4 571�� f _ I For" i 21 26 J - iarr11te0n I ]] �veMrf 201 °•1• AOte} ��! I 58 ' •!"Wity 1 } Willow [r:..>rr 30 17 95 n F'T- r-^.. '.�•-. _� it - ) ' .SiWF00t�1 'r / Co.h A Conk 2e 'B - Payeta Gareln p A 21 � I 75 k 2 7 _ may e . Yyt" 33 Luwmnl A J l .S,wloorA CAMPlAct 7' trrri Vale �11tar10 rUltialld ••1 i IS ' Ivan�- it rr/Nrrr, A rl a• 26 20 f 30 $�e1 A • � A 1 `... �O, ' t B u '!I m tu.�Rfl2 * Grdeee'�r, I-� ry rrtmrrrrr 1 Ohsidim y 70 101 y a■th,r..r. \s2 f llerreNilN d � �,_^ fllC. ES 1 7 •2 26 y Net If 1 I•!' - - GAI FM FfAt .Yi1 R+• NtJ�i 1LetFe 5I 2 M01r 19 t Armtow - rr r,rlwrr t n wr ' (/ Parma 23 Emmett 55 !I CeMOnd r 21 Ig80ite rf +Fefiu ��t�"g, AFA SolawrrG� to16 2L�` $&h0 / - 11M■�If 9 �_! r-, °t q P AM S 12 °rot Middle City V� 12 Wilder AI tOn1 l 75 nlwrrE 201 Ne 5. 11 19 3 rr • -9 8 Rxs<y e// ! lfer fw.ls fi lSun caldwell, idea NrFibnsl 55 11 4 vAr �r,r e , e„ SaeYlOtlfl! Hanor7Ket .•r rr5 - S, - rf-frr2rr - Glum d H 9 -v m r - @ , Mlag - 59 Fa dl■ rRarrre. Itr 7 o o tin Kum 2e IQ ime Pr t tr frrrrr t 1(K; 21 22 17 torn At L` >•Rtle r '"---r H be Givens. rer IMiyl1lltl ^j 'i-..' °. g HelSprings 45 n T)A 20 :, foreSr � Jr •. `I Bellevue ti32 ys, vZ—� 16 Opil'l r Cfdwd -6 _�roAr --r^ faewl�"'. -70 IApI1O{NS r re r < rC 71 20 - Hill 2� Murphy �,Ciry o•. ��r5 it rrwrr 1 ryr z t�;hl�nl! 42 0unlaln - - - -- ----•• .a rrfF SM1irONr 1e 46 Cf CAVES ,r'• �'k vI LAwAA 23 62 i n r�e.' •Jarden OEM" r.rr+ Os r.Y r'" ° y rpOfrArf MOM( r 29 R 2tl 19FRd1► ! i e -0 ONCE RAW 23 r� OfnnwS� rrxrt. King Hill ,'•s, Grind View ur* 51 1 A 26 I `I I —k� ding 25 Htlnli : - 7H "� )17 Afrrfrfa 78 melt r•wFra.+rGIEM1f f°rry - r I1 IOne . .. rA.tfNnfr � Bru DuffJfr" �n nr� °li 6 f6LaW Betyr n f r7e rr 3O Ume` ;-12 A''r 6Trgn�N Broome Hapo"40 3 «10 21 - Ho1$pmgl _ vaLcrYM. Wendell ^' 12 the Fr r•rM rr•� SOL rn ur. -Y _ t c, ■ 7` 2t � 1 ' wing u - 36frrrlMs ��y dfe A+Iela Buhl .KI 2 W`Nr)VNTAIN IlME r -r.�,6f2F T+ so Yrv}IE E �. Avr • Fall PACIFIC TlMf' r7 `tom FilerA 9S r INOUIRE LOCALLY FOR CURRENT `>, Castlef°rd ro Kimrn H� ' CONDITIONS BEFORE DRIVING }1 ,i k bdrl re ` ON UNIMPAOVEO ROADS SHOWN !7! r r ON THIS MAP U-1moele nl - .01 1 r �. H011111Q - rP 1 rOi -- 20 .... �I o Ridd4 ^� ~rnllnf `I IT r r 18 59 OY _ N OREGON r _� ti valley i 1° ` NE vA6A -��--�� ``+_-_`_ t I--- - MOUNTAIN TIME - TGIIree y rg1/fAR! - eek PAClfrCT/ME �- �Lam--� �_ � 1 to t4mrri Indian Owyhee Ii r I wrAprlRf Jackpot N ! t1i n arr2n kflern Mdes ___ Rot. I•Mglrntiill City J _ ra =° -----:.=° '�r a 10 ZO 30 4O SCJe m K.10.etn r Y DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (Continued) GAFO expenditures range between 10.0 percent and 15.0 percent of total gross income of the residents of an area. GAFO expenditures for Ada County, the primary trade .area of the proposed regional mall, amounted to $190,822,000 in 1980, rising to $283,600,000 in 1985. By 1990, GAFO expenditures are expected to amount to approximately $395,600,000. The total trading area is estimated to have 1985 expenditures of $395,700,000 and 1990 expenditures of $510,600,000. Whereas, the total trade area expenditures represent a significant amount of money, the bulk of the forecasted sales for the proposed regional mall will initially be generated in Ada County. r In considering the development of a major mall, it is essential to recognize that the regional shopping center will be at the subject location for many decades. Thus, it is important to forecast the changes which can be expected and the potential which will exist to 1990. Such an analysis provides the extent of the target market and the size of the shopping center to meet that market. Market share has been developed through an ongoing evaluation of the performance of existing major regional shopping centers. Additionally, a thorough evaluation of the existing competitive facilities, accessibility, shopping habits and patterns, demographic change, income, population growth, the influx of new stores, the impact of a major complex of this magnitude, and other factors, have led to the conclusion that the mall will capture approximately 25.0 percent of all the GAFO expenditures generated in Ada County. Thus, Ada County will contribute approxi- mately $98,900,000 to the mall's sales. The balance will be generated in time over the total trading area, resulting in total shopping center sales of $160,000,000. Based upon this analysis, a market was found to exist for a million square foot regional mall at the proposed site in 1990. From this analysis, department store ... square footage was projected at a total of 660,000 square feet and an estimated $92,000,000 in sales based upon the 1990 levels. Mall stores will require approximately 340,000 square feet in 1990 with a sales estimate of $68,000,000. Thus, the total shopping center is estimated at 1,000,000 square feet, capturing $160,000,000 or an average of $160 per square foot in current year dollars. II-6 III. SITE SUITABILITY As previously indicated, the subject site is located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road (Idaho 55). The site is adequate in size, is buildable, and by providing suitable deceleration, turning lanes and traffic signals, is entirely adequate for the development of a regional shopping center. Upland, as a part of its industrial development across the street, has brought the necessary utilities to the site and thus, the only missing element is zoning. — There are many definitions of what constitutes a regional shopping center. The International Council of Shopping Centers and Urban Land Institute have published numerous documents discussing the size and attributes necessary to constitute a '- regional shopping center. By today's standards, the type planned for the subject property must necessarily contain two or more major department store operations, along with an adequate amount of square footage devoted to mall stores under a single ownership with entirely adequate parking. The mall stores usually constitute anywhere from one-half the amount of square footage devoted to department stores to an equal amount. Parking generally represents a ratio between 4.0 and 5.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross building area. Internal traffic circulation is provided through the development of an internal roadway network system, complete with stop signs and traffic channels. Traffic signals are ordinarily provided at the primary entrances to the major regional shopping center. A super regional shopping center is one which contains four or more department stores along with a significant array of mall specialty stores. Most super regional malls contain between 800,000 and 2,500,000 square feet. The subject mall when fully complete will be in this super regional shopping center category. A. ACCESSIBILITY A regional shopping center must have entirely adequate access, plus ingress and egress from at least one major traffic artery. In this case, that traffic artery would be Fairview Avenue, which is a four-lane, median divided, highly identifiable traffic artery. In addition, Eagle Road provides two-lane local access to the subject site and with the completion of the Interstate 84 interchange, Eagle Road will provide expressway access via Eagle Road. Thus, the suitability of the site from an accessibility point of view is excellent. The International Council of Shopping Centers and Urban Land Institute have found over the past 30 years that regional shopping center locations generally require the following: — III-1 ACCESSIBILITY (Continued) 1. The site must be convenient to reach over roads with enough unused traffic capacity to avoid high levels of congestion. 2. Ingress to and from arterials must be safe and easy. 3. The location must be a dominant position within the trading area, situated in such a manner to serve both the present and future market. 4. The site must have easy access from expressway/interstate interchange points, within one-half to one mile. Note, however, that when high activity centers such as a busy regional center have side access points too close to freeway interchanges, traffic is likely to be severely congested under peak hour conditions. Shopper traffic interferes with the flow of through traffic, thus resulting in an intensification of congestion and heightened accident potential. 5. Direct access from the primary traffic artery with adequate traffic signals and turning lanes is most desirable. Locations fronting on limited access ex- pressways are good for visibility, but inadequate for access. 6. Good visibility of the location from access routes allows drivers adequate time to prepare for turns. Once again, in all of the above, the subject site is in an excellent position to — meet the accessibility standards of a major regional shopping center. B. POPULATION BASE Both Urban Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers define the trading area for a major regional center as one that contains a minimum of 150,000 people. Additionally, the primary trade area is often defined as that area within ten minutes travel time, while the secondary trade area, generally doesn't exceed 20 minutes. The tertiary or fringe portion of the trading area (if one exists) generally does not exceed 30 minutes. Distance and total population are not the sole criteria for determining a center's trading area. The quantity and quality of the competition is extremely important, as is the age structure of the population and the distance to other major markets. In Boise, there are no regional size malls within Ada County to provide competition to the Upland site. The larger neighborhood centers, downtown Boise and strip commercial projects will provide competition, but not to the extent that they will affect the drawing power of a regional shopping center. Additionally, the age structure of the population is often more important than the total number of people within the trading area. This will be discussed in a latter portion of this section. III-2 POPULATION BASE (Continued) The population of Ada County (the primary portion of the proposed Upland Regional Shopping Center's trading area) contain 173,036 persons in 1980 and is estimated to have 196,764 persons in 1985. By 1990, this is expected to rise to _ 223,745 persons. Thus, Ada County contains an adequate number of people for a regional shopping center's trading area. Added together with the fact that there are no regional shopping centers in Ada County further compounds the opportunity for the development of a major regional shopping center at the subject site. C. TOTAL TRADING AREA - 20-MINUTE DRIVE TIME Trading areas are a function of time and distance and the interrelationship to competitive facilities. Trading areas are affected by physical and psychological barriers, as well as the mix of stores and the mix of merchandise presented to the consumer. The trading area of the proposed regional shopping center has been developed by analyzing the forces of attraction and resistence. Through this analysis, we have concluded that the primary trading area will cover Ada County, contain adequate population and income resources, as well as a dearth of competition, and provide more than adequate potential for a successful major regional shopping center. D. RELATIONSHIP WITH EXISTING RETAIL FACILITIES The development of a regional shopping center on the subject property should not have an adverse impact on the retail facilities located in Meridian, nor should it have a significant impact on the balance of the retail facilities, mainly, shoppers goods stores, in Ada County. As previously pointed out, there is only one competitive mail in Canyon Countyand one major downtown with aging and inadaquate facilities - downtown Boise. Moreover, Ada County has been exporting shoppers goods dollars to other major cities because of the lack of modern, exciting well-stocked and merchandised shoppers goods stores in Ada County. Thus, consumers are traveling to _ Salt Lake City and Portland to make major shoppers good purchases. Moreover, at a time when the growth of GAFO store sales ought to be increasing, it has in fact been declining; a further indication of an exporting of important shoppers goods _ dollars. 1. Karcher Mall Karcher Mall, which contains a tptal of 570,000 square feet of retail facilities, is an enclosed heated and air--conditioned facility located in Nampa, and is 17 years old, relatively unattractive, with three major magnets. The Bon Marche department store in the Karcher Mall contains approximately 60,350 square feet. Additionally, J. C. Penney operates a store in the Karcher Mall, containing 127,670 square feet along with a Falk's, of approximately 15,000 square feet. III-3 RELATIONSHIP WITH EXISTING RETAIL FACILITIES (Continued) Karcher Mall is located in the northwest portion of Nampa, in Canyon County. It is located over 12 miles away and thus, should not be adversely affected by the development of a major regional mall on the subject property. In fact, — whereas the trading areas might reflect some overlap, there will be little customer interchange between the two retail complexes. 2. Downtown Meridian "Old Town," as downtown Meridian is referred to, is composed primarily of convenience goods and convenience goods service stores. Our studies over the past 27 years of hundreds of shopping centers, indicates that there is only a minor interrelationship between these uses and a major regional shopping center. Thus, it is not anticipated that "Old Town" will be affected through the development of the proposed regional mall. Residents of Meridian will still find the "Old Town" area, as well as the Cherry Plaza Shopping Center, convenient for the purchase of their convenience items. E. DEMOGRAPHICS The population within a three-mile radius of the proposed Upland shopping center site currently stands at approximately 29,530 people. By 1990, the population within the three-mile radius is expected to be approximately 36,000 persons. Within a five-mile radius, there currently are a total of 76,700 persons. By 1990, this is expected to rise to 98,800 people. Other significant factors include: -- 1. Age Groups The median age of the persons residing within a three-mile radius is 27.7 years, while the median age of persons residing within a five-mile radius is 28.1 years. The average age of the persons residing within a three-mile radius is 29.8 years, in contrast to the average age of persons residing within a five-mile radius of 30.2 years. Approximately one-third of the persons residing within a three-mile radius are between the ages of 25 and 44. A total of 46.0 percent of the population is under 24 years of age while the balance, 22.0 percent is over 45 years of age. The significant factor here is a young nature of the population. Young families are the greatest consumers. Families with young children, are constantly buying — clothing and food, simply to meet day-to-day demand and consumption. They also usually represent a major shopping center's best customers. �. III-4 DEMOGRAPHICS (Continued) Within a five-mile radius, 31.9 percent of the population are within the ages of 25 to 44, while 45.2 percent of the population is under 25 years of age. The balance, 22.9 percent is over 45 years of age or older. 2. Income Within a three-mile radius of the proposed Upland regional shopping center location, the average household income currently amounts to $27,380. The median household income amounts to $24,301. The per capita income within the same three-mile radius is currently estimated at approximately $9,500. Within a five-mile radius, the average household income currently stands at approximately $28,300 while the median household income stands at approxi- mately $25,400. The estimated per capita income for the area within five miles currently stands approximately $9,700. All of the above are positive factors in the market for the development of the major regional shopping center. F. PROXIMITY TO THE RETAIL CORRIDOR Fairview Avenue, extending westward from downtown Boise, has historically been a major commercial artery. In addition to a proliferation of various types of commercial uses, Fairview Avenue is the location of the Westgate Mall, featuring The Bazaar, a 36,800 square foot limited-line department store. As a result, the residents of Boise and the Meridian area are fully aware of the commercial orientation of Fairview Avenue and thus, this major artery fits in to their existing shopping habits and patterns. People are habitual. They tend to follow similar patterns unless some drastic change occurs. One of the benefits of developing a major regional shopping center on Fairview Avenue is that it fits in to what already exists as a common pattern. Our firm has been involved in the interviewing in major regional shopping centers throughout the United States and Canada. Moreover, the work that we have done with major retailers within the same areas has continuously re-emphasized for us the importance of the existing shopping habits and patterns and placing new major -- facilities within that pattern so as to not disturb the existing retail network. As a result of that, the impact on existing facilities is usually less because the other convenience goods and convenience goods service store and discount department store patterns remain intact. III-5 G. VISIBILITY The location at Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road is an excellent location. Moreover, the site enjoys excellent visibility from either Fairview Avenue or Eagle Road. Consumers traveling in a westerly direction from the suburban portion of Boise, will enjoy excellent visibility to the site. Likewise, consumers traveling eastbound on Fairview Avenue toward the location will have excellent visibility of the site as they approach the intersection. Consumers both northbound and southbound on Eagle Road will also enjoy excellent visibility relative to the location because of the significant amount of frontage available to the shopping center on both arteries. H. INTERSTATE 84 NOT CRUCIAL DUE TO THE LACK OF COMPETITION Interstate 84 is a major east-west interstate artery in the Boise area. At the present time, an interchange is planned at Eagle Road. An existing interchange is in place at Meridian Road. Initially, as the shopping center is developed, our market analysis indicates that approximately three department stores will be placed in the developing complex. Because of the lack of major regional shopping centers, we expect the majority of traffic moving to and from the proposed shopping center to travel to the location via Fairview Avenue and some of the other east-west traffic arteries. That traffic will filter to the shopping center via the north-south arteries such as Eagle Road. The completion of the interchange at Interstate 84 will provide an additional " means of access to the subject property. Nevertheless, the lack of major competition within either the western portion of the Boise area or the entire Meridian area indicates that Interstate 84 will not be as significant as ordinarily might be the case. -- In fact, a study of the existing urbanized population development indicates that the majority of the households which would be patronizing the shopping center resides north of Interstate 84 at a point where Fairview Avenue will be much more convenient to travel to the shopping center than Interstate 84. 1. THE ABILITY TO BUILD ON THE SITE Urban Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers identify ten site selection characteristics which are to be considered for regional shopping centers: 1. Location and Access 2. Size 3. Shape V 4. Topography 11I-S THE ABILITY TO BUILD ON THE SITE (Continued) 5. Drainage 6. Minimal subsoil complications 7. Surroundings 8. Utilities 9. Zoning 10. Environmental impact feasibility Number 1, the location and access has already been discussed, while the last four items above (surroundings, utilities, zoning, and environmental impact) are adequately discussed in other sections of this report. It is sufficient to say that these characteristics have been considered in regard to the Upland site and are not believed to pose any problems for the development. A discussion of the other elements related to the ability to build on the site are as follows: I. Size The building to site ratio applied for outlying (suburban) shopping centers with a one-story design is four or five parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. Thus, a million square foot mall would require between 4,000 and 5,000 parking spaces. Given an average of 400 square feet per parking space, the parking area would require between 1,600,000 and 2,000,000 square feet while .� the buildings would require 1,000,000 square feet. Thus, the total amount of land area required would represent between 2,600,000 and 3,000,000 square feet, or between 60 to 70 acres of land. Along with the additional facilities that are usually developed on the outlots of a super regional shopping center (which this is) the land area requirements would approximate 90 acres. Moreover, planning for the future is important and thus having available land for future development and expansion is a critical need for major regional shopping centers. IH-7 THE ABILITY TO BUILD ON THE SITE (Continued) 2. Shape The most advantageous shape for a major regional shopping center is one which has an equal amount of frontage on both major arteries. Where only one artery exists, it is advantageous to have the majority of the frontage on that artery. Nonetheless, adequate length and depth is necessary. A square shape of roughly even length and width allows for advantageous circulation on the site and provides for the centralized placement of the building structure. Thus, total planning can be provided to the site considering internal traffic circulation, parking, ingress and egress, drainage, water retention, and other pertinent factors. 3. Topography A flat size is most easily developed, requiring little on-site grading to be performed and ease of construction. The most suitable topography has a slope -- grade of less than 5.0 percent. The Upland site is flat and will pose no slope restrictions. 4. Drainage Adequate drainage for storm-run office is essential. As noted in the Engineering Section of this report, Upland has produced and received approval of a drainage plan for the site. This plan includes the detention of excess run off (above historic levels) with discharge of no more than half run off rates, with the addition of an oil and sediment trap. 5. Minimal Subsoil Complications The absence of subsurface lot and a depth of water table which will not pose complications for construction are absolutely desirable. These are also addressed in Upland's Engineering Section to this report and had been found to pose no problems to grading and/or construction. In summary, the subject property meets all of the requirements necessary for the development of a major regional shopping complex designed to primarily serve Ada County. These include the market aspects, accessibility, and buildability. I1I-8 N. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS As a part of the overall evaluation of the potential and advisability of developing a major regional shopping center on the subject property, we have considered the fiscal impact that such a development will have upon the community. Fiscal impact considers the benefits to be derived by the community, as well as the costs involved in assessing those benefits. This section of the report discusses the fiscal ramifications of such a development. A. THE SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT ON MERIDIAN The impact elements which need to be addressed are as follows: 1. The Upland property has already been annexed to the City of Meridian and thus, the City has already agreed to provide City services to the site. 2. A regional shopping center designation already exists in the city of Meridian and has been zoned for almost ten years. To date, no activity has occurred there. It is our recommendation that the City of Meridian proceed to zone the Upland site as a major regional shopping center location in order to encourage an alternate location to the existing regional shopping center property so indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. Our analysis indicates that little interest has been shown in the existing location because of its position relative to population deployment in the area. We are of the opinion that that department stores, which are the catalysts for major regional shopping centers, will be far more interested in the Upland location. Thus, the forces of supply and demand in the marketplace will decide which location the major department stores and specialty stores believe represents the best opportunity for them to serve the Meridian market. 3. The development of a major regional shopping center on the Upland property will create both full- and part-time jobs after completion, amounting to between 2,500 and 3,000 jobs with an annual payroll of over $20,000,000. During the construction phase, it is anticipated that over 600 man-year jobs will be created, representing a total payroll of between $26,000,000 and $28,000,000. While this is a two-year situation, the permanent part-time and full-time employment will continue to add over $20,000,000 to Meridian's economy. The employment dollars generated by both the construction and the full-time operation of the mall on the Upland site will have a multiplier effect throughout the Meridian community and, thus, the employment and the expenditures will have an extremely positive impact upon most types of businesses and services located in the city of Meridian. N-1 THE SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT ON MERIDIAN (Continued) 4. City expenditures relative to a major development of this magnitude are usually of concern. We have, therefore, reviewed the qualitative aspects of the mall development and offer the following observations: a. Administrative Costs The administrative costs which the city might be expected to bear are no different than those for an industrial development and thus, we do not anticipate any additional administrative charges. b. Police Major regional shopping centers operated by professionals, such as this one will be, have their own security force and thus call upon the local police only in unusual situations. Therefore, the shopping center is providing for the security of the persons on its property at the time that they are — shopping. C. Fire Protection A major regional shopping center is developed with fire protection in mind. All areas are sprinkled to protect against the spreading of a fire, and provide life safety systems. Homart Development Company, which operates 25 major regional shopping centers, has never had a major fire and has averaged one minor fire per year for all of its 25 shopping centers. A major fire could only occur if there was a simultaneous breakdown in the entire sprinkler system within a major complex. A review of other major shopping center developers along with the International Council of Shopping Centers which represents the shopping center industry, the same type of excellent fire record has been found. In fact, major regional shopping centers have, perhaps, the best fire and safety records, and buildings are designed and built with safety and protection in mind. -- N-2 THE SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT ON MERIDIAN (Continued) — d. Sewer Facilities The sewer facilities required for a shopping center of this magnitude are currently in the process of being provided by Upland at its own costs. e. Water — The water facilities required for the proposed major regional shopping center will also be provided by Upland at Upland's costs. Thus, again, no cost will be borne by the City of Meridian. B. BENEFITS REALIZED FROM INDUSTRIAL USE (FUTURE) IN RELATION TO RETAIL COMMERCIAL USE TODAY Upland is currently in the process of developing part of its land as an industrial park. It will take time to absorb the land currently allocated for industrial development, before the site proposed for a major shopping center could be developed industrially. Moreover, the total number of jobs to be generated will not be as high for industrial use on the proposed regional shopping center site — as for a regional shopping center. Moreover, while at the present time, the sales tax and additional property taxes do not accrue directly to the City of Meridian, it appears in time that they may. Thus, the significant retail sales to be generated by the mall ($160,000,000 by 1990), along with the value created from a major million square foot mall will positively affect the taxes collected by the City of Meridian over time. These taxes will be far in excess of the taxes to be created by the development of an industrial park. N-3 -- V. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The greatest impact from the proposed shopping center, located south of Fairview Avenue .and east of Eagle Road, will be in the area immediately — surrounding it. For the purposes of this study, this area is taken to be that bounded by Ustick Road to Overland Road, and Meridian Road to Maple Grove Road. Figure 5.1 shows the proposed site and the surrounding street network. The land surrounding the site is primarily agricultural in nature; however, the- area has shown a trend towards increased commercial , industrial, and residential uses. Access to the site is via Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road. Fairview Avenue is a major arterial providing four through lanes between Boise and Meridian. Eagle Road is currently a two-lane minor arterial but is planned for upgrading to five lanes between Fairview Avenue and I-84 in 1986. Eagle Road, north of Fairview Avenue, is tentatively scheduled to be widened to five lanes in 1988. Traffic signals exist at each of the major intersections along Fairview — Avenue with the exception of locust Grove Road. Typically, these signals operate in an actuated mode thus providing quick response to the area's varying traffic needs. Currently, Eagle Road is signalized only at Fairview; however, signals at Overland and Franklin Roads will be included with the Eagle Road widening project in 1986. EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES If all goes as planned, the shopping center could be open by 1988. Based upon this premise, 1988 was chosen as the base year for traffic analysis. An estimate of the 1988 average daily traffic, as shown in Figure 5.1, was ❑btained from Ada Planning Association and from an Interchange Location Study performed for the Idaho Department of Transportation (DOT) . These estimates were derived from the year 2000 planning projections from both sources and adjusted back to 1988 using a 20 per year growth rate. This rate was obtained from the Ada Planning Association and represents the average for Ada County and this area in particular. The year 2000 estimates did account for a travel demand shift created by the addition of an interchange at I-84 and Eagle Road. They did not, however, include any traffic generated by additional retail shopping in the immediate study area. V-1 ca c COLE RD. a m O O 0 O Q T Y �} 0 m 9.800 8,500 Q' N MAPLE GROVE RD. O Q p 0 o o to � Q T 11.000 8,360 1 3,000 FIVE MIL RD_ 0 0 o p N � 7,600 71800 10,9001CLO VERD LE RD, 0 0 0 O O 0 p p p to p N *- ID 10,500 C 16,500 EAGLE Rd. 2 10,200 4,500 p c 0 z 0 m coQ p r. co "j '? G W. N T N W 6U it `- s Q O LOCUST GROVE RD. 3 z ui } C? v N Q al oIL O Q N fr GoU 10,170 L6 c° © 1 ,800 MERIDIA RD. � 009`1 N FIGURE YEAR 1988 DAILY ® 5000 - AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC VOLUMES 5. 1 11NCH = 422OFT. Intersection turning movement data was also obtained from Ada Planning Association sources since actual volume counts were not available. This data was utilized in the capacity checks at Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue as well as the entrances to the proposed shopping center. LEVEL OF SERVICE The Ada Planning Association 's Trans ortation Im rovement Program, 1985-1990 lists the following major improvements within the study area: Description Start Date -Widen intersection of Five Mile Rd. and Franklin Rd. 1985 -Widen S.H. 69 (Meridian Road) , Amity Rd. to I-84 1985 -Eagle Road & I-84 interchange 1986 -Widen Eagle Road to five lanes, I-84 to Fairview 1986 -Widen Eagle Road to five lanes, Fairview to Chinden 1988 Assuming these improvements are implemented, Figure 5.2 shows the resulting widths of study area roadways (in number of through lanes) and their levels of service. These widths are for the base year of 1988. Level of service (LOS) for a facility describes the quality of traffic operation with respect to maneuverability and operating speed. These levels range from A (best) to E (worst) and cover the entire range of operations that may occur. Level of service C or better is usually preferred, but LOS D may be acceptable during peak hours. Table 5.1 describes the various levels of traffic service. The description of level of service factors is also applicable to interstates, although the volume ranges are somewhat higher than those for arterials. Table 5.1 also summarizes these volume ranges and their respective service levels. As indicated by Figure 5.2, traffic conditions worse than LOS C would be expected for many street segments in the study area. It is assumed that '-- the Ada County Highway Department will address these needs in the future, as traffic volumes justify them. For the purpose of this study, it will be assumed that a level of service C or better will be available on all streets within the study area. This is done to illustrate the effects on service level -that additional site traffic may have. Obviously, if a facility is operating at LOS E or worse the effects of additional traffic could not be indicated by a lower service V-3 m COLE RD, tr co v a V MAPLE G 0VE RD. n a � NLu N Q 0 � N ., rr a N FIVE MILE RD. n Lu v v N N r► V Lu N CLO VERD LE RD. m m w N N N ...V uj m a N V N EAGLE R . a to a qr q N � Q ui Z a T � N � `{ N G W W a cc o LOCUST GROVE RD, 3 z be U ' U Lu C m O N cn Q � 4 � © MERIDIA4 RD. Y a a q FIGURE LEVEL OF SERVICE YEAR 1988 PLANNED LANES1IF33 # - - NUMBER OF THRU LANES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE 5.2 1INCH = 4220FT. TABLE 5.1 LEVEL OF TRAFFIC SERVICE Level of Service (LOS) Arterial Freeway 2-Lane 4-Lane 6-Lane 4-Lane 6-Lane A. Free Flow 7,000 15,960 25,980 25,200 43,200 B. Stable Flow - Few restric- 8,170 18,620 30,310 36,000 64,800 tions on operating speeds C. Stable Flow - Higher volume, 9,330 21 ,280 34,640 46,800 75,600 more restrictions on speed and lane changing D. Approaching Unstable Flow -- 10,500 23,940 38,970 54,000 81 ,000 Little freedom to maneuver, condition tolerable for short periods E. Unstable Flow - Lower oper- 11 ,670 26,600 43,300 72,000 108,000 ating speeds, some momentary stoppages F. Forced Flow - Traffic stop- > 11,670 >26,600 >43,300 Not applicable pages, breakdown condition. Source: Quick Response Urban Travel Estimation Techniques and Transferable Parameters , NCHRP Report 187, TRB, 1978 level , nor could traffic be realistically added to this route. Using LOS C as the minimum design criterion, both Franklin Road and Fairview Avenue would have to be widened an additional two through lanes as shown in Figure 5.3. There would also be a need for widening on some portions of Cloverdale Road and Five Mile Road. -- SITE TRIP GENERATION The proposed regional shopping center will be located on a 90-acre _ tract of land. Of this tract, 23 acres (1 million sq. ft. ) will be leasable floor space while 67 acres will provide space for 8000 parking stalls, access roads,' and other uses. Estimates of trips generated by shopping centers of this size were obtained from three sources. Table 5.2 identifies these sources and summarizes the information found there. TABLE 5.2 TRIP GENERATION RATES Tripends per Study G.F.A. Source 1000 G.F.A. Size xI000 1. Institute of Transportation Eng. Trip Generation Report, 1982 37.1 6 1000+ 2. Institute of Traasportation Eng. Trip Generation Report, 1982 37.2 37 500-1000 3. San Diego Traffic Generators, 47.0 10 225-1332 1979 4. NCBRP Report 187, 1978 34.7 NA 500-1000 For this study the rate of 37.2 tripends per 1000 square feet (G.F.A.) (source #2, ITE) was chosen as the most reasonable rate. Not only was the ITE source the most current, but the study size used to develop this rate was large enough to considered representative. Based on this trip rate, a total of 37,200 trips will be generated by the shopping center daily. Various travel modes (particularly transit) to and from the site were also considered; however, based on discussions with the Ada Planning Association, it was determined that the automobile would be used almost exclusively for trips to this shopping center. V-6 COLE RD.I a - U • � Q MAPLE GROVE RD. q a N N a ., 0 m v Q 'R Q FIVE M[LE RD. � a a m ` V � m a CLO VERD LE RD. m m v ^ v CAI ci cc EAGLE RD. ., ra qr 4 Z in 7S .1 N �. Q W cc a o LOCUST GROVE RD. 3 z Y Lu J V� 2 Y _ m O U) a -- Ic .. v U. a L6 a © � MERIDIA RD. v FIGURE ( 1— LEVEL OF SERVICE YEAR 1988 LANES REQUIRED © $ — NUMBER OF THRU LANES FOR STABLE FLOW' 5.3 11NCH = 4220FT. It is not uncommon for shopping facilities of this type to divert traffic passing the site. This diverted traffic represents customers who are already on the street and are merely stopping off at the site while en route to another location. Typically, this accounts for a significant percentage of the business for drive-in banks, supermarkets and convenience stores but is only a small portion of the trips to a regional shopping center. Because of this and the simplistic nature of the study, diversion was not directly accounted for in the generation rates. Thus, the results from this analysis represent a worst-case estimate of site traffic. TRIP DISTRIBUTION — The orientation of site traffic with respect to the surrounding vicinity is a function of distance, population, location of competing facilities, and major street linkages. For this study it was assumed that competing facilities would be distributed in direct relation to the surrounding population. Moreover, the street and highway network is of similar quality in all of the major directions. Hence, trip distribution percentages were calculated based on population size and distance from the site. The area surrounding the site was divided into eight subareas or zones -- (see Figure 5.4) , each with similar characteristics and served by an identifiable street or highway. For each of these zones a percentage of the total shopping trips is estimated based on its population and average travel _ distance. Zonal population was determined from information provided by the Ada Planning Association and the 1980 census. In addition to Ada County, population centers in Canyon County were also included since they would comprise a significant percentage of the market. As shown in Figure 5.4, the following trip percentages are estimated: -� Major Access Route Percent - East on Fairview Avenue 34% - North on Eagle Road 8 - West on Fairview Avenue 13 - West on I-84. 14 - South on Meridian Road Z - South on Cloverldale Road 10 - Southeast on I-84 11 - Downtown via I-84 8 These percentages are comparable with the market percentage estimates prepared by Homart Development Co. V-8 ' ■tom ��'�ii■► ■■F��■■l iA■I KFA WAR- _ L r: OWN ONE INGORN M- Ol MEN now-r-a" !■■■illlassom F■■NFA ONE ■: .� IN -RE ■ ■ll'., S- i■sort =mil■■■I m■■� a� ■WA■ElI ■■E1� ��bd■ rd � r - - DISTRIBUTION TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Once the trip distribution percentages are determined, the next step is to convert these into actual trips and assign them to the base year street system. The assignment was aided by a computer traffic modeling program called TMODEL. This program can quickly evaluate many route alternatives in search of the optimum street routing. At all times, the trip assignment - process considers street capacity as well as current traffic volumes. Daily site traffic as assigned to the street system is shown in Figure 5.5. As might be expected, the heaviest volumes were on Fairview Avenue and on Eagle Road between Fairview and I-84. These routes provide the major access link to most of the market area. LEVEL OF SERVICE WITH SITE To analyze the overall effects of the site on the street system, the site generated traffic is combined with the estimated 1988 daily traffic as shown in Figure 5.6. These volumes are then compared to level of service ranges in Table 5.1 to estimate the stability of traffic flow in each street segment. This analysis presumes that the existing street system has the lane configurations discussed previously and shown in Figure 5.3. Levels of service for each street segment are shown in Figure 5.7. As would be expected, the addition of site traffic to the street system decreases traffic service levels on several roadway sections. In particular, the major east-west travel routes would experience a reduction by one or two service levels. Traffic along Fairview Avenue, between Eagle Road and Maple Grove Road, would be reduced from LOS B to LOS D. At this level, traffic fluctuations would cause short periods of restrictive movement; however, the majority ❑f the time flow would be relatively stable. Assuming Franklin Road is widened to four through lanes, as would be dictated by projected residential growth patterns, the additional site traffic would not have any significant effect on its operation. In fact, '~ due to an excess of capacity, its level of service would remain at LOS A. Traffic operations along Eagle Road, between Franklin and 1-84, would be reduced to LOS E as a result of site traffic. This is due to the heavy volume of traffic expected to approach the site via the interstate. In order to meet this demand, Eagle Road may require widening to six lanes in this area. Conditions on that section of Eagle Road, between Fairview and Franklin, will also worsen with the addition of site traffic. In fact, the service level will drop from A to D in this area. As with Fairview Avenue, a level of service 0 indicates some periods of flow restriction, however, V-10 COLE RD. cc r D� a a W O m 0 m ♦ N �- MAPLE GROVE RD, 1.513 1,00o OlO ` � Q e] J INC 0: FIVE MIL RD. 2.710 0 0 0 r 3.880 CLOVERD LE RD. 2.810 p a 3,880 — o 00 rn a p � o 0 a � C " EAGLE R 2.870 3.200 -' 13 92 12,950 - 0 0 o Z cn cv a C m C D W W 0: > D: O a O LOCUST GROVE RD. 3 z �4 W J — V Y cc Q Q W 0 U. 0. © MERIDIA RD. 0 690 ego ti FIGURE i — F'' 5000 — AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC YEAR 1988 DAILY SITE TRAFFIC 5.5 1 INCH = 4220FT. c coCOLE RD, r cc O O p m �+9 N N C m N r) " Co. MAPLE GROVE RD. 11.310 71500 • O a o o 0 � a 13,000 FIVE MIL RD_ I 13,710 5,360 — o 0 a o � Q 11,480 14,580 CLOVERDIALE RD, 10,410 � _ o 0 � m m o 0 ao 0 m _ N EAGLE R 13,400 24. 20, 29.450 4,500 13.370�". v o O N N Z i N N m Q, O cc �? 1 m LC co cc Lu a o LOCUST GROVE RD. 3 z " Y W J C� o ]C cc co ZI 0 c H CIAa coV U. 10,170 LL m a ® '15,800 MERIDIA RD, 0 8.290 ca — m N — � FIGURE _ © YEAR 1988 COMBINED 5.6 5000 - AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC I DAILY TRAFFIC 11NCH =- 4220FT. a COLE RD, r- co — o U � V MAPLE G 0VE RD. N N a O � J Q a FIVE MIL RD. w a N Q CLOVERD LE RD, C 4 � W V N .�► 4 - W N � r► a N EAGLE R v v v � � m o � W Z La C W- W a O LOCUST GROVE RD. z 8 Y a m � a � g^ U. � © ., �► .. a � � .. MERIDIA RD. Nft ( ? -- LEVEL OF SERVICE YEAR 1988 PROJECTED LANES FIGURE © $ - NUMBER OF THRU LANES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE 5.7 1INCH = 422OFT. the majority of the time flow would be stable. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Based on the traffic volumes entering and exiting the site, it was determined that two signalized access points should probably be constructed. It was also assumed that one of these entrances would be located on Fairview Avenue and the other on Eagle Road at its intersection with the future Pine Road extension. These entrances would provide a means for shoppers to safely turn left across through traffic on both major arterials. Three additional unsignalized entrances would provide for right turns into and out of the site. These would be stop-sign controlled with their capacity dictated by the gaps in through traffic on the main street. In addition to the two signalized entrances, the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road was selected for further analysis due to its proximity to the site. Procedures described in Circular 212: Interim Materials on Highway Capacity for intersection analysis were utilized to evaluate intersection level of service for the base year 1988 both with and without the site. The Circular 212 methodology is based on the sum of conflicting traffic — movements during the peak hour of operation. To transform the ADT volumes into hourly volumes, the daily volumes were multiplied by 10 percent, which is a typical value used for approximating peak hour traffic. In addition, a directional split of 60% outbound/40% inbound was assumed for this area. _. This split was determined from data provided by the Ada Planning Association and assumed to be representative of this area. -- The resulting peak hour traffic volumes for these intersections are shown in Figures 5.8 and 5.9. As mentioned previously, right turning traffic had the option of choosing which of the five entrances to use; — hence, their volumes were distributed among all entrances. However, all left turning traffic was routed to the signalized entrances. Based on these volumes, the entrances were designed to provide adequate access to the site while minimizing conflict with through traffic. Figures 5.10 and 5.11 '~ illustrate typical intersection geometries which accomplish these objectives. -- Information provided by the Idaho Transportation Department indicated that improvements to the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road would be included in the Eagle Road widening project of 1986. The tentative .- geometry at this intersection is shown in Figure 5.12. The level of service at the entrances and the intersection of Fairview" and Eagle is shown in Table 5.3. V-14 m 60/40 SPLIT w FAIRVIEW DHV = .10 ADT 103 * 1247 138 925 ---� 131� CY 0 0 to A) EXISTING TRAFFIC N Lu FAIRVIEW �— 126 0 —� ;� 0 120--�----► 54 � � o B) SITE TRAFFIC Lu w FAIRVIEW • � 142 ♦-1373 138 1051�---► 185 ----� O N � to C) COMBINED TRAFFIC FIGURE 13 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC FAIRVIEW AVE. AND EAGLE RD. 5.8 — � m - WEST ENTRANCE t— 73 W J L Q W — � c 0° co FAIRVIEW �— 1488 s5o 1172----� 54 ,- W U Z Q m o � m m Z w Q Z FIGURE © PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC SITE ENTRANCES � 5.9 Y _ 1 �l OI W cr- LL NORTH ENTRANCE ti 0 cn NOT TO SCALE E4 FIGURE TYPICAL GEOMETRY NORTH ENTRANCE 5. 10 T 1 1 EAGLE ROAD \ �s. l oo' ' c a O m w _ z FL �j 10 NOT TO SCALE FIGURE ® TYPICAL GEOMETRY PINE RD. ENTRANCE � 5. 11 W II .J L!J FAIRVIEW AVENUE _ FIGURE MOO TENTATIVE GEOMETRY FAIRVIEW AVE. AND EAGLE RD. 5. 12 . 12 TABLE 5.3 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE Location Existing Proposed — -Fairview Avenue & Eagle Road C- D-/C- -Eagle Road & Pine Road Entrance N/A B -Fairview Avenue & North Entrance N/A E/D+ — The two levels of service ratings under the "Proposed" heading represent the operating conditions before and after the suggested widening of Fairview Avenue from four to six through lanes, respectively. — If congested conditions were found to exist at the north entrance, as suggested in Table 5.3, it may be necessary to add an additional left turning lane off of Fairview. Another option, which would also provide for — future increases in site traffic, would be signalization of an additional entrance on Fairview. This would be done instead of the additonal Teft turn lane previously mentioned. In either case, actual traffic numbers should be — used for absolute justification. — SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS System improvements are categorized by one of the following three — types: 1. Planned Improvements - these are projects listed in the Ada Planning Association 's Transporation Improvement Program, 1985-1990. 2. Assumed Improvements - these would be improvements necessary to maintain an adequate level of service for the area's projected -- population growth and would be independent of any commercial development on the project site. Improvements of this nature are shown in Figure 5.3. 3. Site-Related Improvements - this would encompass any improvements needed over and above those previously mentioned. These improvements would attempt to mitigate the impacts of site traffic on the — surrounding street system. This study is not intended to imply any direct responsibility for -- improvements by either the developer, the Ada County Highway Department (ACHD) , or the Idaho Transportation Department ( ITO) . Instead, its sole V-20 purpose is to forecast future traffic needs and identify potential problem areas. The final responsibility for implementing any recommended improvements, above and beyond those planned by Ada County, will have to be negotiated between the developer, the ACHO and the ITO. This section summarizes the traffic service evaluation and improvement requirements for the study area. -Fairview Avenue from Locust Grove to Meridian Road The level of service, based on 1988 projected traffic volumes, is approximately LOS C. The addition of site traffic will put this link at LOS E. Widening to six lanes, consistant with the rest of Fairview Avenue, will restore an adequate service level . -Ea le Avenue from Franklin to I-84 T This street is scheduled for widening (as a planned improvement) to four through lanes in 1986; however, site traffic will still push traffic operations into LOS E at this location. Widening this portion of Eagle Road two additional through lanes is recommended. -interstate 84, from ,Eagle Road to the I-184 Wye Traffic volumes for this portion of the interstate should increase due to a shift in travel demand via the new interchange at Eagle Road. In addition, site generated traffic will increase volumes significantly; however, the interstate should be capable of meeting this demand at a LOS of C. No improvements recommended. -Franklin Road If four lanes are provided to serve the projected residential traffic, any additional increase, as a result of the shopping center, should not significantly decrease the level or service here. This would be an assumed improvement; therefore, no additional site-related improvements are necessary. — -Fairview Avenue, from Meridian Road to Cole Road imilar to Franklin Road, the traffic projections made by the Ada Planning Association indicate a need for six lanes by 1988. If six lanes are available, the level of service along this arterial would decrease from 8 to D with the additon of the shopping center. This may still" be an acceptable service level . This would be an assumed improvement; therefore, no additional site improvements are necessary. -Five Mile Road and Maple Grove Road, North of Fairview Estimated site traffic on these streets has lowered the LOS from 0 to E, thus using all of the remaining capacity. Widening may be indicated by this anlysis; however, not recommended until justified by V-21 actual vehicular counts. -Interchan a at I-84 and Eagle Road his interchange was not directly analyzed for level of service because of a lack of information specific to its design and orientation. However, interchanges between roadways of this type typically serve traffic volumes of this magnitude. Of course, both off-ramps would require coordinated signalization to minimize conflict between movements. The construction of this interchange is a planned improvement and is scheduled for 1986. -Intersection_of Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road Assuming this intersection is designed as shown in Figure 5.12, it _ should operate with some congestion with the extra site traffic. However, the widening of Fairview Avenue to six through lanes would improve operations. This widening is an assumed improvement. -Entrance on Eagle Road This entrance is assumed to be located at Pine Road. A typical design which would adequately serve site traffic is shown in Figure 5.11. In addition to site traffic, a signal at this location could serve traffic along Pine Road when it is constructed. This would be a site related improvement. -Entrance on Fairview Avenue The operation of this intersection was found to be very near unstable flow conditions ( i .e. LOS E) . However, the additional capacity gained from the widening of Fairview would restore operation to a more reasonable level. In recognition of the near-capacity conditions, it is recommended that this entrance be located no closer than 1200 feet to Eagle Road. This would be a site-related improvement. _ SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A number of recommendations related to the efficiency of traffic operations were identified in this report. They are summarized in this section. _ -The existing street system will need to be improved to adequately serve the projected traffic volume increase in this area in the near future. •This increase is directly a result of an increase in population and a travel demand shift created by the new interchange at Eagle Road. -The interstate system, although decreasing in level of service, should be able to adequately serve the additonal site traffic in 1988. V-22 -To achieve stable flow along Eagle Road, between I-84 and Franklin Road it will be necessary to widen this portion from four to six through lanes. -To maintain an adequate level of service on Fairview Avenue six through lanes will be necessary by 1988. The additional through lanes would be necessary primarily because of population growth in this area. -Two signalized entrances will be necessary to provide adequate access to the shopping center. One entrance should be located on each major street adjacent to the site. To minimize conflicts, these entrances — should be located no closer than 1200 feet to the next intersection. -Three unsignalized entrances should be included to provide alternative points of access and to relieve demands on the signalized entrances. All entrances would be site-related improvements. -The intersection of Fairview and Eagle will need to be developed as shown in Figure 5.12 as a minimum. A design of this type is included in the 1985 improvement plans for Eagle Road. V-23 VI COMMUNITY IMPACTS A. AIR QUALITY Background Since the early 1970's people have been becoming more aware of and concerned with the condition of the environment where they live. As scientific research has advanced the ability to assess the impacts of such things as polluted air, laws have been passed in an effort to better protect natural resources and to assure improved environmental quality. A major step toward controlling air pollution occurred when the Federal Clean Air Act was passed in 1970. Through that law, and its amendments passed in 1977, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established national clean air standards, with which every community in the country must comply. Monitoring of the air quality has been going on in Ada County since 1974. (2, p. 8) The pollutants which are of concern are carbon monoxide (CO) , hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulates and photochemical oxidants. (5, pp. 12-13) The latter result from the sun interacting with chemicals in the air and breaking them into other substances, such as sunlight acting on oxygen to create ozone. Northern Ada County exceeds the federal air quality standards and has been designated a "non-attainment" area for carbon monoxide. It is an "attainment" area for suspended particulates and sulfur dioxide and an "unclassified" area (data are nonexistent or insufficient to determine attainment or non attainment status) for hydrocarbons, ozone and nitrogen dioxide. (5, p. 11 ) (Ada County is considered to be an attainment area for particulates even though measurements indicate concentrations which exceed the air quality standards. This is due to a provision that allows an area to be _ considered in attainment if the particulate matter is due to high background levels of fugitive dust which are carried into an area from surrounding agricultural activities. This is common throughout the western United States. ) The Problem In accordance with the requirement of the Clean Air Act, northern Ada County must meet federal standards for carbon monoxide by 1987. (2, p. 4) Various control strategies have been developed to attain and maintain accept- able air quality levels in each area, such as the recently instituted auto emissions inspections. Monitoring air quality has been carried out primarily in the downtown area of Boise where the greatest concentration of auto traffic can be expected. Some additional temporary monitoring has been done in the West Bench area as far as Maple Grove Road. Little monitoring has been done in the Meridian area since some samples were taken there in late 1977. (2 p. 11 ) - VI-1 According to the results of air quality modeling (not measurements) , the Meridian area is projected to have lower concentrations of CO in the future. Daily total levels of 8.5 parts per million in 1980 are projected to be reduced to 4.5 ppm in 1987 and 4.6 ppm by 2000. (5, p. 25) This projection is .� based on the population allocations in the 1975 Metroplan, however. Indications at this time are that the people are choosing to locate on the West Bench and toward Meridian in greater numbers than the Metroplan calls _ for. This means that traffic concentrations are already greater closer to Meridian. No recent air quality monitoring has been done to determine the impacts of this shift on air quality in Meridian. `- All indications are that the CO problems are related to transportation and are enhanced by meteorological conditions. Monitoring has shown that high CO levels are concentrated along major traffic corridors. When temperature inversions occur, most commonly during midwinter months, air containing the CO is transported by light winds throughout the valley. (15, pp. 123-124) This means that the entire area shares vulnerability to high levels of CO which originates in highly traveled roadway corridors. Because the area near Meridian is a slightly higher elevation than Boise, there may be some air drainage to the east. It is also possible that with fewer barriers to prevailing winds, more mixing and thermal convection could be present near Meridian. This theory has not been tested scientifically, however. It is known that the problem of air quality deterioration is valley-wide. ^� Solving the Problem The total amount of emissions are dependent on the total number of automobiles being driven. As more people move into the area, emissions will ._ be increasing, but with continued improvements in technology, there should be reduced levels of CO in those emissions. Thus, even with anticipated population growth, it is expected that the federal standards will be met eventually. Developing a regional shopping site at Fairview and Eagle could shift the concentrations of CO within the valley slightly to the west, but this is very -� likely to happen anyway, as the West Bench continues to grow and Meridian adds suburban housing to the east. The interchange at Eagle Road at I-84, which will be begun in 1986, will also enhance this shift. Should another shopping r. center site in Meridian also develop, the same predictions could be made concerning the impacts on air quality in northwestern Ada County. The plan to attain the designated levels of air quality improvement will continue to depend on control of auto emissions and efforts to reduce total auto trips. The development of a shopping center could well make it possible to more efficiently serve the Meridian area with transit alternatives (bus, carpools, etc. ) and thus further reduce the number of auto trips made. There are two main factors which affect air quality locally. One is the trend growth in population toward the west and away from the southeast (as the VI-2 Metroplan is written) ; and the other is the meteorological condition which — causes the ambiant air quality to be shared by all areas in northern Ada County. It is not likely that a change in the Meridian plan to allow an additional regional shopping center site at Fairview and Eagle would nega- tively impact the plan for air quality attainment in northern Ada County. B. IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AREAS Meridian has several residential areas in proximity to Old Town and extending to the east, north and south of Fairview in the North Curve neigh- borhood. There is a mix of older homes close to the downtown, while the suburban residences have been built within the past ten years or are currently under construction. In general the quality of the housing stock is quite high, with the older homes being well-maintained. The residents are proud of — their neighborhoods and of living in Meridian. The goals for the development of Meridian, as listed in the comprehensive plan, include a desire to assure development in an orderly fashion which distributes housing within the Urban Service Planning Area. That is the nature of the residential development which is happening in the North Curve neighborhood and which exists on the periphery of Old Town. These areas should be enhanced as residential areas by commercial development at Fairview and Eagle. The primary impacts which could result from development of a shopping center would support the continued residential uses in the North Curve area. An increase in housing demand has been occurring in Meridian already and locating a regional shopping center at Fairview and Eagle would probably increase the number of people choosing to live in Meridian. There would likely be a greater demand for multi-family housing in the vicinity of the regional shopping center. This enhances the plan goals and policies set forth in the Meridian plan which recognize a need for additional types of residential choices for Meridian citizens. At the current time, there are probably a sufficient number of lots available to accommodate additional demand. (3, p. 33) There would be less impact on other residential neighborhoods in Meridian, such as Cherry Lane, Warrior or Linder Acres. Some growth would continue near established resi- dential areas, however, as long as land is available. Certainly there would be a continued demand for re-sale homes as they returned to the market. Traffic impacts on existing and proposed residential areas would be slightly less with a regional shopping site at Fairview and Eagle, particu- larly when the interchange is completed at Eagle Road and I-84. That will reduce traffic through downtown, though the Old Town area will continue to have some traffic; it should be far less than if the only interchange were at Meridian Road. This will allow the preservation of the mixed use/residential quality of this neighborhood. VI-3 C. IMPACT ON ADJACENT USES AND LAND USE CHANGES Land use changes are taking form in Meridian right now. According to the plan, and emphasized by decisions made by city officials, houses are being -- built and industrial sites are being developed. The effect of a regional shopping center on the nearby residential uses has been mentioned. Other adjacent land uses at Fairview and Eagle are the light industrial/warehousing being developed across Eagle Road. A major commercial development would be quite compatible with the light industrial uses which exist just to the south of this site and now are developing to the west. East and north of the site rural activity continues to be the primary land use. A combination of hay and row crops, dairying and rural residential uses characterize the area. These uses are compatible with the stated inten- tion in the Meridian plan of preserving an agricultural buffer between devel- opment in Meridian and Boise. These uses can be preserved through zoning and by offering positive incentives to maintaining the land in its current use. — If it is the intention of the city to direct growth in such a manner that each area develops as set out in the plan, then that can happen through the fair application of administrative policy as growth continues. There will be pressures to develop the areas adjacent to the Eagle Road interchange. By designating the southeast corner of Fairview and Eagle as a — commercial zone (along with the existing industrial zoning in the area) , some of the demand for land use changes right at this interchange will be diverted. The combination of zones should enhance the interchange enterprise areas which the plan encourages. D. COMMUNITY PATTERNS The goals in the Meridian comprehensive plan indicate a desire to develop a balanced community in terms of land uses, to reach a level of economic self-sufficiency and to have a strong community identity. Designating the site at Fairview and Eagle as a location for a regional shopping center would argueably help create the desired balance of land uses. It supports and complements the growth of the eastern industrial area, which is essential for economic self-sufficiency in Meridian. The site is separated from other commercial uses. There is residential, light industrial and agricultural use between the site and the nearest commer- cial uses, which are approximately one mile away. By enforcing zoning along Fairview, further strip commercial development can be restricted or prevented, leaving the existing buffers of other uses in place. This follows one of the major plan policies which identifies strip commercial and strip industrial as undesirable uses. VI-4 By designating this site as a regional shopping area, the city will have nodes of commercial development at Cherry Plaza, downtown and at this site. The typical commercial activities which exist at Cherry Plaza and downtown are not regional in nature and so would not be expected to change dramatically. The commercial uses at the regional site would be somewhat different--such as large department stores--and draw on a larger public than the grocery stores, small restaurants, gas stations, etc. which make up much of Meridian's current commercial mix. This would enhance the neighborhood/community character of the existing commercial uses and provide a more complete mix of uses for the city in the long run. There is a positive benefit to the resulting ._ cost-revenue balance of mixed land use development also. Designation of a second site for development of a regional shopping center gives Meridian more opportunities to work toward the goal of increased economic self-sufficiency. The jobs and support services which would accrue to such a development would bring Meridian closer to that goal. In this case the needed utilities, water and sewer have been brought to the site at developer expense, without the expenditure of public funds. Other land uses and proposed mixed use areas indicated in the plan will -- not be negatively impacted by the designation of an additional regional shopping center site at Fairview and Eagle. Meridian has already committed the appropriate areas in the North Curve to residential and has annexed much of the land along Fairview. This gives the city the opportunity to direct the nature and character of the adjacent land uses as they are developed. E. COMPARISONS WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES There is always curiosity to know just what will happen as a result of major land use decisions. It is always reassuring to consider what has happened in other situations when a similar decision has been made. That is one thing which takes some of the "crystal gazing" out of predicting impacts. There are two somewhat similar examples from Idaho experience i4hich can be — cited. One is the development of Karcher Mall between Nampa and Caldwell and another is the development of the Pine Ridge Mall in Chubbuck, near Pocatello. Karcher Mall is used because it is familiar to almost everyone who resides in Ada County, though it may not provide a thoroughly valid compar- ison. When Karcher Mall was first developed almost twenty years ago, it was reputed to be the largest suburban shopping mall in the Northwest. It certainly was the largest in Idaho at the time. The mall was built out in the country between Caldwell and Nampa along the main thoroughfare connecting the two cities. Most of the land along the Nampa-Caldwell Boulevard was then zoned for commercial use, which naturally resulted in the strip commercial development existing today. (The zoning in Meridian is already different as are the plan policies. ) VI-5 _ When the mall went in, it attracted much of the business from the down- towns of both small communities. There simply was not enough population or economic demand to support, for instance, a J.C. Penney's, in both the mall location and in downtown Tampa. Today with more population base and some renovation, the downtown areas of both Nampa and Caldwell are much more prosperous. Those same impacts cannot be expected in Meridian. The restaurant, banking, medical services, groceries, gas stations and the feed mall/farm supply stores are not sufficiently regional in nature to be likely to relo- cate. It is likely that a few businesses may opt to move toward the shopping center location, but others would be just as likely to come into Old Town. The impacts of the mall are likely to be felt in Boise if, for instance, the Bon or Sears moves out of downtown to relocate at the new regional mall site. For Meridian, however, the impacts would seem to come on the benefit side. In Chubbuck, the new Pine Ridge Mall was completed in about 1981 and it is currently the largest mall in Idaho. It has three anchor stores including ,�. ZCMI and the Bon, and has about 750,000 square feet. Discussions with the public works director in Chubbuck and planners in Pocatello indicate almost no negative impacts on existing commercial development have occurred in either community. Most of the existing commercial activity is very similar in nature to that in Meridian at present and very few businesses have left due to the mall. There has been increased traffic and the mall developer responded by installing a traffic light at the main entrance to the mall. Ancillary commercial development has come in to take advantage of the increased commerce in the area. The Chubbuck Police Department has had additional calls for such things as bad checks and theft. This can be better handled--in the case of Merid- ian--by the city building more stringent security requirements into agreements with the developer. officials of both communities initially expected greater economic impacts but the area has apparently sustained its old character and been able to support the new mall. The only negative impacts observed have been on the older Pocatello Mall, which has experienced a decline in the number of shop- pers. There is no parallel situation in Meridian to this example. Apparently the potentially negative impacts of such a land use change decision can be countered by good consistent planning on the part of the community which opts for increased commercial development at the regional scale. VI-6 F. GENERAL ECONOMIC IMPACT ON MERIDIAN Jobs--Expanded Income Opportunities for People Development of a major project brings benefits to the community in terms of added jobs and increased spending power. In the case of developing a regional shopping center, job opportunities will be available during the construction phase and for permanent employers at the various stores when the - center is completed. It is anticipated that despite some shifting of workers, there will be a net gain in total jobs due to the different nature of retailing on a regional scale. Many of these jobs could go to Meridian resi- dents simply because they live closer to the site. A single job generates more economic contribution to the community than the value of its wages. That wage earner not only spends his earnings for food, shelter and consumer goods, but he also requires services. As his wages are spent for those foods and services, additional jobs are created to provide the support for that wage earner. This "multiplier effect" ranges between 0.5 in small isolated towns to as high as 1 .85 secondary jobs for each original employee. The generally accepted multiplier level for commercial development is between 1 .5 and 1 .7 per original job. (8, p. 22) Thus for every $1 ,000 in wages earned, between $1 ,500 and $1 ,700 additional money would cycle through the local economy. Expanded Income Sources--City Benefits -. Additional revenue could return to the city in terms of taxes on prop- erty, though with the tax limitation ceiling this would be within the one per cent level. There would be increased fundings available for schools due to -r more local residential development. The return from sales tax to the community would be greater. Other sources of additional money available to help the city would come from sewer and water hook-up fees, new construction permit fees, etc. Some roadway improvements could be expected, particularly as traffic demands and use warranted widening or other improvements. This could improve general aspects of circulation and traffic handling. The Eagle Road inter- change will necessitate some widening of Eagle toward Fairview which should improve that area. One of the primary benefits of developing a regional shopping center in Meridian is that it brings the city closer to its goal of economic self- sufficiency. It will give a boost to the entire economy, allowing the city to focus more on Meridian as a viable whole community, rather than as a "satellite" community. Some of the things that people now have to leave Meridian for--i.e. , jobs; shopping for certain consumer goods--would be in place in Meridian. New Expenses Incurred There will be some new expenses, particularly at the beginning of the project. The police and fire protection costs may be the largest. In terms .r VI-7 of fire protection, there is a perceived need for additional capital outlay. For police protection, it may be possible for the city to negotiate some arrangement with the developer of the regional center, though there will probably be some need for added staff. It should be noted, however, that Meridian obligated itself to providing certain services when the site was originally annexed to the city. The center will provide some funds to offset these costs on a year-for-year basis and other tax revenue should help. As far as added administrative costs are concerned, the city has wanted and needed an improved city hall facility for some time. This increase in commercial development may help make that possible, though it will be an expense for the city. The shopping center might not be a total solution to the basic funding problem, and the community could experience some costs above that which the center brings in annually. It would be expected, however, that those costs might be felt most strongly during the first years of the center's operation, and would "even-out" over time. The initial capital costs to Meridian would also be phased over future years, but would provide an improved base for public service now. Other expences which are traditionally borne by a community experiencing growth and development are the costs of extending sewer, water and utility lines. This has already been completed by the developer. The city will receive the usual hook-up fees which should help offset any change in oper- ating costs. Again, over time, the initial impact will smooth out. It should be relatively easy to adjust to any future incremental changes. Commercial vs. Industrial Development One very strong recommendation for granting the zoning change, is that commercial development could be begun in the near future. It would allow the increased income and other benefits to the community to come much sooner than if Meridian waits for the demand for industrial uses to develop. There is a demand for industrial land, and the city has a good supply of land zoned for industrial uses. It is quite likely that in today's market the rate of absorption--i.e. , demand for industrial park development--will be -- lower than for prime commercial development sites. From a market standpoint, the Eagle/Fairview location for a regional shopping center is closer to population centers and has a number of other factors in its favor for more immediate development. It is in an excellent position to develop soon. The industrial land will also be developed, but it will likely happen more slowly. It is possible that Meridian would have to offer more incentives to industrial developers in the next twenty-five years of competing with other industrial zoned land in the valley. VI-8 There is the perception of a latent demand for a shopping center--now--if all the development factors are in place. This site in Meridian appears to meet these very favorably. Downtown Meridian Old Town has been discussed from the standpoint of possible impacts. The basic character of Old Town is not likely to be altered. There are restaurants, convenience stores, banks, real estate offices, medical clinics and other businesses which are not regional in nature and which will probably remain. There are vacant stores in the main part of town now. Renovation proj- ects similar to the buildings on East First Street and Idaho in Old Town could be undertaken by investors and create some reuse areas in buildings which are currently vacant. There is a lot of character in Meridian's downtown buildings which will not be ignored in the future. The added population base could make the economics very positive for redevelopment even sooner. The other small shopping areas such as Cherry Plaza and the specialty services such as the farm supply stores certainly will not leave the area. The nature of their business complements but does not compete with a regional center. while some individual merchants may opt to move, the lower rental rates in, for instance the Cherry Plaza area, will certainly attract new businesses. Basically, it should be anticipated that the development of a regional shopping opportunity in Meridian will have a positive effect on the entire community. G. QUALITY OF LIFE Many factors enter each individual's opinion of what "quality of life" includes. Psychologist Abraham Maslow developed a human needs hierarchy which contributes to the sense of quality of life. Maslow and other theorists suggest that human beings develop through five needs levels, from the basic physiological (survival) , to safety/security, belongingness/love, to self- esteem and finally self-actualization. (6, p. 11 ) This theory can be extended from the individual to the community, where a set of individuals determine ways to satisfy those needs at a community level. In an attempt to quantify the quality of life factors which exist for Ada County, the Boise Future Foundation has just completed the analysis of a questionnaire sent to Ada County citizens which asked about such things as the environment, economy, government systems, social conditions and cultural resources. The researchers needed to identify both subjective indicators (sensitive to people's feelings of satisfaction, expectation, etc. ) and objective indicators (able to measure information regarding infrastructure, for instance) to be able to make an accurate sample of Ada County residents' opinions. (6, p. 13) 4 VI-9 The factors which were identified as the most important quality of life considerations were: individual well-being; community stability and order; employment and advancement opportunities. For the most part people were "highly satisfied" with the availability of water for drinking and especially for recreation; access to housing, health services, park facilities and recreational activities. The citizens tended to be least satisfied with air quality; the condition of roads; and general performance of government (and citizen participation in government) . (6, p. 20) The quality and availability of retail shopping ranked with availability of cultural and artistic activities in about the middle range of satisfaction, so there is room for improvement in these areas. This brief summary does not include all the factors the survey attempted to evaluate, nor did the survey attempt to examine some of the more difficult to define reasons that cause people to come to or stay in Ada County and particularly Meridian. There is a sense of freedom here that is missing in other parts of the country. When people are asked what they like about living in the area, the great variety of individual recreation activities is bound to be mentioned. Many Meridian residents cite the size of the town as an advantage, facilitating the easy-going life style which is not available in larger communities. Many like the availability of most consumer goods (although not in Meridian) in reasonable proximity to their jobs, homes, churches and other — community activities. They seem to almost take the low crime rates for granted. Some mention the sense of community which exists in Meridian and they point proudly to Meridian's healthy growth in recent years. The people here are very mobile and willing to drive or travel any distance, particularly to find suitable recreation opportunities or even to shop in a larger market area such as Salt Lake City, Portland, Seattle or Spokane. This would seem to imply that there is a demand for improved commercial/consumer opportunities, even though the majority of local residents are very satisfied with living in the community. r VI-10 BIBLIOGRAPHY OF INFORMATION SOURCES _ 1 . Ada Planning Association. 1978. Draft--Ada County, Idaho. Year 2000 Population and Employment Projections. 2. Ada Planning Association. 1979. Transportation Control Plan for the Carbon Monoxide Non-attainment Area of Ada County, Idaho. 3. Ada Planning Association. 1984. Demographic Report, Ada County, Idaho. 4. Bartholomew, Harland. 1955. Land Uses in American Cities. 5. Boise Future Foundation. 1982. Greater Boise's Carrying Capacity: The Air Quality Resources. 6. Boise Future Foundation. 1984. Managing Carrying Capacity and the Quality of Life. . _ _�. 7. Clark Coleman & Rupeiks, Inc. 1970. Nampa, Idaho Central Business -- District Plan. S. Conklin and Rossant; Kammer Siler George Associates. 1973. Urbanization Projections--Powder River Basin, Eastern, Wyoming. 9. De Chiara, Joseph and Koppelman, Lee. 1969. Planning Design Criteria. -' 10. Idaho Division of Financial Management. 1980. Idaho Economic Forecast. 11 . Marsden & Associates and Ada Data. 1982. An Analysis and Evaluation of -� Meridian Comprehensive Plan Modifications Related to Probable Commercial Developments. 12. Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 1978. Amended 1984. 13. North American Weather Consultants. 1980. A Tethersonde Field Study Examining Low Level Stability in the Boise Valley. 14. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1981 . Final Environmental Impact Statement, Wastewater Management for Boise, Eagle and Ada County, -` Idaho. 15. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1981 . Draft Environmental Impact Statement Appendices, Wastewater Management for Boise, Eagle and Ada County, Idaho. 16. Urban Land Institute. 1968. Community Builders ' Handbook. 17. Urban Land Institute. 1973. Technical Bulletin 69. Shopping Center Zoning. Washington D.C. 18. Urban Land Institute. 1976. Technical Bulletin 71 . Mixed Use Develop- ments: New Ways of Land Use. Washington D.C. Personal Conversations with: Steve Baxter, Planning Director; Pocatello, Idaho r dorm Holm, Planning Director; Nampa, Idaho Sylvia Robinson, Planning Director; Caldwell, Idaho Steve Scott, National Weather Service; Boise, Idaho Steve Smart, Public Works Director; Chubbuck, Idaho VII ENGINEERING The following information is a statement of the engineering aspects of Treasure Valley Business Center which will affect the proposed development of a Regional Shopping Center: STORM AND IRRIGATION DRAINAGE Upland has already prepared and has received approval of a drainage study for the entire 320 acres of Treasure Valley Business Center development including the area proposed for the Regional Shopping Center. The study includes: 1. Conveyance and routing of offsite storm water runoff flows 2. Conveyance and routing of onsite storm water runoff flows 3. Storm water detention and purification 4. Irrigation routing and distribution The present Phase I construction west of Eagle Road has a built-in allowance for storm drainage that would result from the development of a Regional Shopping Center. UTILITIES As a result of the present Phase I development, all of the necessary utilities will be brought virtually to the front door of the proposed Regional Shopping Center site: Water - Upland is presently connecting into the City of Meridian water system by installing approximately 1.3 miles of offsite water mains in Fairview Avenue and Pine Street. We are installing a 12" pipe network within our park to insure adequate distribution. Wells will be added as required to sustain the flow necessary for fire protection. Sanitary Sewer - Approximately a mile of 15' offsite outfall sewer is presently being constructed in Pine Street to our Treasure Valley Business Center site. This outfall contains enough reserve capacity to serve the proposed Regional Shopping Center. Power, Gas, and Telephone - These utilities will also be available at the site because of our Phase I construction. Three phase power is being brought to the site. Gas will be tapped from a 4" supply line _ in Fairview Avenue, and the telephone will be on the Meridian exchange which will allow calls to either Nampa or Boise without a long-distance charge. VII-1 SOILS The Caldwell and Nampa sediments as Found on the site generally consist of clay, silt, sand and gravel and contain variable amounts of caliche cement. The coarser material consists of crystalline rock including rhyolite, quartz monzonite, diorite and arkose with some scoria and basalt pebbles. These sand and gravel deposits encountered over the site are conducive to development and -- will support moderate to high bearing pressures. VIi-2 w VIIL DESIGN The site plan on the following page illustrates the preliminary design concept for the proposed mail on the subject property at full build-out. The key issues of concern to the City of Meridian are discussed below: Ingress and Egress: Ingress and egress to and from the site should be excellent. Persons entering the site from Eagle Road will have two ingress points, while those entering from Fairview Avenue will have three ingress points. It is assumed that two signalized access points would be constructed, one on Eagle Road and one on Fairview Avenue, allowing traffic to turn left across through traffic on both major arterials. Orr-Site Circulation: As illustrated, the development will have a ring road allowing easy on-site circulation. Peripheral land users (free-standing establishments fronting Fairview Avenue and Eagle Road) will benefit from this road as well. Pedestrian Access: Visits on foot to the malt by trade area residents are projected to be very low because of the limited population base within one mile of the site. Population within i mile of the site is projected to be nil. V III-1 .. ... .. r r Y r ■ r E PROPOSED MALL SITE PLAN Meridian, Idaho ---- -- - - FAIIIVIEw AVENUE �.�.., .:. - miI OTrT..TO..MO. •FTp00 _ _ e."svO Iq_ •b,00. TOO __ -- WT./TOwI MOB 1w—M. xrr.lion wo, nseos �eR _ YlLZ j a � � � /r ��