Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-19 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, August 19, 2025 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Doug Taylor Councilman John Overton Councilwoman Anne Little Roberts Councilman Brian Whitlock Councilwoman Liz Strader Councilman Luke Cavener Mayor Robert E. Simison PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2025 Amended Budget Amended Budget Notice: https://bit.ly/PH-FY2025AmendedBudget Public Hearing Closed 2. Public Hearing for City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2026 Proposed Budget Proposed Budget Book: https://bit.ly/FY2026ProposedBudgetBook Proposed Budget Notice: https://bit.ly/FY2026ProposedBudgetNotice Public Hearing Closed 3. Public Hearing for Gramercy Townhomes (H-2025-0019) by Elton Development Company, located at 1873, 1925 and 2069 Wells Ave. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0019 A. Request: Rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zone to the TN-R zone. B. Request: Preliminary Plat for 82 buildable lots and 8 common lots. C. Request: Development Agreement Modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. Motion to approve made by Councilman Overton, Seconded by Councilwoman Little Roberts. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock, Councilwoman Strader Voting Nay: Councilman Cavener 4. Public Hearing for Rockwell Greens Subdivision (H-2025-0002) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, generally located at the Northwest corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Rd. Approved Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0002 A. Request: Annexation of 51.15 acres of land with a R-15 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 412 buildable lots and 27 common lots. C. Request: Alternative Compliance to standards for developments abutting a State Highway. Motion to approve made by Councilman Overton, Seconded by Councilman Taylor. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock, Councilman Cavener Voting Nay: Councilwoman Strader FUTURE MEETING TOPICS EXECUTIVE SESSION \[Action Item\] per Idaho Code 74-206(1)(f): To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. Motion to enter executive session made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilwoman Strader. Voting Yea: Councilman Taylor, Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock, Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Cavener Into session: 9:20 PM Out of session: 10:02 PM ADJOURNMENT 10:02 PM Meridian City Council August 19, 2025. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:02 p.m., Tuesday, August 19, 2025, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Luke Cavener, Liz Strader, John Overton, Doug Taylor, Anne Little Roberts and Brian Whitlock. Other Present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Nick Napoli, Jamie Leslie and Steve Taulbee. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE X Liz Strader X Brian Whitlock Anne Little Roberts X John Overton _X_ Doug Taylor _X_Luke Cavener X Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call this meeting to order. For the record it is August 19th, 2025, at 6:02 p.m. We will begin tonight's regular City Council meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: We had no one sign up for the community invocation. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Simison: So, we will move on to adoption of the agenda. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Going to amend our agenda this evening to add an additional provision to an Executive Session at the end of the meeting. So, I'm going to offer that we add 74- 206(1)(d) to our Executive Session agenda and with that, Mr. Mayor, I move we approve the agenda as amended. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 2 of 61 Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. Is there any discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is agreed to as amended. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under Public Forum? Johnson: Mr. Mayor. Yes. Jen Card. Simison: Good evening. Card: All right. I'm Jen Card and I'm back again to talk to you about Orchard Park Sigarra and, actually, I wanted to bring up something that somebody said last week about being with the development and things like that. It's not that residents are against the development. What we want is the intent of the approved development to happen and we also want the respect of the contractors and the builders back there when they damage our property and they cause harm to our quality of life. Those are the things that we are asking for. We want it built out. We know it's going to be built out and at this point we just want it done, which brings me back to -- I didn't bring any pictures this time, but I had my fence story and here is a little bit of what I went through with that. So, my fence was damaged. I called the developer, he said call Grandview Communities. Oh. And I wanted to say the developer stopped me last week on my way out and said you are not going to get those houses sold back there if you keep showing up at City Council, but here I am again. So, I called the developer, they said call Grandview. I called them they said I will take a look at it and never got back to me. I followed up several times. Nothing happened. So, I finally decided to call City of Meridian. Planners know who is back there. They issue permits; right? The city should know. They didn't know. They couldn't tell me while they were on the phone with me. They had to research and get back to me about a week later and I had some more questions that I came up with in the meantime and they said they would get back to me. Two weeks later they still hadn't gotten back to me, so I decided to stop by City Hall and nobody was available to talk to me. So, then, I was told to put it in an e-mail and copy so and so's boss. So, that's what I did. So, they gave me a name. I reached out to that person at Grandview Communities. They never returned my call and that's where I was. I'm like fine, you know, I will replace my own fence if it doesn't look like what they want to do. If they eventually choose to do that, then, that's on them. But it was the biggest runaround and the response from one person that I spoke to at the City of Meridian was, well, if you told them that happened of course they will take care of it and here we are. They haven't. They haven't even responded at this point and I know that they have been working with the city. So, it -- it's ridiculous and I think we need to take this as an opportunity to improve the process. I'm sure there are so many smart people Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 3 of 61 in this room that can determine, you know, maybe there is a liaison with the neighborhood that can funnel through, because there is no reason that the city should not be able to tell me who I need to call when I get a hold of them, so continued to next week. We will see you then. Simison: Thank you, Jen. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Know that we are prohibited from commenting about what is requested, but I am just going to say, Jen, I appreciate you coming here each week and I want you to know I hope you are feeling heard because you are being heard and I find this public comment information incredibly enlightening. So, thank you for being here this evening. Simison: Okay. Is that the only one, Mr. Clerk? Johnson: The only one that's present. There was somebody signed up online that is not here. ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2025 Amended Budget Simison: Okay. Then with that we will move on to our Action Items for this evening. First item up is a public hearing for City of Meridian fiscal year 2025 amended budget. I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Fields: Good evening, Mayor and Members of the Council. I'm going to pull up our presentation for tonight. Okay. So, welcome to our Fiscal Year '25 amended budget public hearing. Our agenda tonight is very simple. I'm going to go over our Fiscal Year '25 amended budget of 264 million in the three major reporting funds, the Governmental Fund, Capital Improvement Fund, Enterprise Fund and, then, we will pause and take any public comments and, then, seek Council's approval for our amended Fiscal Year '25 budget. To kick this off we are going to start by looking at the total city budget. Our final amended budget for fiscal year '25 again is 264 million. This is up 3.3 percent from our original budget that we announced this time last year. In the graph in front of you we have depicted our different categories and expenditures and the percentage changes in each of the categories I'm going to dive into a little bit more detail. We have a total of 22 budget amendments for our Fiscal Year '25. I'm going to go through all these changes in the upcoming slide, but just know that these amendments have been presented to you by each department throughout the last ten months. So, this is more of a formal process for us to notify our citizens and the state of our final Fiscal Year '25 budget. So, think of it as this is more of a year-end review for you. In our governmental fund we had a 10.43 percent increase, which is about 11 .5 million dollars. Again the Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 4 of 61 graph in front of you depicts the percentage changes in the respective categories. We had a total of 20 budget amendments in our Governmental Fund that makes up this 11.5 million dollars. 6.3 million is attributed to the various grants. 4.2 million is for the Fields District park property. 1.8 million is our fire truck replacement. These are the big ticket items that was presented to you. In addition we had a reduction in our carry forward adjustment of 2.5 million. Moving on to our next major reporting fund, which is our Capital Improvement Fund. There were no budget amendment -- amendments presented in this fund. However, we did see a carry forward adjustment -- a reduction of 114,000. Last is our Enterprise Fund. Our Enterprise Fund went down about two percent, which is about 2.9 million dollars. In our Enterprise Fund we saw one budget amendment, which was the 2.5 million dollars of wastewater aeration basin retrofit project. I listed out a couple of the governmental fund budget amendments in front of you that had an Enterprise Fund impact, which is our ARPA -- ARPA grant fund, the biosolid dryer project, which is 6.4 million and, then, our medical health benefit trust that had an Enterprise Fund personnel impact and, then, we also saw an 11.9 percent of carry forward reduction in Enterprise Fund. This is a short and sweet presentation. That concludes our Fiscal Year '25 amended budget. Take any questions from the public or you guys. Simison: Thank you, Jenny. Council, any questions for staff? Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Jenny, could you just for the benefit of the public hearing and for myself on the Enterprise Fund, the carry forward adjustment was a pretty significant number. Can you just kind of give me the one-on-one on explaining what the adjustment and why we needed to do that? Fields: Yeah. So, ten months ago when we announced our original budget amendment we had -- Fiscal Year '24 was not closed yet, so we still have three months of operational expenditures that we kind of guess we were going to need the budget for. So, at the end of Fiscal Year '24 we adjust what the actual remaining budget is for the last three -- or the last quarter. So, that's why you will see budget amendment carry forwards of reduction, because that actually reflects the actual budget that was remaining for the prior year. Simison: Thank you. Council, any additional questions for staff? Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Clerk, anyone signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, yes. It's Tanawah Downing, but I believe she's in Washington DC, so she's not online or in the room. Simison: She's not on? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 5 of 61 Johnson: No. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present who would like to provide comment on this item? Seeing no one coming forward or raising their hand, Council, do I have a motion? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Move we close the public hearing on City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2025 amended budget. Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. 2. Public Hearing for City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2026 Proposed Budget Simison: And with that we will move on to Item 2, public hearing for City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2026 proposed budget. Ortiz: Good evening, Mayor and Fellow Council Members. I will go over our agenda tonight for Fiscal Year '26 budget. The first item is our budget process overview and we will go in a high level of all that entails. Second item we will go -- do a high level overview also of our major governmental funds and the last item if -- we are requesting or seeking approval of the Fiscal Year '26 budget. Our -- our budget development process is about nine months long. We begin preparing the proposed budget -- budget in February and in March. Each department, alongside with their Council liaison and Mayor, conducts a thorough review of the budget and examine each line item to ensure alignment. At the end of May the proposed budget is submitted to Council and public for review. Budget workshop was held in June to gather feedback, refine the budget and address any concerns or questions. The workshop play a crucial role in shaping the final budget that gets us where we are at today. The annual budget is approved by Council upon closure of tonight's public hearing. It is important to recognize that this process overview doesn't capture the extensive behind-the-scenes work involved in developing our annual budget. There is a lot of internal discussions, detailed analysis and careful planning that occurs throughout these phases. I wanted to take a quick moment to extend my sincere thanks to the Mayor, Council Members, department directors and staff for their dedication through this nine months and all the hours invested in this process. That being said, we will move to talk about the total city budget is 264,484,996. The graph on the left is the expense categories. Personnel is about 34 percent of our total budget and remains our largest expense category. Carry forward Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 6 of 61 makes about 34 percent of the budget. These are projects that will not be finished during our current Fiscal Year '25 and are carried over into Fiscal Year '26. The distribution of the budget on our right side graph is between different departments and the biggest one is wastewater and it comprised at 36 percent of our budget. Now, I will go over through our governmental funds and our revenue is 101 ,267,935. This is comprised majority of taxes, which is 53 percent. The proposed budget is taking the three percent allowable property tax option, which we calculate on average to cost about 47 cents a month for 100,000 dollars of taxable value. As a reminder we are projected to decrease our levy rate year over year. In other words, if a house value did not change year over year then the property taxes paid would be lower. For our next Governmental Fund total expenditures is 131. Apologize. For our Governmental Fund our total expenditure is 131 ,621,333. Our biggest expense is personnel. It comprised 57 percent of our budget. The distribution of the budget on our right side graph, the majority is for public safety. Public safety compromises at 55 percent of our expenditures. Our next major fund is Capital Improvement Funds. We have a total expenditure of two million. This is comprised of a carry forward for Fire. The project includes fire station remodels and -- for the Enterprise Fund revenue we have 52,428,916. Most -- the majority of our revenue comes from utility sales revenue, which comprises 62 percent of the revenue source. For Fiscal Year '26 Enterprise Fund total expenditure is of 130,863,663. Unlike the Government Fund where personnel is the largest expense, Enterprise Fund largest expense is the capital projects. Between new capital funding and prior year capital projects that is carried forward this compromises 76 percent of Enterprise Funds budget and capital expenditure. On our right we see the breakdown between different departments and the biggest component is wastewater at 72 percent. Now, we stand for any questions or any comment from the public. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Mr. Clerk, anyone signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Yes. Jennifer Saxton. And I don't believe she's here. Simison: Not seeing anyone. Is there anybody in the audience who would like to come forward or online to provide testimony on this item? Good evening, Terry. Dennington: Yes. My name is Terry Dennington and I reside at 4581 West Big Creek Street in Meridian. Mayor and Council Members, I just wanted to address you and thank staff Jenny and Mr. Lavoie and Ricardo for all of the things that they provide, so that I can understand exactly how this budget works, what you guys are having to look at, all of the different divisions. It's very -- it's really interesting. I wish more people were here and actually taking a part of this and seeing exactly how the monies are being spent and the process that staff and all of you have to go through to try and come up with a decision on how you are going to spend people's money. So, I just wanted to thank you for that, for all of their help, the things that they provide and thank you guys for all the work that you do. I really appreciate that. Thank you so much. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 7 of 61 Simison: Thank you, Terry. Is there anybody else who would like to provide testimony on this item? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Not seeing anyone showing a willingness to provide any additional public testimony, move we close the public hearing for the City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2026 proposed budget. Strader: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Simison: So, next steps? Would you like to discuss those? Fields: Sorry. Stopped sharing. Okay. Next steps. We will be working with the Legal Department on our final ordinance that will be presented. Our target date right now is September 2nd Council meeting. So, you will see a formal ordinance in front of you. Simison: Mr. Nary, do we need to take a motion in order to get the ordinance with an actual number? Okay. So, it just said public notice amount, so I want to make sure. Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. Just a quick question. The public notice amount was a slightly higher than the final number that I believe I saw. So, you know, about a difference of a little bit over 10,000 dollars. Will the final ordinance be the 264,498,131 or will it be the 264,484,996 dollars? Fields: Our public -- what we show on the papers is the same amount as this. Simison: Is what? Fields: Is the same amount as the -- what's on the screen. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 8 of 61 Strader: Yeah. That would make sense to me that it would be -- if there is a discrepancy it would be the higher number. But I thought I saw a different number on a different slide. It could have been me. Possible. Maybe I'm off on that. Fields: Yep. There we go. Okay. Our apologies. The public notice is the correct amount. So, this is the correct amount that we will be publishing on our L-2. So, our apologies. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Got it. And do you need an -- do you need a motion to approve or is this going to come back via an ordinance? Sorry I'm being -- Fields: That's okay. Strader: Spell it out for me, please. Fields: It's going to come back as a formal ordinance for you guys to formally approve. Strader: Thank you. Simison: Councilman -- Mr. Nary. Nary: Members of the Council, does it -- taking a motion to approve this publishing number or is this the number you already published? I guess that's what I was -- Fields: It's the number we already published. Nary: Already published. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Simison: And that's why I thought. I thought that they needed to publish a number, so -- okay. Okay. Thank you very much. 3. Public Hearing for Gramercy Townhomes (H-2025-0019) by Elton Development Company, located at 1873, 1925 and 2069 Wells Ave. A. Request: Rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zone to the TN-R zone. B. Request: Preliminary Plat for 82 buildable lots and 8 common lots. C. Request: Development Agreement Modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 9 of 61 Simison: All right. With that we will move on to Item 3, which is a public hearing for H- 2025-0019. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Good evening, Nick. It's nice to see you. Napoli: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Just give me one second. I apologize. All right. So, next item on the agenda is the rezone, preliminary plat and development agreement modification for the Gramercy Townhomes. So, the applicant is requesting a rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zoning district to the TN-R zone, a preliminary plat for 82 buildable lots and eight common lots and a development agreement modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. The site is located at 1873, 1925 and 2069 Wells Avenue. As shown on the screen the existing zoning is C-G and the FLUM designation is mixed-use regional. In 2021 the subject properties were approved for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age restricted units on 5.24 acres of land. The top parcel up here was not a part of that application. However, the applicant has cited due to a change in demand for the project the project was not viable, which is why they are back asking for an amendment to that agreement. The subject properties fall within the mixed-use regional future land use designation. The intent of the mixed-use regional designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail and residential dwelling and public uses near major arterial intersections. The mixed-use regional designation should make up between ten and 30 percent of the total development area, with gross residential densities ranging from six to 40 units per acre and the mixed-use regional area located in the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Overland Road encompasses approximately 165.2 acres. Of that total roughly 25.1 percent of the mixed-use regional area in this quadrant is residential, which does align with the Comprehensive -- Comprehensive Plan's vision and density targets. This is the rezone map and this is the concept plan. The proposed development plan depicts 82 townhomes with -- within the traditional neighborhood zoning as the single use for the subject properties. The TN-R zoning requires two different types of housing and staff finds that the surrounding garden style apartments, single family detached and townhomes provide the mix of units desired in the area, which is why a single product is being proposed with this application. The proposed townhomes range in size from 1 ,650 square feet to 1 ,750 square feet with three and four bedroom units. The net density for the development exceeds the minimum net density of six units per dwelling per the TN-R standards and the net density is 19 units per acre. In addition to the townhomes, the development planned depicts a .6 acre commons open space with parkways, on-street parking and alleys. The applicant has provided an internal pathway that connects from the ten foot multi- use pathway on the southern boundary to help residents connect with Mountain View High School, as well as Gordon Harris Park to the south. The project exceeds open space requirements providing 18.8 percent against the 15 percent that's required in the UDC. Amenities include a large central open space and a dog waste station totaling 3.5 amenity points, well above the one that's required. Each townhome includes four parking spaces and there are 46 guest spaces that are also provided throughout the community in the form of parking on the open space and on-street parking. Access is proposed via three private drive aisle connections. One to the north connecting to an existing drive aisle and commercial property and two to the east that connect the south Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 10 of 61 of Wells Avenue. These drive aisles are currently not named and are considered commercial drive aisles. However, the applicant is proposing to add six private streets in the development that require a minimum of one connection to a public street. Staff has discussed this with the applicant, has determined the southern connection on the eastern boundary would be the best as it aligns with Blue Horizon on the east side of Wells Avenue and this will take coordination with neighboring property owners to name that existing drive aisle, as it is currently a commercial drive aisle and that would be this one -- this drive aisle right here. The applicant will be submitting a private street application with the final plat. They just need to work with those neighboring property owners, which they have indicated will not be an issue at this time. And the applicant has indicated that the build out timeline for the development depends on demand. However, they anticipate the -- the development -- the project developing in five phases with the first phase consisting of the large open space and the amenities and roads, as well as the homes that front on the open space. So, they are proposing these elevations within the development agreement. There may be some color variations that come with the design review process. However, this will be the standard elevation. It is 39 feet 11 inches, which is under the 40 feet that is the restriction in the TN-R zone and to note with that, the neighboring surrounding properties -- I can go back to the beginning and show you. So, this is -- these -- these are office buildings that surround here. They are all one story with -- some of them have parapets that appear to be two- story that exceed around 25 feet in height. The townhomes to the south are two-story townhomes that have a rough height around 25 to 28 feet. So, these will be a little bit taller in the area. However, they are within the UDC guidelines for the TN-R zone. So, the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval as presented in the staff report on this project. And we have not received any written testimony since the Commission hearing and I will stand for any questions you guys have. Simison: Okay. Thank you, Nick. Counsel, any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward. Good evening. Chittester: Hi. How are you? My name is Mike Chittester. 7174 South Angel Way here in Meridian. Happy to be here before you today representing Elton Development. We are a Meridian based company. Our office overlooks this site, so we live it every day and happy to be here to talk about this project. I will speak and then -- and go over -- do an overview of the project and, then, I'm going to ask Hethe Clark, who is our development attorney, to speak to a couple of -- of technical issues when I conclude. As we have discussed, this is a project where we would bring 82 townhomes to this area. I want to speak just briefly about -- briefly just about our company. We are a development company again based here in Meridian. We have done a number of multi- family projects, residential projects. We do some senior living projects as well. That gives you a little bit of background on us. As far -- I wanted to give you just a little bit of history on this site. We -- we have been -- the Elton Companies have been looking at the site for quite a while. First in 2014 and '15 this was actually a candidate site for the New South Meridian YMCA. St. Luke's and the Y, just as -- as they have done at the Tomlinson Center, they were looking at partnering and Elton Companies was interested at that time in locating senior housing adjacent to it to have elderly, you know, around Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 11 of 61 healthcare and exercise and so in 2014 and '15 this was exercised as a potential and that's where our company's focus began on the site. Between 2016 and '19 there was really no active development there. The Y and -- and St. Luke's moved on. No real active development. The parcels were still owned by St. Luke's, the Y, and, then, there was a charter school that owned one of the sites. In 2020 we began looking at -- our company began looking at an active adult senior housing community there. We -- we got very far into the project, but market forces changed the dynamic and -- and we decided that we needed to move on from -- from that project. And, then, in '23 and -- you know, really since that time, late 2022 we have been looking at a number of different projects here. We have looked at office, medical office, flex industrial, destination retail -- a lot of things and -- and what we have run into consistently is -- is what you will see here with the site, you know, that red line you see there is a principal arterial, that's Overland Road. Great access and connection through the city. The blue line is Wells Avenue and there is a light there and so there is still -- it's a -- it's a small collector, but it still can serve fairly well. But these sites are -- as you can see they are just landlocked and so with almost every use we have had it just -- we have run into the issue of visibility and access and, you know, it doesn't look too far away there, but the closest you are from Wells Avenue on the east side is 210 feet and the closest you are from Gala to the north is about 300 and so this has just been a tough thing to try and find a commercial use for and that's the big concern generally when you are taking a commercial use to a residential use is -- is you -- you lose that commercial property. I -- I share these -- these last few slides with you just to say we have worked really hard to look at commercial uses and a number of uses and -- and we have just -- it's been difficult to find that and so that's how we have arrived at -- at what we think can still be a great project that can complement Gramercy. This is the -- as you have seen before a colored rendering that gives you a little bit better idea of what's happening here. North is to your left here on -- on this image and south is to your right. To speak to some of the -- the things that we worked to as we went through design to -- to make this a good community, I think the soul of this property is we were able to find room for that -- you know, that 20 -- it's about 26,000 square foot open area. A lot of grass. A lot of place for people to move around and along that we have -- we know people like pets, so we put a number of pet amenities in the community as well. We worked hard to get on- street parking. As -- as was mentioned we meet code with our -- with our units and the garages, but we all know that for visitors and deliveries, et cetera, having on-street parking is -- is helpful. We -- we -- that red line you see through the property is the -- is what we -- wanted to have a central connection for all of the townhomes to make it to that central amenity and, then, also to connect to the ten foot regional pathway that goes throughout the city and I think a very -- thing you don't notice about this site is if you do get to the southwest you have got about a three minute walk to Gordon Harris Park, which is kind of a hidden gem in -- in -- in this area of -- of Meridian, so -- so, that speaks to what we have tried to do to make this a community that would be a nice place to live. This is a -- this is the -- the rendering of the homes. Again colors and some things we will -- we will work out through design review. These are -- are intended to be for sale product, as opposed to for rent. Again, three and four bedroom models. Three stories. The three story concept -- in this development we had to work within existing roadways, so it wasn't a blank slate and -- and because of that there -- it was difficult to Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 12 of 61 do a two-story townhome with -- with the area we had and so we were going with a three story model, which we -- we still feel can be very successful and if you want an idea of -- of what is going to come here, this is a project that our principals worked on in -- in Garden City called Parkway Station. This is the -- the -- sort of the basis of our design -- our starting point for what we are trying to do here, so this is very big if -- it depends on who you ask in our office if the doors will be those colors or not, but, otherwise, this is a -- a good representation of -- of the project and I will let -- I'm going to step aside for Hethe. Clark: You know I couldn't stay quiet, right, everybody? Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise representing the applicant and I just kind of wanted to add a little bit more, because I know over the years of being here, you know, we are always a little bit concerned about taking something out of C-G and so I just wanted to add a little bit more to that. So, this is a snapshot from the Comprehensive Plan. It's speaking to the mixed-use regional. This is my own little bit of private protest on the right. You know, that -- with mixed-use regional where we tend to just look at the areas that are bounded by the roadways. I wanted to put both sides on there, so you can kind of see that that mixed-use regional node has a great deal of commercial that's already been developed and, as Nick mentioned, that with this project it takes it to 25 percent, which is right -- you know, within what we are trying to get in terms of the residential use that's going to be on this site. So, this proposal to go with TN-R is based on the -- on discussions that we have had with staff. You can see that TN-R is actually already existing just south of the project. So, it actually provides for an additional buffer from the residential uses to continue up to the C-G. So, we think it's a good fit and it adds to that overall mix of types of -- of housing in the Gramercy area. The -- we are very confident that there is not going to be an issue with the continuation of the public roads there. I just add that the Gramercy development is subject to a development agreement that requires cross- access and cross-parking and the applicant has always had a very good relationship with the Gramercy developer. I represent the Gramercy developer, so I have worked on this for a long time. So, that is not something that's going to be an issue and so just wrapping up, I -- I did want to just emphasize that the applicant really did work very hard on this. I was able to go to a couple of the pre-annexation -- or, excuse me, pre- application meetings and one of the things that they did was to flip that central MEW lot, that was originally going to be on the south and at staff's suggestion they were able to flip it into the middle, make it all work very nicely and so I think this is a good -- a good change and we would ask for your approval and Mike and I are happy to answer any questions that you might have. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor. Keith or Mike, I don't know who wants to address this. If the office is close, then, you know what happens when the parents are lined up to pick up Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 13 of 61 the kids from Gem Prep, because I come out on to Blue Horizon and, then, down Wells and it's packed. Chittester: So, we met with -- it -- it absolutely is. We -- we see that every day and it creates quite a lineup that goes down to Blue Horizon. It goes up Wells a little bit, turns into the site. So, we -- we -- the main -- the main person who -- is who is concerned about that was the Goddard School, which is the -- the building to the south -- south most. And so we -- we met with him a number of times and talked about, you know, what is the traffic impact going to be and so we didn't really have to -- I mean this wasn't part of the application, but we actually -- we did a -- we had Keller and Associates -- I wanted to be able to tell the school this is actually what's going to happen and it's not me just saying, oh, everything's going to be fine. So, we had them do a -- a traffic -- sort of a limited traffic study that looked at the a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic and -- because he wanted to know what's going to happen at that exact intersection that you spoke of and so we -- we had them look at that and the peak hour traffic will be -- p.m. peak hour traffic would be 60 -- I think it's 67 -- 69 total cars and, then, those get distributed. There are actually four exits you can take from the site, to Gala, three of those private drives. And so it -- it turns out that if you -- if you see down here at the bottom where it says Goddard Drive in the p.m. peak hour, which is the most active, about 20 cars would -- would be arriving at that and so the Goddard school felt like, okay, that's one every two -- couple minutes, three minutes, that's going to be manageable. It will still -- I don't know what to do about Gem Prep. I -- I just don't, because it creates an issue. We were able to work with the school in Boise, regional -- who is -- who is north of the school also. Just help them feel like this is not overwhelming traffic and, to be honest with you, if this were a medical office the rate would be three or four times; right? Or -- or office. This is actually a fairly low use. Does that help? I can't -- I can't fix Gem Prep. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: It does. I appreciate the study. I don't know -- I don't know if Captain Leslie's got anything to add to this, if the police ever help. I don't know if once -- what is it Fierce Cheer gets built if there is a way to run the traffic through there. I mean I just thought maybe we could just all kind of brainstorm on what can be done about that since we are going to have construction traffic and other things added to it with this coming up. Clark: Sure. And, obviously, very mindful of that. The other thing I would just point out, too -- and it's not a one to one -- or 50 percent reduction, but I would just ask the Council to also keep in mind that there is a previous entitlement on it. It was for 164 active adult type units. So, it's not going to go down by half in terms of the traffic because of that, but it is -- already has an entitlement for roughly twice the number of units. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 14 of 61 Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: So, in -- I believe in 2021 the City Council approved an age restricted multi- family development here and I have been kind of comparing these. One of the struggles for me is Mountain View High School is clearly way over capacity. The schools here are very stressed. I understand that district wide there is not the same dynamic, but it still creates an acute issue in south Meridian. So, I would like you to speak to that. I have questions about the driveway width and understanding why those are deviating from our typical standards and what the justification is for that and, then, do have some other ones, but I will briefly mention -- unfortunately -- not your fault, but we have had other projects -- and you may have heard from one of those neighbors that testified during the public forum where we have had some major quality of life issues happening during construction unfortunately on some projects that are in my district and that has kind of led our City Council to have a lot of discussions about requesting from developers a dust mitigation plan of some sort. You are right next to a school. So, to me like this is a more acute situation here, because if you have a lot of dust happening it's going to affect the kids. So, I just want to give you a chance to chew on that, because that might be a new topic for you heading into Meridian, but, unfortunately, because of some very bad circumstances that we are having in my district now this is going to potentially start affecting other developers. So, I just wanted to throw that out there. But if you don't mind talking for now about the -- the school concerns and driveway with that would really help me. Thank you. Clark: Council Member Strader, so on the -- with regard to the schools, the -- I will just start by saying Pepperidge is the elementary school, Lewis and Clark is the middle school. Both have plenty of capacity. With regard to Mountain View High School, the -- the -- the -- the city's anticipated generation of students is -- I think it was 19 across all age group -- across elementary -- excuse me -- middle and high school. So, we are talking about a relatively minor impact over the course of the build out, which was probably five to seven years. Something like that. Yeah. And, then, that goes along with what we have discussed in a number of other hearings that we have had where overall the -- the enrollment at in West Ada has -- overall over the last couple years reduced and, then, as we look at the -- the difference between the number of first graders, as compared to the number of high school students, it's a significant reduction between first grade and high school. So, we anticipate that -- I don't know this, because West Ada is -- as you know is a little bit quiet in terms of what their specific plans are, but as we all know they -- they look at busing, they look at redistricting, they look at portables before they build and we anticipate that that's part of that dynamic. But, again, this is a very -- as these projects go we are talking about maybe ten high school students over the course of a five to seven year build out, so we think it's manageable. I will let Mike take the -- the driveway. Chittester: Yeah. When -- when we were working with staff one of the things you -- you may see, if there is an alley load, is it's a sea of concrete if -- if you don't have some Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 15 of 61 way to sort of break it up and so it was a staff suggestion to create some sort of physical barrier of a planter strip, a rock -- something along those lines to create some variation or -- or kind of denotes where one begins and one stops and breaks it up a little bit and so it's -- they are the same -- that -- that's the origin of that and, you know, we would be very concerned if we felt like that, you know, made it so you couldn't park a truck there, because there are going to be trucks there right from a sale -- being able to sell it. But we feel like it -- it will be a -- a feature that will -- will help break up those -- those long islands of concrete that you get on the alley load, so -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just from a practical perspective -- I don't know if you have a picture somewhere -- but how many -- how many vehicles can you fit in the driveway and, then, if there is a car garage in the garage? I --just because a lot of people use their garages now, unfortunately, for storage, it's human behavior, we can't stop it. I just want to make sure we are not going to have a huge parking issue, because -- and I will just say like I hate private streets. I have hated them for a long time and my feelings about them have not changed. So, help walk me through that, please. Chittester: Yeah. In terms of -- you are -- you are totally right. We know what happens in garages. That's -- that's the -- that's for sure something that happens. We have space -- you know, there are -- if you want to go to developments that are going to be very similar in Meridian you can go to Pine 43, you know, some others and -- and the garages we have been in them, we have measured them, they are -- they are the same. They are very typical for the townhome product. If you have got two F-350s it's going to be a little tight. It -- it really will. But I -- I feel like we are similar to other -- other products that seem to be functioning. There -- there is room for two cars, you know, in the garage and, again we -- we -- the -- one of the reasons we work to try and incorporate 40 something of the off-street parking was to help with some of that congestion that could well happen and so I -- I -- I think what we are doing is really what's seen in the valley. I don't think it's -- it's too different and it should fit, you know, three to four vehicles pretty comfortably. There will be people that will use their garage for something else and -- and if there is a -- you know, if someone's abusing that there will be -- it will be a neighborhood issue that will have to be handled through the HOA. Does that help? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I guess how -- how many vehicles can -- do you think you can fit in each garage and in each driveway? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 16 of 61 Chittester: Two in the garages for sure. No -- really you can fit four. The depth is about 20 -- 1 don't have my plans in front of me, but over 20 feet from the garage. The garage is -- you can fit two cars in there. You know, so I'm -- these are not so small that I -- I don't feel like my wife and I could get our cars in there, so -- it's not as spacious as a large home, you know, but there is room for two cars in the garage and -- and certainly in the driveway. Two in the driveway. Two in the -- in the garage. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Mike, can you -- I think you kind of touched at least on the -- on the impact of the schools, but the decision to move from an age restricted product to -- to something for everybody and -- and the -- the reason why I ask is, you know, I supported this when it came before us the first time, simply because of the age restricted element, due to the -- not only to the impact on our schools, but the impact on -- onto Overland and no matter how you cut it your residence, when they need to get where they need to go, are likely going to have to use Overland and so those are -- those are two big barriers for me to overcome and I'm just trying to understand kind of the rationale behind moving away from that. Chittester: Yeah. There is no one in the room who is more disappointed that that didn't happen than -- than us. We spent two years and a lot of capital in that project. The -- what happened is during that time the -- the amount of inflation that happened over a -- really almost a 12 month period. Cost went almost up 40 to 50 percent during the development and even between the time we permitted it -- you know, we started permitting and -- and went out to bid. So, it's both that and, then, I think Idaho has found more resistance to senior living that is apartments. There -- the Bri at The Village, which is not too far away, beautiful property, well done by Brighton, struggled for a long time and I think it's just now filling up. It began in 2020, which was a tough time to sell a senior housing property. So, we -- it just -- the market demand was not there for it. The costs went a lot higher than -- than anyone anticipated, including our contractor, so we -- we put a lot of heart and soul into that and I would love to see that project there. But, yeah, it just -- it just wasn't a feasible project. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, just -- Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Mike, I -- I -- I'm sorry to hear that part, too, and, you know, I think I am -- I am generally supportive of the rezone, but I'm not in support of it -- you know, removing the DA provision to keep this age restricted. So, I wanted to give you an opportunity to respond about kind of what your thoughts -- you said that a for rent product isn't sufficient. You mentioned in your description that this is a for sale product and certainly you guys are creative and can build a for sale age restricted product that would, you know, keep minimal impact on our schools and minimal impacts on our roads and just Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 17 of 61 help me understand kind of why -- as creative as you guys are -- that -- that type of process, that kind of product isn't going to work. Chittester: Yeah. The -- the biggest issue with -- with -- even a townhome product is -- is stairs, you know, and -- and so for an age restricted property to -- to have two stairs is a lot. Like I mentioned, one of the issues you have with a -- with a two story townhome is you need the length -- excuse me -- you need the length to be a little bit more so you can fit more on two levels. We didn't have that in -- in the north and south sections and so we -- we chose to go the three stories. Three story age restricted would -- would just be out of the question. Cavener: I agree with you. Chittester: Yeah. So, I mean if you are -- that -- that really is the -- as far as the age restriction goes that -- that's the biggest challenge. What you are going to at that point is patio homes, right, where everyone wants everything on one level. Cavener: I guess, Mr. Mayor, I guess that's what I would expect to see. Certainly I don't expect somebody, you know, that's more seasoned in age to want a -- a three story townhouse. Again, why I was surprised to see kind of three story townhouses. So, just trying to be upfront with you. I think this is for me going to be a very big hurdle to overcome simply because the age restriction. It's just going to be too much for our schools and too much for our roads. Clark: Council Member Cavener, if I could just respond to that. The -- again, with regard to the schools, the evidence in the record shows that there is a cap of capacity for both elementary and middle school. It also shows that there is minimal impact on -- on Mountain View. So, I just want to be clear on that. With regard to traffic, it's actually a reduction from what the original is. So, from -- from that -- I just want to be clear on that. The -- there is a couple of other elements I think that go to -- I think what some of the -- the suggestions that you are making. One is that, again, this is mixed-use regional and TN-R -- we are talking six to 40 in terms of -- of density. So, if we went to a patio home -- patio home type project we would be -- we wouldn't be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan any longer and, then, I think just the other issue of requiring an age restriction raises a number of other potential legal questions when it comes to -- Cavener: Mr. Mayor. I'm going to interrupt you, though. You guys asked for that. Clark: No. I understand. Cavener: Oh. So, we agreed to what you are asking and now you are asking to change things. So, I just -- I'm going to stop you right there with any implications. Okay? That's -- that's not appropriate. You guys asked for this and we granted it and now you are asking for a change; correct? Clark: We are asking for a change as I -- Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 18 of 61 Cavener: Thank you. Clark: Thanks. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Just curious a little bit more about the -- the for sale product. In looking at the schematics here are we talking for sale for the -- like the -- the six -- six-plex unit -- like you are selling the entire unit? Are you talking about individual townhomes, even though they are going to be -- it looks like established in separate building types? Chittester: Yeah. Individual, though. It will be platted as individual for sale to -- to individuals and that's the way we are looking at it, you know, in terms of working with realtors, et cetera, to get the right market value, et cetera. It happens -- sometimes it will happen that someone may come and say I want to buy this six-plex. That's not out of the question. But that's -- it's not the intent and the way it will be platted. Taylor: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up. Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Just to kind of clarify. So, will all of the buildings be six-plexes or is there going to be four-plex, six-plex, three -- like -- provide me a sense of that. Chittester: Yeah. Five, six, seven and eight there -- three will be. Yeah. The north where it's skinnier I think they are five. In the center there is a seven and an eight next to each other. Taylor: Mr. Mayor, just one follow-up question. Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Did you explore making kind of a bottom level retail with some housing on top instead of just strictly residential? I'm kind of curious what -- some of the other options that you looked at, because certainly I can appreciate the fact that having lack of visibility from the street like really hurt some of the commercial, but was there any -- was there any look at how to maybe integrate those a little bit more in that? And I'm kind of curious what your -- what you found when you looked at that if you did. Chittester: Yeah. The -- the floor plan for these works very well for a home -- a home office scenario. On the bottom floor you essentially have a garage and, then, a bedroom with a bathroom. It -- but a lot of people would use that potentially as a -- as a home office or somewhere they could go and -- and work. We are doing both three and four bedroom models and the four bedroom models is intended, so on the top floor you Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 19 of 61 would have, you know, a principal bedroom and, then, two others. So, you could kind of fit a few kids and -- and parents up there and still have an option for downstairs. We have gone away -- and I -- I'm going to speak I think for Bill that we have kind of tried to go away -- and I don't think the city likes the live -- live-work -- to call it that and -- because, then, it brings in -- and it can bring in issues for buyers, because, then, they are saying -- banks says is this a commercial property or a residential property. So, we have moved away from calling it live-work, anything like that, but it does work very well. There are also issues with -- if you are -- if you have a business in there, traffic, people coming in, number of visits, et cetera. So, it works very well for someone who is looking to work from home. Could see someone doing that on a limited basis. We have held back from calling it live-work for some of those issues. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: You won't understand why I'm asking this question, but in the presentation could you tell me are they all going to be a pitch style roof? Not roofs -- nothing on top? Chittester: Pitch style roof. Yes. Nothing on top. Overton: Thank you. Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Thank you very much. Chittester: Thank you. Simison: Mr. Clerk, anyone signed up to provide testimony on this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, there are none. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present who would like to provide testimony on this item? There is nobody online in -- in the -- in the -- providing testimony area. So, I guess I will -- Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I would -- I know that we have got Kelly on from ACHD and was curious if, Kelly, you could weigh in what Overland's rated between Eagle and Locust Grove. I believe it's better than D, but I can't recall and it's -- it wasn't notated in any report that we received from ACHD. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 20 of 61 Kelly: Mr. Mayor, city councilors, give me just a moment to look that up. I should be able to find that pretty quickly. Give me just a moment and I will chime back in. I will raise my hand. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: While we are waiting for that I would just comment -- which is like I actually really love those live-work units. Like I think they are very innovative. But, you know, I -- they don't work everywhere, so I -- I don't know if using them with a development that has private streets is a great idea, for example. I'm not sure that combination works super well, but I -- I don't know where you have heard that we don't like those. I -- I wouldn't say that's the case, at least in my experience. I think those are pretty innovative and kind of a nice way to try to address getting additional commercial out of this type of an area. So, I'm just going to throw that out there. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: While he is looking the applicant has -- I know that the generation that we provided is from the summer, which I would assume is the '24, '25 enrollment. I know West Ada has reported an increase in enrollment in '25, '26, as opposed to '24. We don't expect you to have updated data, but if they have provided that to you and it's somehow different or more favorable than what we were provided for a '24, '25, 1 would be open to reviewing that information. Clark: -- in the presentation for next -- the next application. So, if -- if we can pull that -- I -- if we have a second I can pull that up. Cavener: Yeah. That would be great. Can you -- Clark: Yeah. I can pull up the next one. We just looked it up the other day. And for fear of stepping -- or putting my foot in my mouth again on the -- on the conversation we had earlier, one of the differences here is this is for sale product and it's more of a question of enforcement on our part later on for people who are going to own those privately, rather than having a multi-family project that we control in its entirety. That was the point I was trying to make, not to -- to create an issue there. So, this is -- these are the most recent counts that we could find. So, '24, '25 was 38,618. Today what we found is 38,220. This is from the city's -- or excuse me -- from West Ada's website. And, then, you can see the kind of overall trend on the -- on the right over the last several years. So, hopefully, that answers your question, Council Member Cavener. Cavener: Thank you. That's -- I -- I know the West Ada put out a release that indicated a slight increase in enrollment. So, it's interesting now that their -- their website isn't Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 21 of 61 reflective of that. I don't know if maybe IT and Coms weren't on the same page, but that's -- this is helpful. Clark: Yeah. We -- we spent a lot of time thinking about this and trying to track it down as you know, so -- Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Just to point to the same conversation, Councilman Cavener, but West Ada just reported their fourth straight loss in enrollment four years in a row this last week. So, their numbers have continued to drop over the past four years. Clark: And that -- this was the bar chart that I mentioned previously where you can see the difference between first graders and 12th graders and there is a difference of about 915 right now between first graders and 12th graders. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: You have a crystal ball. I don't know how in tune it is. You don't have the updated slide that shows numbers specifically for Mountain View do you? Clark: I do -- well, I don't have -- they don't have anything as far as I'm aware -- how did I do the wrong one? Let's see. I don't -- I apologize for that. This -- this was focused on the other project. Simison: Kelly, were you able to find the information? Kelly: Mr. Mayor, Councilors, I have the traffic counts. I'm having trouble finding and verifying whether that met level of service thresholds. So, it's been -- to be quite honest it's been a little while since I have looked up this information, so I'm trying to kind of refresh my memory on where to get those thresholds. So, I apologize for that. Give me just a minute and I can chime in when need be. It's 1 ,500 trips in the p.m. peak hour, which should be well within. However, I don't want to give you a should be. So, give me just another minute and I will get back with you. Thank you. Simison: Kelly, I don't know that we heard that very well. The sound was very light. Could you repeat it clearly into your microphone? Kelly- Yes. Mr. Mayor, City Councilors, apologies for that. I have found the traffic counts. I'm having trouble locating the -- the thresholds for the level of services. It has been, quite frankly, a long time since I have looked at these, so I need to refresh my memory as far as what those thresholds are, so I will continue searching for those. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 22 of 61 Sorry to keep you guys on the hook, but give me just another minute and I will have an answer for you. Thank you. Simison: Nick may have the answer. Nick? Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, so this isn't for this project, because they were proposing private streets. However, I do have a current application that I'm processing that's just down Overland on the other side of Eagle Road and it is better than E. The p.m. peak hour traffic count for the -- for Overland Road is 1 ,254. 1 don't know if that matches up with what you were looking at, Kelly, but is a p.m. peak hour level of service is better than E for a project that's half a mile down the road. Kelly: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, City Councilors, Nick is correct there as far as those traffic counts. That matches what I have. Simison: Okay. Thank you very much, Kelly. So, we haven't officially called you back up, but I guess we are calling the applicant back up for any final comments. So, we can at least have that officially on the record and, then, continue the -- the conversation. Clark: I'm happy to answer any other questions or look for reinforcements. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Just because I'm curious and this has been a big topic, I would be curious about your dust control plan, what that would look like during construction. Again, because you are right next to a school -- Chittester: Yeah. Great point. We fight this on -- on every project and most everyone's probably been impacted by it with all the growth in the community. It's something that we would -- we would work with -- with the highway district and -- and we -- I don't -- but we don't have that developed today; right? We just -- we are not there yet. With the approvals, then, we will finalize our -- our construction plans and we have a contractor on board, but understanding the importance to the Council we would be happy to work with staff, you know, if -- if there was a -- a condition to work with staff to have someone review a -- a dust mitigation plan that's good. But it's just not something we would have developed at this stage of the project. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I -- I kind of just want to preview for you -- maybe workshop a bit what I would have in mind and I'm not sure that dust is really what this project is about for me, but I think it would be a requirement in our development agreement and the findings that you Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 23 of 61 would submit a dust control plan to our staff for approval and, then, you would need to adhere to that plan. So, it would be enforceable by us. So, if you weren't following the approved plan, you know, you might end up with like a stop work order or something like that. Chittester: I don't have any concerns with that. Again, we -- we are on the site and so we are going to -- and -- and Craig Johnson, Taylor Merrill, the folks who own Gramercy are in the building next to us. We know them well. And so I think everyone will be very interested in doing that. I have no concern with a condition like that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. And I mean it would just be helpful I think to know like would that include, you know, using a water truck, you know -- Chittester: Frequencies and those -- Strader: Right. Chittester: Sure. Strader: Yeah. Chittester: Absolutely. It's a -- a typical -- like a safety plan. Sure. Strader: You know, I actually never wanted to have to regulate this and I -- I think still we are really struggling with that and -- and our Council I don't think has even arrived at a -- at a conclusion about what we are doing on it, but it has been a major issue unfortunately and -- and that's kind of how this works sometimes is the problem projects unfortunately when they are unresolved for a long period of time end up driving where we have to go, which is unfortunate. Chittester: Yeah. Not a good use of your time, but -- Strader: Yeah. Chittester: -- totally understand. Strader: But unfortunately necessary. Thank you. Chittester: Sure. Simison: So, I -- I just want to say from my perspective next -- I don't know how much Councilman Cavener spends his time over there. I know Council Woman Little Robert Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 24 of 61 spends -- I mean I spend a fair amount of time in this area. My favorite restaurant is in this area. I have got good friends that own buildings in this area and spend time sometimes just hanging out with them in this location. So, I -- I -- I feel like I see a lot of it, you know. Got kids that to go to Mountain View. I come up, I see the impacts, a lot of that, but, ultimately, I think this is the right move in this direction and that's -- I get that from talking to the businesses in that area. If you go back to Gramercy Way, I think I was working for the city when the overall approvals for that project existed, but talking to the businesses, with the shared parking, it was clear that this was intended to be an area where people get out of their cars and walk and, frankly, there is not that many places like Gramercy that have the integration of multiple types of commercial all right there in one area and, you know, it's important that we have the residential components to do that. Gramercy Park, the restaurant, they have been waiting for years for the apartments on the other side of Overland to open. You know, some days I think that they were praying that that was -- you know, how they were going to stay afloat was getting more residential units around them to have that walking capacity, because, frankly, the parking is some of the biggest challenges they face because of the school, you know, or because of others that tried to close off their parking to them and we had to go through an effort to make sure people understood. Gramercy was designed to be different. Gramercy was designed to be a place where people would come and live and walk to access commercial services through that area and when I look at that area it's kind of funny, I actually think this is the least busy part of the entire project. You know, definitely going to Mountain View is -- you know, you got cars lining both sides of the street accessing all those office buildings in that area up by the school at two times during the day is definitely a different level of congestion, you know, and -- but, then, really, you go out through the rest of the project, it's people cutting through to trying to cut off Overland to get over to Eagle Road to avoid the -- the corner. It's not even really, you know, traffic generated within the project that is creating some of the traffic congestion -- and I say congestion loosely. I -- it doesn't -- when I leave from Empire Title building area I go that direction to get out to Eagle or I go the other direction, just depends if I want to avoid Mountain View or do I want to avoid Eagle Road. It's not because I want to avoid Overland. Frankly, getting out onto Overland at that light can sometimes take forever. So, that's what I'm avoiding more than I'm avoiding anything else. But I just think that -- I understand the -- the challenges that have happened with the past project that I think everyone really loved the look and feel. It was going to be a first internally parked. You weren't going to have this large parking lot in the middle -- or around like we do most of our other things and that's what I think that really attracted people to this project, but we -- but we get it. I think everyone understands that sometimes things don't pencil. But, ultimately, I think the reduction in units and as well as the overall use in that area, this is a positive outcome in the situation and I don't know that commercial in its -- would make -- ever make sense here. Office. Maybe. But having the beds and the heads I think has a greater value and impact to our restaurants in that area and some of our other service providers, so -- just want to say that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 25 of 61 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I am pretty concerned about the point that Council Woman Little Roberts brought up, which is the -- basically construction traffic management near Gem Prep. Have you all thought about whether there is some kind of a plan you could put in place to help mitigate that, maybe what times people are leaving the site? It sounds like it is a pretty acute concern. Chittester: Yeah. I -- I think that makes sense. It -- it does -- you know, for the -- for the pick-up times it -- it -- you -- you really just have one fewer lane of traffic, because you have got people parked as they are, you know, snaking up to get -- to get to the school. I don't think it's -- you know, I haven't seen a lot of danger, but it definitely makes you feel when you are driving there you feel like it's tight. I -- I feel like -- I mean we have been meeting with Rick Appell from the school with Cameron from Boise Regional Realtors. We know the owners, Taylor Merrill and Greg Johnson, while we are in that area, so I think that makes a lot of sense and we are -- we want to make that work for everyone and, if not, we will be, you know, hearing about it. So, we are happy to meet with them and try and -- and -- and see what we can do. I'm just trying to think of the times of day. You know, construction usually is kind of a 7:00 to 3:00 type -- type thing and so there may be some congestion, but I think it's a good idea to -- to plan around that to try and avoid that -- really it's the afternoon that I think is the most -- most significant. Simison: Yeah. And I -- I would even argue this -- this -- coming in -- you can come anytime in on that road at any point in time, entering the site. It's exiting the site and, you know, from -- from a safety perspective, not knowing where the people work or what type of vehicles will come in, do you want them exiting the light or would you want them exiting going around and going at a place where there is not a light? Chittester: It's -- it's really pushing the maybe north to Gala to leave the site, as opposed to going out onto Wells to get -- you know. So, there -- there are ways to do that. Simison: Yeah. Yeah. Council, any additional questions, comments, thoughts? Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: If there is no more public testimony, I move we close the public hearing. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 26 of 61 MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Some comments. I take -- take seriously, you know, the comments that my fellow Council Member has that lives right there and has to deal with it, because I'm probably at least once a week one of the problem cars, because I -- as a grandparent pick up two of my grandkids from Gem Prep once a week. So, I'm quite familiar with the backup and how all that works and I usually go all the way down and get out at Millennium to avoid Wells and the one thing about this project that I like is the fact that you can go all the way down to Millennium, Gala, Wells, Blue Horizon -- you have multiple ways to get out onto Overland Road or out onto Eagle Road and I think you can't say that about a lot of areas in the city. They are already built, they are already there once they open. You are positioned next to not only a city park, but you have got a high school that's got -- it's like having a second city park. It's got tennis courts and other amenities that people can use that's really close. There is -- as Mayor mentioned there is quite a few restaurants within walking distance to that as well. I didn't want to, you know, jump up and down and say I'm a huge fan of the math, going from 164 to 82 really makes me happy. I think you are going to have a lot less of an impact in that area with the 84 units, even though you may end up with a larger family versus seniors. don't think you are going to have an impact that we would notice in the school district. As I said they just came out last week and said that for four years in a row their enrollment numbers are dropping. There are schools that are overcrowded in the district. They know that, but there is more schools in the district right now that are very low and have plenty of room for capacity and West Ada is trying to work on what that solution is going to be. That means them having to do some district boundary changes. That's not our issue, but they don't stand here and tell us not to build something, because they know they have the capacity in their schools, it's just which schools have capacity. I'm in favor of this project. I like everything I have seen so far. I like the quality. I like to look. I think it's a good fit for that spot. You are coming in as an in-fill project, almost one of the last in-fill projects in that area and I think it's going to be a good fit and a good balance for that area. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I appreciate my good colleague's perspective. I think I just look at this one a little bit differently and I think for me it really boils down to two things that we talk about the most up here right, but we rarely ever have to talk about fire response times or proximity to parks or police department or waterways, all the things that we are in control of we do really really well. The things we often are wrestling with are traffic impacts and school impacts and my good colleague over here Mr. Taylor showed me at least updated numbers for these three schools. The good news is lower student Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 27 of 61 enrollment at the middle school. Bad news is higher student enrollment in high school and elementary and the elementary and for me Mountain View is maybe a sticky wicket for me, because it is either number one or number two most overcapacity high school in the state and if I had a freshman going there this year and I'm seeing what that student is going through and that we are going to generate even more students, even a small amount, I think it's too much in that school. I know there is plans at one point to improve Overland, but those of us that drive Overland at 5:00 or 9:00 a.m. know it doesn't feel like better than E, if feels like another letter and so I -- I struggle with that. Having more density of a retired resident base that to me was like the right fit for this and this just to me feels very much like we are trying to spin a square peg in a round hole and so I can't be supportive of it. Not that I don't think that the project's good and not that I don't think that it will be widely popular, I just don't think it's in the right part of town. Certainly, again, not in a spot that our schools can support or the roads can support. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor, despite my complaint about traffic, it is very very limited to 45 minutes prior to school getting out I would say. So, I think it can be mitigated regarding what time construction traffic and things like that leave, but -- so -- but as far as the project overall I feel like it is a good fit. We are seeing some declining numbers in kids coming up as far as schools go and it just seems to really fit with the neighborhood and the feel and what Gramercy was designed for. So, I will be supporting it. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Just a couple of quick comments. Probably my biggest disappointment will be Fat Guy's Deli might get a little crowded. It's one of my favorite restaurants ever since the first time I showed up and they gave me a free sandwich I became a lifelong fan and it's really good. Simison: Have I got a sandwich for you. Taylor: Well, you can take me and buy me lunch. I will get two free lunches there. I think it's a really good project. I'm -- I share the disappointment in the -- in the -- sort of the deed restricted component. We have had a couple applications where they have come in, you know, before the city where they have asked to change that, because of -- economics have changed. I think that's really unfortunate, because I see that as a growing demographic, but I think a point was made tonight by the applicant about maybe those type of senior housing is just not what people in Idaho want and so I think we have a responsibility as a city to ensure that, again, we are not the ones building these -- these -- these projects. We rely on our good partners in the private sector who have to sell these things and make some money to make these things work. So, I think Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 28 of 61 we have to provide some latitude in -- in what makes some sense. I do like the project. I think it makes sense, you know, in this part of town. I will make the comment I think with respect to the school enrollment, good Council President has been nothing but super consistent about his concerns about Mountain View. But when you look at the year over year enrollment trends -- you know, if you look at first grade this year we are, you know, West District -- or West Ada it looks like it's close to a thousand students less than 12th grade and those numbers start tacking down considerably once you hit 8th grade and -- and -- and continue downward. So, long term trend I don't know, but I -- -- I'm comfortable with the idea that West Ada can navigate this. Again, Mountain View is -- is the most difficult school I think we have in the entire community to kind of manage, so I certainly am sympathetic to that and understand it, but I do have a level of comfort with -- with the school district's ability to -- to manage that. So, I'm going to -- I support this project tonight. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Things I like, things I don't like. I -- I -- I really did feel that the age restriction was the crux of the original approval in 2021 and -- and that's important to me. I think in this case, because it's already been annexed into the city it's a little bit of a different question for me around the -- just thinking through kind of the bar for it here. I think if -- if it had not been for the dramatic reduction in density it would have been a complete nonstarter for me, but seeing that does help me. I think for me if -- if we can have the applicant submit a dust control plan to our staff to approve that would help get me more comfortable, just because the location next to a school. West Ada -- this just continues to be a struggle and I think it's -- it's hard, because we are looking at an overall declining enrollment it seems like, but we have these really acute areas, like this is a really acute area. It's completely swamped with kids in Mountain View. I -- I do buy into the argument that in a five to seven-year build out ten additional students likely at the high school is a manageable number, like I -- that -- that resonates with me. So, I think I can support the project, but I would like to see a dust control plan. That's where I'm at with this one and I would also say I -- I would not encourage you -- like away from -- like live- work units and stuff like that, that's creative. I wouldn't give up on those ideas in Meridian. I think -- where they make sense. I -- I think because the private streets here it would not make sense. So, I wouldn't advocate for that in this particular instance. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: Council Woman Strader hit the point that I was going to stress as well. I think in the build out, you know, ten, 15 more high school students is manageable. What's even more manageable in my mind is that it's within walking distance of the high school, so you are not going to have the traffic, you are not going to have the parking issues, so I -- I just like the location of this for a lot of the things that the Mayor talked about. It is a Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 29 of 61 walkable community. Gordon Harris Park is a gem and kind of a hidden gem so we won't advertise that, but what a -- what a great amenity for these 80 families that would be living in -- in this community. So, I can be supportive of this as well and -- and supportive of Council Woman Strader's request that we have a focus on dust mitigation plan being submitted and I think that's important because of the proximity to the school as well. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Real quick before I -- I see where this is going and I saw maybe Councilman Overton reaching for his mic to make a motion, which is just maybe some encouragement. We certainly asked the applicant for some information tonight. Maybe they weren't prepared for around dust mitigation. I know that is part of this Council's effort to level up. So, I would encourage when a motion is made that we should be including in that motion those dust mitigation elements as -- to be included as part of the DA. I think that we should be supporting our staff to make more clear motions, so they are not having to infer or interpret what we are intending. Let's be very direct with them, so that they have some clarity on that. So, that would just be my only request. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Somebody decided to steal my thunder, but with that said, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony and the applicant agreeing to work with our city staff and submit a dust mitigation plan on site for the use of water trucks and other devices to help control the dust during construction, I move to approve File No. H-2025- 0019 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 19th, 2025. Little Roberts: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 3. Is there discussion on the motion? If not, clerk call the roll. Roll Call: Cavener, nay; Strader, yea; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea; Whitlock, yea. Simison: Five ayes. One nay. And the item is agreed to. Best of luck. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. 4. Public Hearing for Rockwell Greens Subdivision (H-2025-0002) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, generally located at the Northwest corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Rd. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 30 of 61 A. Request: Annexation of 51.15 acres of land with a R-15 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 412 buildable lots and 27 common lots. C. Request: Alternative Compliance to standards for developments abutting a State Highway. Simison: With that we will move on to Item 4, which is public hearing for Rockwell Greens Subdivision, H-2025-0002. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Napoli: All right. Mayor, Members of the Council, the next item on the agenda is the annexation, preliminary plat and alternative compliance for Rockwell Greens Subdivision. So, the applicant requests annexation of 51.15 acres of land with R-15 zoning district, a preliminary plat consisting of 412 building lots, 27 common lots and alternative compliance for the city standards for developments abutting a state highway and I would like to mention the alternative compliance request with this application was director level and it was approved with the director level. Actually, on the screen -- oh, no. I apologize. The site consists of 51.15 acres of land generally located at the northwest corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Road. Actually on the screen the existing zoning is RUT in Ada county and the FLUM designation is medium density residential. There is the annexation exhibit. This is -- so, this is an image of The Fields Sub area plan, a four square mile planning area located in northwest corner of the city's area of impact. This plan promotes a cohesive modern rural character across all new development, emphasizes a high quality design. This is one of the first few projects in that area and the proposed -- the proposed density for the 51 .15 acres of land with the R-15 zoning district equates to 8.05 units per acre. This is on the high end of the medium density designate -- residential designation, which -- which staff does have concerns with as there is currently a lack of connectivity to commercial and neighborhood serving uses. There is no regional park in the area and the nearby schools are over capacity. However, the applicant has exceeded the minimum requirements for open space providing 17.1 percent instead of the 15 percent required and amenities by providing 26 and a half points instead of the ten required in the -- as outlined in the UDC. They have also noted that the new elementary school is under construction in Star and the boundary lines will be adjusted in the 2026-2027 school year, which is anticipated to relieve some of the existing capacity issues and West Ada School District did confirm this with their letter to the city as well. Staff has communicated these concerns to the applicant and recommends the City Council carefully evaluate whether this level of density is appropriate given the current landscape of the area. In evaluating comparable -- comparable developments along State Highway 16, the Gander Creek Subdivision approved in 2019 and the Chukar Ridge Subdivision approved in 2020 had gross densities of 3.42 and 4.0 units per acre respectively. Additionally, the average density within a one mile radius of the proposed site is approximately 5.83 units per acre. The proposed subdivision borders the future Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 31 of 61 alignment of State Highway 16, which is considered a hazard in the Comprehensive Plans existing conditions document. Due to such factors as high -- high vehicle speeds, accident frequency and impacts to air quality. These elements are critical in assessing the suitability of the proposed subdivision and staff -- staff is particularly concerned about air quality -- quality given the proposed subdivision's density at the upper end of the medium density residential FLUM designation. This would expose a larger number of residents to recognize hazard compared to a lower density development. Similar developments on the west side of State Highway 16 as mentioned before Gander Creek and Chukar Ridge were approved at 3.42 and 4.0 units per acre on the lower end of the medium density residential FLUM designation. To address these concerns the applicant has requested alternative compliance to the mitigation standards outlined in the UDC for developments near federal and state highways. This included a sound engineer's report that found the expected outdoor worst case peak hour noise would be 62 to 64 decibels with a berm and wall proposed, which is deemed accessible -- or acceptable. I apologize. There it is. The sound engineer concludes that traffic noise levels are expected to be less than the 65 DBA day-night average sound level. The berm and barrier are required to help mitigate the noise and the residential buildings along the first row nearest the highway should have additional consideration for the floors above the ground floor as a six foot wall and a six foot berm may not adequately block the line of sight from State Highway 16 for these spaces and to show that a little bit better, these units right here are the ones that will be bordering the State Highway 16. They are attached units, so it will be a single family attached unit, so there will be less separation than single family detached. The applicant's mitigation proposal includes a six foot berm, top of the six foot wall, to mitigate noise alongside the use of enhanced building materials designed to meet stricter -- stricter sound attenuation standards. The applicant has also exceeded the minimum number of requirements for the open space and amenities as earlier mentioned and this approach aligns with the alternative compliance granted to Gander -- the Gander Creek development in 2020 -- 2024, though their current -- their current proposal is at a higher density than that prior approval. The director did support the alternative compliance for the sound attenuation as meeting UDC's requirement for a ten foot wall above the center line of State Highway 16 would necessitate a -- roughly a 30 foot structure, because this is the overpass at McMillan. In addition to this, the applicant has worked with city staff to propose thicker vegetation coverage along State Highway 16 in the form of one tree for every building lot and one tree every 20 feet in the open space, instead of the one tree every 35 feet as required by code and roughly the building lots are 28 feet wide along the State Highway, so you are going to be having one tree about -- one per 28 feet, instead of the one per 35. So, you have about a 20 percent increase in vegetation coverage for trees. In addition to this, the applicant has agreed to 80 percent vegetation coverage along State Highway 16, instead of the 70 percent required by the UDC excluding the 12 foot irrigation road that will actually run parallel directly adjacent to State Highway 16. Access is proposed off of North Ersatz Place, which was constructed by ITD and remains under ITD ownership and this is the only access provided to the -- to the development. ACHD has not accepted this right of way from ITD yet and this will require the applicant to work with the transportation authority for approval of work within the right of way with future submittals and this was addressed in the development Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 32 of 61 agreement for that. This collector road is shared between the proposed subdivision and the future Cole Valley Christian School, which will be -- get a better image for you guys -- just right here and it's been -- it was approved, we just cannot sewer it at this time. So, they are waiting for sewer services. Northernmost access point is not supported by staff in this case due to it being a collect -- designated as a collector roadway and it requires limiting access points to a collector and arterial roads. The UDC does. A secondary emergency access was a concern from staff with the original proposal as it did not meet MFD standards. However, since the publication of the staff report the applicant has coordinated with MFD and has come up with a proposal that will satisfy -- satisfy the requirements. This will be submitted with the first final plat. Additionally staff would like to note that we have received a finalized report from ACHD since the P&Z hearing. They did require some changes. The applicant has stated that the first homes are -- would be occupied -- or planned to be occupied in 2027 with a projected build out rate of 50 to 60 homes per year. Full build out is anticipated to be between 2035 and 2037. In summary, staff finds the proposed preliminary plat and R-15 zoning designation to be generally consistent with the future land use map and UDC. However, due to the development's density, its location next to this -- a future state highway and current service limitations in the area, staff recommends that City Council closely evaluate whether the proposal aligns with the broader goals and readiness of the surrounding area. Staff work with the applicant since the publication of the staff report to modify some conditions. The Planning and Zoning Commission adopted these conditions and that are these on the screen. This would have been included in the Commission recs to the City Council. So, the Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending approval and we have not received any new written testimony since the Planning and Zoning hearing and I will stand for any questions at this time and two conditions that are still outstanding for Council to consider -- I did want to touch on this. So, providing a stub street alignment. I talked with the applicant prior to the hearing and we are in agreement with that and, then, the DA provision E -- so, ACHD actually, with their new publication since the Planning and Zoning hearing for the -- for finalizing that staff report, they actually do not want those curb cuts to align. So, we are asking you to strike that condition tonight in agreement with ACHD. And I will stand for questions. Simison: Thank you, Nick. Council, any questions for staff? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: We can also ask the ACHD rep, but I believe McMillan is an F, but could you remind me if you have it handy, Nick? Thank you. Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, so, yes, McMillan Road currently p.m. peak hour traffic count is 386. Which is better than E. McDermott Road is a peak hour -- is at one hundred traffic count and better than D. So, that is where we are currently lying with traffic counts. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 33 of 61 Strader: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Nick, as always appreciate you presenting an application. I noticed something new and different in the staff report that I'm -- I'm curious you can talk to us a little bit about. I can't recall a time when there has been items that have been highlighted in our staff report. Is that something new that you are introducing? Is there a reason that we are adding that? It -- it -- it helped me to flag, oh, boy, these are things that Nick thinks is really important and maybe I have missed it before, but can you just kind of walk us through why you are doing that? Napoli: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council President Cavener, it's a great question. You know, as far as with this -- as you guys know I'm into this role for a year now. As I have developed in this role and I have, you know, talked with the team in our staff reports we try to -- we are going to try to highlight more important key things that we want you guys to focus on that, you know, while it may meet the UDC it is important to consider some of these things given the data that we have. So, really, with most of my staff reports currently -- and I haven't been in front of you guys a whole lot lately -- there is a lot more coming. All my staff reports, you know, in the last really six months have really included highlighted in bold. I try to include all the issues slash concerns that I have or we have as a team or that may not meet the UDC or the Comprehensive Plan what we feel as staff, so you guys can make the best informed decisions. So, we just wanted to highlight that for you guys. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up if I can. Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Nick, I think -- I appreciate that and as particularly, you know, you are -- I think the first thing that you flagged about concern with the -- the soundproofing I think these enhanced soundproofing, to me it seems like the applicant is proposing a solution that addresses that concern, but I feel like that that was proposed within the application, but because you highlighted that that led me to believe that maybe you have got concerns beyond that and I'm just trying to make sure that I'm reading what you are trying to tell us correctly or if I'm just not following the bouncing balls appropriately. Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Council President Cavener, no, good question. Well, with that really I highlighted that primarily so, yes, it is -- it's their proposal for alternative compliance for sound attenuation is consistent with what we have approved previously with the Gander Creek development. However, this development is at a higher density and if you guys feel that there is a further action that is needed on sound attenuation you guys can require that with this application. Obviously, in a perfect world we would meet what our standards are in the UDC. However, with the McMillan overpass, building a 30, 40 foot Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 34 of 61 structure, engineering that would be a significant cost. So, that's really why I highlighted that for you guys. Cavener: And maybe, Mr. Mayor, just one more then I will -- Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: -- to that point I guess I have never seen -- because a -- a product type is more dense that it would require more soundproofing; right? If -- if we are -- if -- if -- if we are soundproofing we are soundproofing and I -- I -- I'm -- I'm struggling to see how density is -- is involved in that. Can you just educate me real quick? Napoli: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council President Cavener, so with that -- Simison: Can I piggyback on that real quick? Just a similar -- air quality was a similar issue. If it's bad for one, why does it matter if there is a hundred there? So, just in context why -- we get it, there is more people that are impacted, but help us understand the difference between people are impacted versus one person impacted. Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Council President Cavener, good question. So, with that, you know, and talking with the team, primarily -- so density -- obviously, correct, there is going to be more people that are impacted by it. Typically -- and we have it designated as medium density residential on the Comprehensive Plan. So, yes, R-15 is allowed. If it's in the density range it is allowed. However, in talking with the team there was comparisons to the Gander Creek, which was medium density residential, which was significantly lower on the density chart, which means you typically have larger lots, which put you further away sometimes from the state highway and that's really the idea behind it is -- exists -- it is a hazard in the Comprehensive Plan. It is called out as a hazard in the existing conditions report. So, with that we felt that it was important to call out the density in comparison to what we have previously approved with the sound attenuating standards. So, at this point we are kind of comparing the previous development and what we have approved with the current development noting that there is a higher density with this development. So, if you guys did feel that there was additional provisions that would be required, it's possible that that could be required at this point from you guys. Correct. Simison: If I can -- if I can put words in your mouth just follow up on that. So, air quality is -- is the example. It's not that there is more people impacted, it's that the homes are located closer to it, because of the standards of the density, is that what you are really trying to articulate or are you trying to say there is more people near it that -- because I -- I kind of heard this -- the first thing I said, that the standards play something further away, but these standards make it closer, so that's why the concern. Napoli: Mr. Mayor -- so correct. It would be a mixture of both. So, yes, there will be more people living in the subdivision, but also typically in the R-15 zone compared to an Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 35 of 61 R-4 zone, the lot sizes are significantly smaller, which could also mean deeper -- or less deep and narrower, which, then, puts people in closer proximity. Simison: Right. That helps, but -- Council Woman Strader. Strader: Mr. Mayor, thank you, that was very helpful, because I did not pick up on that distinction. So, I appreciate that. My -- my question is on something that is kind of unrelated, but I think it does impact us quite a bit, so we were going back and forth with ACHD and ITD about the underpass on McMillan Road to actually go under Highway 16 and from what I recall about this it is like two lanes and extremely narrow. I don't even know if we ended up getting pedestrian connections. Could you just -- if you know and maybe ACHD needs to do this -- if they are on, but could you walk through where that ended up, because I have like -- almost all my concerns, besides school stuff, which know Hethe will really dig into, is really like this whole area on McMillan Road -- and I'm just concerned that this is going to be a major choke point. So, I just wanted to understand where did that end up? Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, no, great question. So, yes, it's a two lane road currently that does have a ten foot multi-use pathway on the southern portion of McMillan as far as -- and we may want to check with Kelly, but in conversations with ACHD that intersection of McMillan and McDermott has some complications I should say that do restrict certain lights from being put up. So, signalizing that intersection and actually widening it at a future point is going to be an -- it will be tight. I don't know if there is enough right of way there for us to add a third lane to actually have a third turning point with that ten foot multi-use pathway on the southern portion. I know that there is some complications here that could create a choke point; correct. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Thank you. So, I just want to preview that for Hethe and team. At some point in your comments if you could address that concern I think that would be really helpful, because what I -- what I recall is that the city advocated for this, but it was like we were kind of late to the party, because they had already started all these plans in motion and the best that we could squeeze into this -- there was literally not a foot of space left -- was one pathway on one side and, then, these two lanes and we know already because of the stupid connect -- excuse my French -- the canal that it can never be widened from an economic perspective like feasibly on McMillan, so this does need to be a big focus I think in the application. Thank you very much. Simison: Council, any additional questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward? Clark: Hey, everybody. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street in Boise representing the applicant. So, let's dive right in here and I got too many papers sliding around. So, you Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 36 of 61 are aware of the location here. We are right on the side of the east side -- or west side of Highway 16, just north of McMillan Road. You can kind of get a feel from this picture that the block to the east of us is largely built out. So, this is part of the -- kind of orderly progression of the development of the city. Within the comprehensive planning this is the -- an MDR area, but as we look at The Fields in general, it's a -- there is a lot of variety of what's intended to be there and this is an area that the city is investing in, has signaled to the development community that this is where -- where things are going to go. So, we have mixed-use areas. We have a school site is our immediate neighbor and I will talk about that a little bit more and, then, this map is a little bit tough to read, but that green area there to the south, that's Owyhee High School and that includes a future elementary school site that the -- that West Ada already has and as I mentioned this is part of The Fields sub area plan. So, that sub area plan was adopted in 2021. Everybody here is probably more familiar with that than I am, but it does set the stage for development in this area and there is residential development that's planned -- development that's planned for this site, but I did want to kind of emphasize the city's investment in infrastructure. So, you know that the Fire Station No. 8, the new police station, are both open down on Owyhee Storm, just, you know, not quite a stone's throw -- I guess if you have a really strong arm you can get there, but very close to the site. And, then, in addition there is new sewer infrastructure that's going in with this -- within this area and I think this is important to talk about real briefly, so -- and Nick kind of previewed this. So, water and sewer have already been pulled underneath Highway. 16 to prepare for the development of this site. This is the end of the sewer shed. The sewer shed ends on our immediate west boundary. That was why Nick mentioned that the school was waiting for the new sewer shed to open up. So, we are kind of -- even though we were kind of at the beginning of The Fields, we are at the end of the sewer shed, so it's a kind of a unique position to be in here. That -- that new lift station that the city is investing in is -- you can see it down at -- where you see McMillan on the very west portion at the end of that green line, that's where that new lift station is going in. So, in a -- in a very real way the -- the city's Public Works Department is kind of driving, you know, when things will be able to -- to happen here in The Fields, because the city is putting in the investment to make that happen. Again, this is kind of at the end of the existing sewer shed and that investment. This is, you know, in our view kind of the -- the next logical step as a result of all of that and Council Member Strader as -- as I understand it, in talking about like that infrastructure looking at McMillan on this site, it's our understanding that there is space reserved for four lanes and you may be able to squeeze in the five. But that's -- that is our understanding and I'm having our group check on that to confirm, but that's -- that's how -- that's our understanding of that. Another element of The Fields sub area plan is that it's a little unique in the -- the look. It's asking for this kind of high quality rural theme attic and we redid our landscape plan to try to make sure that -- that we matched with all of that. So, this is the site plan you have seen. Fifty-one acres, all R-15 zoning. We do exceed the open space requirements at 17 percent. Pedestrian connectivity is provided throughout the project. You can see the kind of local sidewalks in red and, then, the regional pathways in blue. It's about a half mile of -- of region -- just shy of a half mile of regional pathways. Amenities as with this applicant, you know, way above the -- the actual numbers in general. So, ten points required, we are at 26 and a half with a community pool, Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 37 of 61 changing rooms, the fenced play structures, pickleball, dog park, the -- the kind of things that you would expect to see from this group. Three types of homes. We have detached single level. We have the two-story. And, then, we also have the attached, which as Nick mentioned is going to be largely along the Highway 16 side of things and I will talk about that here a little bit more when we talk about sound mitigation. Okay. So, I know the elementary -- or the schools are going to be a -- a -- a major question for everyone, so I wanted to make sure that we focused on that and then -- and really focus on -- I think on elementary schools, because that's been the -- the question in this part of the -- of the city. So, as always, you know, West Ada provides the data, then, they tell us what they are going to do with that -- with those four options that you guys have heard me say ad nauseam over and over again every time I come here. So, that process of -- of looking at boundaries, of looking at busing and looking at portables and, then, looking at when you are going to build is very much well underway for this part of the city. So, Hunter Elementary School currently has capacity. That is going to absorb some of the pressure on Pleasant View. That's already been announced by West Ada. West Ada also announced that there will be follow-up meetings this fall with regard to boundaries. So, that planning is all happening. In the meantime they have actually got the shovels out and there was -- they -- they -- there was a groundbreaking on the new elementary school in Star just a couple days ago. You can see this is a picture from the -- the news reporting from that. That will be opened as I understand it next year, July of 2026, which means that it will be available prior to the arrival of any students at this site and, then, in addition, you know, if -- in the future we still need elementary school capacity. I have pointed to the new elementary school site that's attached to Owyhee High School that is part of that planning and would be available if West Ada so chose to -- to -- to build more schools. So, we think that this is -- you know, sometimes we don't -- it's harder to see what the answers are. This one seems pretty clear that West Ada has done the planning and -- and they are prepared for this -- development in this area. Okay. So, noise attenuation. And, again, the -- the question here as we understand it is the -- and as Nick mentioned, the -- you know, the -- the code is if you -- if you applied it as it's currently written we would have a 35 foot wall on the side of -- on the side of our project. So, it's not -- that doesn't make sense; right? So, question is alternative compliance. We have tried to go above and beyond on all of this to make all of this work. You can see in this picture -- and -- and -- and this might actually help Council Member Strader in kind of seeing how big that area is under -- under the -- the underpass there -- the overpass there for McMillan. Highway 16 doesn't -- oh, you got another one? Okay. Yeah. We have a -- we have a zoomed in digital picture of the -- of that underpass that we can pass around here in just a second if you like. Okay. So, the -- that right of way extending away from -- from Highway 16 is -- is pretty wide as you can kind of get a feel from that picture, but starting at the Highway 16 right of way we have the required Meridian city buffer that goes 35 feet over to the rear property lines. Now, we have provided for a six foot fence that sits six feet above the ground level of the new pads. So, you get six feet of buffer -- or, excuse me, a berm and you get six feet of fence to help with the sound attenuation. That fence alone attenuates the sound down to actually 62 to 65 decibels, which takes you kind of below that threshold and that's like normal conversation is 65 decibels. That decibel reading is actually before installation of the additional landscaping and as Nick mentioned we agreed to do Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 38 of 61 the additional landscaping, both with the additional trees, so we have at least one tree with each lot, so that is -- I think it was 20 percent more than the -- the current standard. In addition, in the areas that are not on the lots, it's one for 20 feet. So, that's even more. And then -- and when we went from 70 percent vegetation -- vegetation cover to 80 percent vegetation cover and it includes that unknown fescue and I always have a hard time saying fescue for some reason, but fescue grass that is called for as part of the -- The Fields sub area plan. So -- excuse me. With that I -- I would just mention that we are in agreement with the revised conditions presented by staff. We -- we agree with the -- the note that Nick had about modifying the condition -- I think it was F. Do I have that right? To -- he will -- he will confirm that for me. I, unfortunately, didn't take the note -- to make sure that the conditions are consistent with the ACHD report. That's the condition that deals with the alignment of the intersection at Ersatz -- was it F? E. But, otherwise, we are in agreement, but I just wanted to emphasize as well that, you know, we -- we do think that the city is invested in The Fields sub area plan. We -- we respect and acknowledge that. I know the whole development community has been watching that investment. We think we have provided an application that's consistent with The Fields sub area plan and takes advantage of the infrastructure that's available now and, again, we are in agreement with the conditions. We would be happy to add a dust control condition, Council Member Strader, and we -- we would also -- just been talking that that may be a good topic to bring some industry professionals together to come talk to the -- to city and city staff and talk about best practices and try to come up with something that makes sense for everybody. So, we are not really doing it on an ad hoc basis. So, we are -- and we are happy to help work on all of that. So, with that I'm happy to answer any questions. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions? Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Okay. So, I think a lot of my questions are going to be transportation related for right now. So, the underpass is something that we need to revisit. I -- I am just expressing what I remember that came before us and that was a two lane road with only enough space for a ten foot multi-use pathway on the south side. So, I would like you to just keep that in mind. Could you walk me through your pedestrian connection, because you were saying you had a pedestrian connection to McMillan, so if we could start there. Clark: Oh. Yeah. There is a couple things that I could mention about that, Council Member. So -- so, as you can see these are the -- the blue is the regional pathways. One thing I would point out -- and let's see if the -- the mouse will keep up with me here. I have got another slide that shows this as well -- is that as Nick mentioned one of the conversations that we had with the -- with fire was to confirm the location of the -- the emergency access and I will just show you that. So, that -- this -- this was something that we present -- we showed at P&Z this is the location of the emergency access and Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 39 of 61 ultimately based on the conversations with ACHD the -- that can't -- the revised conditions of approval call for that to be a temporary full access in the event that these other roadways are not completed, so that there is additional access there beyond the regional pathway on the -- on the west side going south, if that answers your question. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Maybe -- actually, let's just take a big step back, like from a really high level perspective. How would someone living in this development get onto the new Highway 16? Clark: Good question. So, we were -- oops, I lost -- we have -- we framed it a little bit differently and framed it -- how do you get to Costco. Strader: Okay. That's fair. Clark: So, I can show you a couple of these different scenarios. Yeah. You got it. Thanks. It's a little -- it seems like your system's a little bit more reactive than mine. Okay. So, if you wanted to get to Costco -- so, there is a couple of different ways. So, primarily the -- you know, if you are going during a day when traffic on McMillan is not a concern, you are probably going to go take this pink route over and head -- head straight up. The area is actually pretty porous in the sense that the roadway network to the east of us is largely built. So, another alternative, if you have got a mid-mile collector at Rustic Oak that can get you up to Chinden and over. Another alternative you could go west, catch Star Road, come around and that's actually a location where you could get onto Highway 16 if you wanted to -- to make that approach or you can continue east to Costco and, then, the other options are to head south, the -- you know, you would probably head over onto McDermott -- onto Owyhee Storm and, then, loop around or take a right onto McDermott and come back up. You can see here that that is basically a function of some of the ITD planning. So, the -- the O's here are the overpasses where there is not access and, then, the X's are the interchanges where there would be access. So, you have got to -- you got to do some parallel driving to get to some of that, because this is not an interchange location here, but it's really not an insurmountable thing and we actually, I think like everyone, expect that Highway 16 is going to take a lot of the burden off of these area roads, including Ten Mile. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I think we definitely hope that is the case, but it also opens up convenient commutes for new people all the way out in Star and Emmett and so I'm not sure if it will end up being like that, but let's start from a really basic level. If you are in this subdivision and you would like to go west -- actually no -- east on McMillan Road how Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 40 of 61 are you going to turn out of the subdivision if it's a two lane road? Like I -- I face this challenge already in Paramount, which is not as dense as this project. If I want to turn left onto McMillan at peak traffic hours there is hardly any center lane to speak of. There is a sliver of one and you can often have to wait for like ten minutes at a time to even find an opening to turn left. So, this -- it's hard to know the scale, so that's kind of what I'm getting at, but is there going to be a center lane here that people can turn into? Like how will people make that turning movement even to go down McMillan Road from this subdivision? Clark: Yeah. So, the -- part of -- and -- and maybe what helps is if the -- the ACHD report one of the things that it required was that we had to construct a center left turn lane and a dedicated right turn lane on McMillan Road at Ersatz. So, that will -- I think that will help with part of it and, then, perhaps to answer your other question, the -- on the mitigation requirements in the ACHD report -- I have just been able to track this the -- the segment between -- of McMillan between Owyhee Storm and McDermott is -- -- is going -- is -- let's see. These -- the -- the roadway segment is listed as funded improvements in the CIP and it speaks to it being five lanes. So, eventually -- it's going to take some time, it's going to take some rooftops, it's going to take some impact fees, but that is in the plan. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Right. But you are saying there will be five lanes on McMillan basically to the west; right? But I'm telling you, at least from what I recall, I remember looking at -- for the underpass itself I don't think there is any space to add additional lanes. So, what I'm trying to understand is -- I'm just concerned we are going to be creating a really horrible choke point for traffic on McMillan right where Highway 16 is and I just -- I think we need to drill down into that, because it's going to be a big concern for me. Clark: And McDermott's on the east side of the overpass and it's -- the CIP calls for it to be five lanes between Owyhee Storm to McDermott. So, that -- that would suggest to me that that's not going to create the -- the choke point that you are talking about, but -- Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I mean I -- at least I recall clear as day having it -- having renderings shown to us in a City Council meeting about what the underpass would look like and it could be that there is a -- an old plan that -- that calls for five lanes, but my understanding is that it -- it -- it's an impossibility, that it is like not physically possible. So, we -- we do need to get clear on that. Maybe there is a -- Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 41 of 61 Simison: I think you are correct, but there was also understood that there is no turning movements under that span, so that's why it would only be four lanes under the span, because you are really not queuing for any turning movements underneath that and there is no access points to it. But I don't recall what they ended up -- I am looking -- I -- I feel like -- I know it's designed for four, two lanes in each direction. Strader: Really? Okay. Maybe. It could be my faulty memory is just -- Simison: But no center turn lane. Strader: Okay. Clark: Find that little -- sorry. If it's helpful to the Council I know it's not typical to have a digital, because it's harder to leave something with you, but I'm happy to hand around this Pad that has a better picture of it, but you can see the room on either side of the current two -- two lane roadway. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Hethe, can you send it to the clerk and, then, they can add it to the packet and we can all take a look at it up here. Clark: Yeah. I agree with that. Thanks. Appreciate it. This picture kind of shows it, but it's a little hard to see because of the distance. Maybe we will -- we will get that e- mailed and, then, maybe that's something we can pick up again at -- at rebuttal. I don't want to make everybody wait. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Maybe we still have our partners at ACHD on. I know part of it's ACHD, part of it's ITD, but if they have something to add to this about what the underpass at McMillan Road and Highway 16 is expected to look like that would just be extremely helpful for me. Kelly- Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, I do not know off the top of my head what that underpass is going to look like for McMillan. I can certainly reach out, see what the plan is for that. I haven't been in any of those conversations. I'm happy to do that. I don't know if I could get something tonight, though, unfortunately. I can maybe shoot out a text and see, but I cannot make any guarantees on that. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 42 of 61 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: If you could at least make the information request I would -- I would really appreciate it. I don't know what will happen tonight. You know, for me -- like what I really would like to see is exactly how is this going to work from a traffic perspective here at McMillan Road with this underpass, but, then, also all of the -- I -- I want to understand the interchanges here as well and how a resident from this side of The Fields -- you know, from this part of Fields District is going to likely get onto the new Highway 16 and I know that's not strictly an ACHD question, but it has enough to do with you guys, because you are building the connectivity to ITD's work. So, yeah, I -- -- I think I will need to understand that a little bit in more detail as well. Kelly: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, yeah, certainly happy to help with that and will do my research and I will get back in touch. Strader: Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Simison: Council, other questions for the applicant? Okay. All right. We are going to go and take a ten minute recess, just so everyone can stretch their legs and -- before we get into further conversation. If there is any way this information can be found by the time we get back that would be great. (Recess) Simison: It looks like we are all back in the room. I will say for the record that I used my downtime to phone a friend. Mr. Hood confirmed that the span is 83 feet underneath, which does allow for up to two travel lanes in each direction, but will -- does not allow for our full design, which is ten feet sidewalks on both sides. There would have to be some constraints likely, but it's originally only going to be built out to two lanes initially. But kind of coming it up to four long term. Clark: Mr. Mayor -- this is Hethe Clark again for the record. I think -- I don't think I did a very good job of explaining the Highway 16 access before, so maybe if I slow down and kind of walk through that a little bit I think it might help. So -- and Council Member Strader, maybe to answer your question directly about what do you do when it's busy on McMillan? Like how do you get out? So, if it's not busy, you know, the world's your oyster; right? But if it is busy you are probably going to be taking a right turn, okay? So, if you take a right turn you are going to have multiple options. You are going to go over to Owyhee Storm would one be -- would be one option. There is a light at Owyhee Storm that allows you to turn left, then, make another -- and there is another light down at Ustick on Owyhee Storm and, then, you have the ability to access Highway 16 pretty easily right there. Another option. Rather than turning left at Owyhee Storm, you know, say you want to -- just whatever direction you are going on a Highway 16 -- and -- and let's be clear, Highway 16 is a little bit of a different model than what we are kind of used to when it comes to the interstates and these -- this is going to be a hop on, hop off kind of transportation model and it's going to make life way nicer in this area. You are going Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 43 of 61 to be able to get down in three or four minutes down to the freeway and, then, head out to the -- to the airport. So, we are -- we are really excited about the proximity to Highway 16. When we hear hazardous area we -- that's not what we see, we see a real benefit. So, coming back to that question of what are our options. So, you could go south on Owyhee Storm. You could continue west on McMillan, take the right on Star Road, take the right on Chinden and, then, you are also at Highway 16. So, multiple options for our residents and -- and multiple pretty easy options to make a right out of McMillan and not deal with that traffic situation that you were mentioning. Council Member Strader. So, hopefully that is a little bit clearer than the -- the muddle I created earlier. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I -- I think we are getting closer, but, actually, had one of my colleagues point something out to me, which is -- I guess maybe what I'm not understanding is -- so, at the intersection of McDermott and McMillan like -- not the part where -- I mean the part I guess to the east of Highway 16, like how is that going to work? Is that going to be a four way stop or -- or is it going to be signalized? Like how -- if -- if you are, you know, trying to make a turning movement -- because, you are right, the underpass is a straight shot, but, then, if you are trying to make it -- like a left turning movement how is that going to work? Clark: So, Council Member Strader, so McDermott -- that -- that is a -- that will be signalized. You are not really going to be going north on McDermott unless you are local traffic, because McDermott is going to terminate at a cul-de-sac and I think it may already. If you are going right, then, you can head down and, then, that's kind of what that area that has that boot -- the intersection there for Ustick has been oriented to pull away to allow for enough room to -- to make that -- that interchange fit. So, that's why we have got that design there is where we kind of swoop around and out to -- but that is another option. So, the -- the northbound -- I guess the answer to your question the northbound McDermott option is probably just a local traffic option, it's not -- you are not really going to be turning left there eastbound off of McMillan. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: I can't help but -- and I had to talk to Captain Leslie over here, because our -- we put our old hats on -- well, his current hat. My old hat. And we look at maps and think I'm blue line. Sorry. I'm going to Owyhee Storm down to Ustick and I'm hitting Highway 16 and that's how I'm getting out of there. I live in Woodbridge. I have traffic issues every day. Certain times of the day I do not go up to Locust Grove and try to turn left. I do if I want to get frustrated, but if I want to be successful I pick a different way to get out of my subdivision. You have to be strategic. And I look at this and I think that's Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 44 of 61 -- it's obvious to me that -- you might try it once or twice turning left on McMillan and going underneath, but I don't think that's going to be a preferred route. I think folks are going to figure out they want to get under the limited access highway, figure out the best way to do it and choose that as a path. Clark: I think you are right. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: Hethe, just, again, kind of getting back to the underpass. So, to turn right into Rockwell you are being required to put a right turn access and a center lane on McMillan or -- can you just review that for me again? And I'm just wondering from Highway 16 at what point can you begin a right turn access if that's being required? Clark: So -- so, from Highway 16 -- so, the -- Council Member Whitlock, so there is not a -- it's just an overpass at McMillan at Highway 16. So, you would be approaching probably, you know, from the east on McMillan itself rather, so -- is that what you are referring to is the intersection? Whitlock: Correct. And maybe just to clarify once. You get through those two lanes on the underpass -- Clark: Uh-huh. Whitlock: -- how far -- how far before -- I mean do you have enough space to even put a turn lane in to go north into your property? Clark: Council Member Whitlock, we do. So, the -- this picture here might help. So, the -- there is quite a bit of room and that is the mitigation that was required was to do the center turn lane and the dedicated right turn lane at Ersatz. So, yeah, we -- we do believe that it can accommodate all of the mitigation that ACHD required after they reviewed our -- our traffic impact study. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Kind of got lost in some of the discussion, but I want to ask a question about access and some of the interaction with Meridian fire. So, I might be missing the detail, but the -- the temporary access that's intended -- or you are going to be making it an initial kind of a permanent access or a -- I'm not sure how to describe it. My understanding is it's a temporary access. That's to provide another access point for emergency personnel, but can you just walk me through and -- and, Steven, maybe if you have anything to share, I'm trying to understand the access requirements and Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 45 of 61 limitations on how many homes per year in the access. If you could -- I think you have touched on it, but if you could walk me through that again. Clark: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Taylor, so there is a couple -- there is a couple of different things that are playing there. So, generally speaking on a single access you are only allowed to have like 30 homes and so you would generally build just a temporary -- an emergency only to address that issue and allow you to go beyond the 30. In this case we had this additional ACHD requirement of a -- a single access on a collector and so we had to talk that over with ACHD and come to a -- the -- the right solution. So, if you look at the ACHD report what it says is that with this temporary full access onto McMillan that has to be done after 200 single family building lots have been platted and it will be restricted to a maximum width of 24 to 30 feet and paved. So, that -- it's an ACHD single access issue versus a fire single access issue and with the ACHD single access issue it's a temporary full road, whereas if it was just fire we would just be doing an -- an emergency only. Hopefully that's clear. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Do you guys have like a -- like a rendering or something of -- of kind of what ACHD is proposing in terms of -- I guess what -- what this will look like at kind of the intersection of McDermott and McMillan then? Like I -- because I mean we have some developments that are built out there already. It doesn't look to me like you could fit a roundabout there. Is it -- is it going to be a signalized intersection and exactly when is that going to be built? Clark: This -- the intersection at McDermott and -- Strader: And McMillan. Clark: -- McMillan, is that what you are asking? Strader: Yeah. Clark: So, I don't believe that it is planned for a roundabout, because there is not -- think you are correct that there is not enough room there and it doesn't make sense that there would be one. I -- I guess what I would say -- yeah, I guess I'm -- A, I'm not completely sure what -- how to answer your question or what -- what it is that would provide that answer. I can tell you that, you know, what's in the CIP and I can also tell you what's in the -- the traffic impact study, you know, the -- obviously, you know, we spend tens of thousands of dollars on those traffic impact studies, so that ACHD can tell us whether the roads are going to function or not. This one was about a 50,000 dollar traffic impact study and so it's our understanding that that intersection is on the CIP. The exact layout I'm not -- I don't have that in the packet and I don't know exactly what Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 46 of 61 that would look like, but based on their review of our TIS they did not see that as being a problem and didn't condition it that way. Simison: Kelly, do you have anything that you can add? Kelly: Mr. Mayor, City Councilors, the applicant touched on everything that I would have as well. Clark: I might note, Council Member Strader, that as part of the -- the recommendations in the ACHD report they didn't recommend signalization of McDermott and McMillan at this point anyway, because they wanted to see how -- when -- when State Highway 16 comes in how that affects the traffic patterns. So, that's -- that's another element of it. But that -- that is -- that has been studied and they have arrived at their conclusions on it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. So -- and maybe Kelly could help with that. So, I guess when -- when would that occur then? Because -- and -- and it feels like important infrastructure to make this area function. Like I -- I -- I think -- I -- I -- I agree Highway 16 is going to dramatically change the traffic pattern in this whole area -- hopefully for the better. Like selfishly I really hope it improves the situation. I just -- I -- I -- I guess maybe what I'm struggling with is -- I need someone to paint me a more complete picture of exactly what the roadway network's going to be around your project. Like in a lot more detail. I -- I'm not -- I -- I -- I -- I'm feeling concerned about McMillan specifically. I think we are getting closer. I -- I just don't think we are there. Like -- like, Mr. Mayor, like that -- that comment concerns me. Like if McDermott and McMillan are not going to be signalized at any point in the near future, that -- that's a head scratcher. Is it -- and I do recall they -- they were planning to do some kind of a cul-de-sac around there. It was very strange looking. The whole roadway network in this area I think it's going to be a mess personally. I just want to see what it's all going to look like and I think ACHD is probably the entity that needs to provide some more guidance on that. Mr. Mayor -- and just to explain further my concern, you have a pretty dense project. A lot of people are going to be living here and if we are dumping a ton of people into one spot really close to all these intersections I just want to understand how it's going to work. I don't have huge amounts of heartburn about the project besides, honestly, the roadway network -- you did a decent job convincing me that there is a solution somewhere on the school front, but -- but on this I'm still struggling. Clark: I'm trying to think of what else that I can give you, given the -- the studies. But, you know, we had already mentioned that McDermott -- excuse me -- McMillan between McDermott and Owyhee Storm is on the CIP to widen to the four lanes. I have provided you with the mitigation that ACHD has required after doing the review. It's my understanding -- and I think it was just confirmed that the signal is on the CIP, but ACHD Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 47 of 61 would like to see what the impact of Highway 16 is on that to confirm that timing, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. That just means that they want to look at the timing based on those developments and, then, I think I have also shown what the alternatives are if there is a busy morning on McMillan that folks are going to go right and they have -- and the world's their oyster. So, I'm -- I'm not sure what else I can give you in terms of additional information. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I think what I would like to know is I would like to see a rendering from ACHD about what exactly will be under the underpass. Like I think that would be really helpful. If we could nail down exactly how many lanes it is and, then, I want to understand if -- if it's a signalized intersection what is it? If it's at McDermott and McMillan when are they -- when is it in the CIP for; right? Like what is the timing? I -- I -- I mean I think those are some of the questions I would have and, then, I think it would be helpful to understand the proximity of the entrance to your subdivision from the underpass. How many feet is that, because if the traffic gets really backed up, right, I want to make sure people can get out. Simison: And I think that even answering the -- because if you are going to have a light there you are going to create a natural traffic break. Yeah. That's a chance -- that's an opportunity to get out and turn left, but if you are not, then, what does that mean? And, you know, the reality is I don't know that -- you know, I'm not a traffic engineer here, but I don't think McDermott is ever going to warrant the light at that location, because you don't have enough people probably heading south as a through fare. Now, I could be wrong, but just the way that road network is if I go by what they tell us for other places where we think we need lights and they say it doesn't warrant it, then, that -- I think that's just a question, because if you are just all one way traffic predominantly that definitely impacts your training movements, but I'm scouring their five year work plan, I'm trying to find anything about that project and I can't find it yet, so -- Clark: Well, I -- I think the Mayor -- I think you already confirmed that it's a four lane configuration underneath the overpass. Simison: Can have four lanes. Clark: Can have. Sorry. And, then, the other point about the distance, it's over 600 feet. So, there should be enough distance, you know, two football fields to be able to accommodate that -- any -- any backing. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 48 of 61 Taylor: A couple of things. I -- I would like you to show me the -- the -- it looked like you had a slide on phases, but while you are scrolling to that and can walk me through the timing of the phases and your development, I don't want to hold you accountable for other entities' poor transportation planning, but it is interesting -- I did not realize it as it looks like McDermott Road does not go through north, which I think, actually, is a significant consideration with what that traffic will look like. It will just be very localized traffic. It seems like they are trying to push people onto Highway 16, as opposed to taking some of those arterials. So, I don't -- I don't really see that as much of a concern now that I have that understanding with that intersection. I somewhat shared the same concern with Council Woman Strader about where the access point is, but if the main access point is 600 feet that would seem like that would not be as much of an issue. So, I think my concerns for the most part are okay. But if you could walk me through this --just not the -- the -- the phases, but also sort of the approximate timelines of when each phase will -- will happen. It sounds like we have got a pretty long horizon here we are looking at, but if you could walk me through that I would appreciate it. Clark: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Taylor. So, it's -- as I always say when we talk about phasing plans, it's all market dependent and crystal ball work. But, you know, given your -- your typical size of a phase, given the typical timing it takes to get a final plat application in, to get your infrastructure in and do the bonding and do all of that, you know, we would anticipate that these eight phases, which will start at that kind of main entrance on -- or in the blue with phase one, work your way down to phase two against McMillan and, then, kind of flow back north at that point, but somewhere in the range of ten years. So, I think Nick's comment about 2035 to 2037, depending on, you know, starts and how things go is -- is -- is about right. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: So, if I'm -- this is helpful. So, if I'm looking at this picture -- so, are you saying it's 600 feet to the phase one entrance or 600 feet to the phase five, I guess dark purple entrance? Clark: Council Member Strader, keep in mind that this is on its side, so -- Strader: Oh, yeah. Clark: -- McMillan is on the right side, so it's -- Strader: Okay. Clark: -- to the -- to the entrance. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 49 of 61 Strader: Ah. I -- I forgot. Okay. So, you are saying it's 600 feet from the underpass to Ersatz, which is this little road here kind of on the bottom right-hand side of your picture? Clark: Correct. Strader: Okay. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: Just to update as I'm going through line by line the updated ACHD staff report that was submitted with this on August 13th, on page 11, top -- bottom of page 11, the top of page 12, they address -- they address it several times, but they finally address that McDermott and McMillan Road, a traffic signal will be warranted at this intersection based on the four hour and peak hour vehicle volumes in 2030. So, they are not going to warrant it for a signal until that time. Previously to that -- and this is the one just a few days ago, they talk about how they will -- they are looking at adding lanes, but even ACHD appears to still be in the mode of we are not exactly sure how it's going to look yet. So, I think having the applicant get ACHD to commit -- this is only a few days old and it doesn't look like ACHD has exactly decided how that's going to look. Simison: I don't know, did we ever take public testimony? I don't remember if we -- don't think -- okay. I think we are still on the primary. And, you know, I'm not going to -- I don't want to dissuade, but we only have the two other members of the team and one member of the public and only city staff online, but -- is there anybody present else that would like to provide testimony on this item this evening? And I couldn't even see her, because Hethe was blocking -- no. You are good. No. You are good. So, without -- we will -- we will just pretend like we are in final comments if you want -- have any additional final comments or we will continue with the Q&A as part of that. Clark: I'm happy to continue the Q&A. Otherwise I would just ask for approval with -- and just keep in mind that Condition E that needs to be modified to match the ACHD staff report. Overton: And, Mr. Mayor, one follow up, not to try to confuse everyone, but they are all over the place in the staff report on what they want to do at that intersection. Just to clear this up, just one page further the traffic study recommends that McDermott Road and McMillan Road be signalized. However, there is not enough right of way to construct a signal making this improvement infeasible. Additionally, staff does not recommend signalization of this intersection as part of the application as traffic patterns are anticipated to change once Highway 16 opens, which is why they are not committing to what that's going to look like. They are doing what we are doing. They are waiting for 16 to open and seeing where everyone goes. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 50 of 61 Clark: I think -- maybe I would make one comment on that, too, Council Member Overton, is that this is the -- these are the items that are called for for the applicant to take care of, that -- that language that you are reading from and when additional right of way is required ACHD doesn't require the applicant to go acquire the right of way, because we can't; right? That's the issue. So, that I believe is what they are speaking to in terms of, you know, there is additional right of way that's required. They are going to have to do what they do with any other public project where they may have to go condemn additional right of way or do what needs to be done to acquire additional right of way. That doesn't mean it's not going to happen or hasn't been planned, it -- it -- what it means is that they are not going to make us go do that, because that's not within our power. Kelly: Mr. Mayor, City Councilors, I just want to confirm that's correct. So, what's essentially being stated there is based on the traffic impact study mitigation would be required -- or mitigation is warranted at that intersection. However, due to a couple factors, including right of way and an uncertainty of what that intersection will look like, the signalization of that intersection is not being required from the developer as part of this application. Hopefully that sort of clears things up. Strader: It doesn't really clear it up. Simison: Okay. Thank you. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Sorry, that -- that's not really clearing it up for me, so -- okay. So, just so we are on the same page, so ACHD thinks mitigation would be warranted here, but because of uncertainty you are not requiring it, because of Highway 16. I'm getting that. But are you saying it's physically infeasible to ever put a signal there? I want to understand that. Is it -- is there a physical constraint where that intersection would go that makes it impossible to put a signal there or economically unfeasible to do so? Or are you just saying you are just not requiring it yet? Kelly: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, that is not being required as part of this development. As the applicant stated, there are right of way constraints there now that currently exists that would interfere with signalization of that intersection. However, if ACHD determines in the future that a signal is something that's warranted there based on how traffic plays out after Highway 16, then, we can have -- we can create our own project, our capital project or something along those lines, and we can acquire that right of way, we can go through our process, but that's not something that we can require of the development. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 51 of 61 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: What are the right of way constraints? I think I -- I think we need to understand that. Do you mean in terms of availability of right of way or do you mean in terms of like the physical -- kind of what I'm getting at is -- is there -- is there a physical condition that would make it impossible to put an intersection there? Kelly: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, the -- when I speak of right of way requirements I speak of where currently the property lines are. So, that doesn't necessarily mean physical constraints, whether that be, you know, irrigation or various structures or whatever, that just means where -- where the property lines currently sit there is not enough room for us to house the -- the poles and the masks and the power boxes for signalization of that intersection. Strader: Yeah. That's not great. Clark: Mr. Mayor, if I could, I -- I think maybe if -- if I'm understanding the concern, Council Member Strader, I -- the -- the signal as I understand it would not be under the overpass. Is that the assumption that's being made? I think the signal is outside of the overpass. Strader: I agree. Clark: Okay. So, I -- I don't know what would constrain it other than acquisition of right of way, which is, you know, a pretty standard -- Strader- Mr. Mayor, I -- Simison: Just -- I mean, again, Google mapping that they already have the bridge deck. It looks like the bridge deck is one hundred feet from the intersection by where the map does and using the stuff for comparison the Cole intersection is over 500 feet from the -- that structure. There is also nothing that appears, it's just -- it's landscaping for two subdivisions on the west -- or east side of that intersection. So, I don't -- again, I don't see anything on -- on top of the ground, though, that would seem to prohibit more right of way. Below the ground, though, I don't know. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: Can I open up another can of worms? Simison: Only if you are going to eat them. Whitlock: I -- I just might. Hethe, if you could go back maybe to the -- the rendering you had up right before this one. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 52 of 61 Clark: You are talking this one or the -- Whitlock: Oh, it showed -- Clark: The -- the Costco one? Whitlock: Yeah. The Costco one would be good. And I mean this -- this is the first piece of a puzzle and we are turning it every which way to see where this might fit in the overall picture that we are trying to put together here in The Fields District. So, we are a little bit of a disadvantage. We are trying to figure out traffic coming down McMillan, we are trying to figure out what Highway 16 is going to do, you have got 51 acres here that goes about halfway up this square mile, got Ersatz Place -- I'm just -- I'm curious about the name of place. To me that doesn't say it's a drive or any throughway that's going to get people from your project to the north and will there be a way that they can move to the west once those other puzzle pieces get figured out? So, again, I'm -- I'm just -- I'm trying to turn this every which way that I can and figure out are there some challenges that we are concerned about today that might be addressed by future puzzle pieces that get put into this? Clark: Okay. Council Member Whitlock, this is one of the items that I'm -- I wanted to make sure that I was understanding, so I did phone a friend, too. So, the -- the Ersatz Place is a roadway that is currently under the IT -- under ITD jurisdiction. It's going to go over to ACHD. It is not intended to go all the way north to Chinden, but on the master street map it turns west and -- and there -- it's intended to go over to Star Road. So, that would be -- you know, call it the mid-mile collector type setup that would be part another additional way through this block to give folks yet another option. I didn't put that -- we didn't put that on this map, because we are not sure about that timing. We kind of wanted to emphasize these are the options, day one, phase one, and -- and we think those options are pretty darn good. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I think if there was a copy of the master street map of like what's planned for The Fields District that would -- that could be very helpful, because I think that was an excellent question. Clark: Yeah. That's the -- The Field sub area map. I think that's -- so, that -- that would show Ersatz, yeah, that -- where Nick is pointing coming up and turning either west there and, then, you also have that interchange area commercial that's just to the north of it. So, I -- I would assume that that was the thought process was to go around that, so it's not the -- the interchange area -- the mixed-use interchange area isn't bisected. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 53 of 61 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: So, will -- will Ersatz go all the way through to Owyhee Storm, then, with this development? Clark: Not with this development. We don't control that. Strader: Oh. Okay. Where -- where does it -- where does your section end on this map, if you don't mind showing me? Sorry. It's just kind of hard to follow with this rendering. Clark: Yeah. It's -- I mean, obviously, it's kind of an artistic -- but, yeah, about where Nick's at on the arrow there is where we end. And, then, that area where it says potential civic site, school, church, that whole area down to -- as I understand it down to McMillan is the -- the school site that was previously approved and it's waiting for sewer. I guess the -- the larger point would be that it's in accordance with what's been planned out there. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: Yeah. I -- I think part of the worry is that it -- it doesn't -- and I -- and I -- I want to be careful, because this is going to come across as kind of critical to ACHD, but we have had kind of a history of planning challenges along McMillan and -- and -- and just generally speaking our whole experience with this underpass was very concerning. Like I -- we found out about it because an old council member who was retired from decades ago like sent us this big red flag e-mail that was like there is a huge disaster that's going to happen at McMillan and Highway 16. That's kind of how it was elevated to our attention. So, ACHD saying something's -- something is warranted here, but we are not requiring anything because we just have so much uncertainty, like that doesn't give me a lot of confidence and I am kind of just worried, because we are putting such a huge amount of density in one place, it's like if we are -- if we -- if we end up creating a huge bottleneck or a huge challenge here I think it will just get exacerbated. I -- I -- I get what you are saying. I think there are a few workarounds, but, I don't know, it's -- it's not -- it's -- anyway, that's my concern. I'm just trying to really understand the plans for transportation and especially the local roadway network and like the McDermott and McMillan intersection doesn't give me a lot of confidence hearing that from ACHD and it's a really short amount of distance from the underpass to where that will be and, you know, again, so, you know, McMillan runs through my district and it's already a disaster. Clark: Yeah. And I -- my client just reminded me of something and this -- I think this kind of goes with what the Mayor was saying -- is that the -- and I'm no traffic engineer, have no crystal ball, but I -- I -- I just have to emphasize that that McDermott intersection may have a hard time hitting the signal warrants. I mean it says that it would at 2030, but because of those movements where it's just going to local -- local Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 54 of 61 traffic on the north and ending in a cul-de-sac and, otherwise, you are just making a right turn, I mean it -- it's -- I -- I don't want to downplay the concern at all, but -- sorry? Strader: Mr. Mayor, unless you are just -- I mean it's not just for people turning, like it's also going to be people that just, you know, want to go east; right? Maybe people that want to go to the Capri or the Delsas or like, you know, there is plenty of local traffic that will come from this and there are plenty of shopping centers now along McMillan. I mean you have got a Walmart there. You have got like quite a lot that I would think people would want to access. So, I -- I think if -- if -- if this is like a four way stop right there -- Clark: I don't think it would be a four way stop. That would -- I -- I wouldn't -- I wouldn't want and be in favor of that either. Strader: Yeah. Clark: If folks are going east they are going to be better off with no signal there. They don't -- they don't want to be interrupted. They are just going to continue on. So, I -- mean that's -- that's my perspective on it, Council Member Strader. Strader: Okay. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: Maybe try to kind of summarize what I'm hearing in my -- kind of my own personal views. I think it's a good project. It's kind of tucked in a spot that's a little awkward next to a state highway. That's not an ideal place to put a development. So, think you have done a pretty good job figuring out how to make that work. I like that it's a fairly long phased out approach. I think having that time built in there for the rest of the developments that come around, I think there is some benefit. It almost feels like you are, you know, we are looking at these different planning entities with our transportation network, to which no one here has any control, other than input, and what we are getting back from them is, you know, who controls what road now versus in the future and what is the traffic pattern going to look like. Nobody knows -- and to our -- our sister agencies who are doing the work, they don't frankly know and so they are reserving judgment and decisions and committing capital dollars until they have a better understanding. It's a -- kind of a -- this feels like a very unique situation for us to be in with that -- with that. I like what I'm hearing with the application. Concerns with school crowding, et cetera are fine. I -- I do think that the surface road network, you know, Councilman Whitlock's question was a really good question, but it seems like there is some -- a plan for that. I think Council Woman Strader's drilling in on what probably is the biggest issue, which is are we accidentally creating a bottleneck to which we cannot back out of. I don't know if any of us have the -- the answers to that right now. That's kind of how I'm seeing it right now. The application itself I think is a pretty solid one and Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 55 of 61 1 don't know what other further information we are going to get from ITD or ACHD. I don't know. I mean I wish there was more information that we could look at, but I just don't know that we can get it, because I don't know that they have it. That's kind of where -- as I'm trying to kind of synthesize where I see this right now that's what I'm -- that's where I'm at. Overton: Mr. Mayor, if I can follow up -- Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: -- on what Councilman Taylor just said. I'm having the same feelings you are. I like the application. I like the way it's laid out. It's one of the first developments we have got on that side of 16 and what I'm -- I -- I literally almost read the entire report, again, from ACHD and what I see them doing is talking a lot about, well, we may do this or we may do that and I think we are looking for concrete answers and those aren't going to come, because they are waiting to see what those warrants look like. They are waiting to see how -- what effect Highway 16 has. I think we have to come to terms with that and go back to just looking at our application and what we are talking about in local roadways that exist right now. Clark: Mr. Mayor, if I could, too, you know, the -- this entire thing is not just a guess though either. You know, I -- I -- I -- I don't think it's fair to ACHD or to the traffic engineers who looked at this to suggest that -- that they are leaving everything wide open. They actually did review each of these intersections. They -- they identified what mitigation needs to be there. With regard to this particular intersection ACHD has decided that, hey, it doesn't make sense to go do this now when we got state Highway 16 that's coming and may change some things and so we are going to reserve the ability to do that later. They are not saying it's not going to happen. They are just looking at this and doing something that I think is pretty obvious. State Highway 16 is going to change a bunch of things and they want to make sure that they understand it before they put it in there. But that doesn't mean it's not going to happen. And so -- and, again, tens of thousands of dollars on a traffic impact study to try to understand all that so that we can put that in front of you guys and have something for ACHD to comment on. Whitlock: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Whitlock. Whitlock: More a comment than a question. So, this slide on the screen I think helps me a lot, because you didn't -- you didn't design Highway 16 and the underpass there, but the fact that you have 600 feet from that underpass to Ersatz Place answered my question of is there enough room there to do a dedicated right turn into your project and I think there is enough to do that center lane and -- and address some of those issues of egress from this property. This map also shows me, you know, a potential civic side of school, church or something similar to that, which it's not going to be homes in there Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 56 of 61 and there will be some traffic, depending on whether it's a school or a church and time of day and those kinds of things, but there will be another egress point out onto Star Road; is that right? At some point. Clark: Owyhee Storm is -- Whitlock: Owyhee Storm. Okay. Next one is Star. So, you know, I -- I think there will be additional options as the other puzzle pieces get put into place here, So, this -- this helped crystallize some things in my mind despite all the uncertainty of -- of traffic and other entities not being able to tell us what their plans are. Clark: Thank you. Simison: And if I could piggyback on that, I mean, you know, I have got my own views on -- you are -- I'm never going to turn right and go a mile and go a mile to go a mile, I'm -- I'm going to be in that left-hand turn lane forever. I'm going to make that left-hand turn no matter what happens. I don't care who is getting in my way type of mentality. That's just me. I'm not going to -- you are not going to -- gas is too expensive for me to drive three miles to make a left-hand turn. My wife, on the other hand, she will only make right-hand turns, you know, that -- yeah, but -- but -- but my main point, though, is the connection to Ersatz over to Owyhee Storm Avenue is actually going to -- in my opinion say that the maps that you have shown really aren't going to be the way that people are going to function, because three quarters of the way down they are going to access -- they are going to go north a little bit and go over an eighth of a mile, quarter mile and, then, take that up to the road, so the -- you are going to access that probably at Owyhee Storm Avenue at some point. That's where you are going to have a light in this area to allow breaks in traffic and people to access more than likely the -- you know, I don't know what's going to happen to McMillan, that's just a -- or McDermott. That's -- no -- no idea, but -- so, that actually to me says that's how you can get out of this long term in my opinion, more so than any place else and I think it's -- it's a little bit more reasonable than the previous maps on how you are getting to Costco components for people like me anyways, so -- Clark: And I think, you know, part -- you know, maybe to our to -- a little more explanation on that. Part of the -- the thought process with that map was to show how you are going to get to Highway 16, the interchanges, where we don't have one right there, so -- and -- and maybe some -- another point and maybe this is the larger point is that, you know, the -- the city's invested a bunch in the -- in this Field sub area. You know, the -- those first few steps in developing these areas are a little more tentative, just because you got to work with the other agencies and make it happen, but, you know, we are never going to get the -- the park and the mixed-use interchange and all that stuff if we don't get some rooftops out there. So, hopefully, that helps to -- this helps to prime that pump. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 57 of 61 Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: It's all going to happen, it's just a question of how long it takes us to get there. Like I -- I -- the infrastructure investment argument doesn't give me the same sense of urgency, because we are -- we are building these on a decades' long timeline. It will all eventually be fine. I -- I just think it's a question of is like is the timing right for this development right now? And from where I'm sitting I'm not getting a lot of confidence from ACHD on how this is going to play out and so that -- that's my struggle. I'm not sure where I'm going to fall on this one. I -- I am very worried that if we do create a bottleneck that we cannot fix it could create a really acute situation that already McMillan is a bad situation and -- and I have already vowed not to put more traffic on McMillan in other applications. I was thinking maybe I would make an exception for this, because it's kind of on the other side of Highway 16 and that might make more sense, because I was thinking maybe we will have all the connectivity we need. I guess I'm just not getting a clear enough picture of how this would all work. I do agree, I think long term Owyhee Storm is the answer. I think Councilman Whitlock completely nailed it on that. But that -- that may be a ways; right? Because you don't control that other property and that would make that connection, so a little bit of a timing issue. Simison: Onto a different topic. The one thing I really -- yeah. I -- I understand the sound issues, but I'm glad that the -- in theory Highway 16 will be open before anything is out there along that, so people understand what they are getting. You know, it's one thing to have it be louder than you like, it's another thing to have it happen after you move in. Clark: Yeah. I think I agree with that. The timing is good. You know, you never want to have the -- the folks come back to you later and say that this wasn't that the -- what the realtor told me, which is the inevitable phone call that I get from the cold calls at my office, but, you know, in this case we are pretty confident in that sound mitigation, because we did put the attached product there in addition to the berm, in addition to the -- to the wall. So, you know, the combination of those things should be a real benefit to the rest of the area in fact. Like if you -- if you -- you know, maybe going back to some of the conversations earlier, if you put in more porous product, you know, with yards and whatnot, that sound is just going to travel through the whole neighborhood and so we think that actually this -- that's another reason to do what we have done is it creates a real sound barrier, not just with the fence, but with the actual housing type. Overton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Overton. Overton: If we have no more public comments, I would move to close the public hearing. Little Roberts: Second. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 58 of 61 Simison: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? They ayes have it and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. Overton: Mr. Mayor, I think we have all had a view of this application this evening and have to go back to one of the first lines that they talked about having to build this out, 50 to 60 homes a year until 2035, 2037. As we watch how this area develops I think even the applicant has to be very cautious and watch how this all goes and how the roadways are going to go as well. I have a lot of confidence in this area that we are going to see a lot more applications coming as the plans for the roadways get more solidified. Confident enough I will kick off the first run as a motion tonight. After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, including keeping in Condition 2-C and adding in the request that the developer work with our staff on a dust mitigation plan, I move to approve File No. H-2025-0002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 19th, 2025. Taylor: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Napoli: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, did you want to strike provision E from the development agreement as well to align with ACHD on not having the alignments aligned with the school. Overton: Yes. Motion maker would like to strike that. Napoli: Thank you. Taylor: And the second agrees. Simison: And the second agrees with that. For discussion. Taylor: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Taylor. Taylor: I will just be pretty brief. I already kind of shared some comments. I think it's a good project. I kind of like it. The more I have thought about it I think it's a pretty good project for where it is. Do you think trying to can -- hold this application to the same standard I would with others with respect to the fact that we rely on our -- our sister agencies and entities when working through the challenges with -- with transportation. It's kind of unique, it's, you know, one of the first ones out there. I do think that this will spur additional applications and interest. Obviously, we -- we know we have a -- a park out there that we would like to get built and we need some impact fees. We need some Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 59 of 61 other things to get going. I think once Highway 16 is done I think we will see a lot of interest out there and this is -- it's always a little bit rough when it's the first one out there, because there is so many unknowns, but I don't think it's fair to hold this application sort of hostage with some unknowns that even are planning division -- or planning departments and our other agencies still are looking for some information on that. So, again, I do think it's a good application and I -- I -- I don't think holding off for another time is going to change anything. I think it's okay to move forward. So, glad to support it. Strader: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Strader. Strader: I'm just not going to get there tonight on it. I was pretty close. I actually thought maybe I could, but I just -- I just don't feel good about it. It really for me it's -- McMillan Road is already a disaster in District 2 is my opinion. It can never be widened -- at least the segment that's along the canal and here I just hear so much uncertainty from our partner agency and I agree we have to rely on their judgment, we have to rely on them to do their job, but we also need to try to help them see around some corners and we need to stop ourselves I think from creating a huge bottleneck here. I just haven't received enough information to satisfy me that we are going to avoid that. So, I -- I -- I just -- for me I haven't hit the bar yet. Thanks. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: I will -- I will be brief. A lot of my Council Members have summed up my thoughts and, you know, I -- I talked about our last application and -- and the -- the right application in the wrong spot and this is different, this is -- this is the right application in the right spot at the right time. I really want to commend the applicant in really responding to the perceived concerns about sound. I think ultimately that benefits your future residents, it benefits our community, it's a win all around and going to the alternative compliance seems to be the most appropriate. Like my good -- my good colleague Council Member Taylor, if I had written concerns from the highway district about some of this I would -- I would be more sympathetic to slowing it down, but I think that certainly this application is going to -- Councilman Taylor's points -- spur some development to the west, which I think will also provide some better connectivity to our future residents. So, I don't see any reason why I'm going to be opposed about this application tonight and look forward to seeing it be a success. Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 60 of 61 Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor, I will be supporting the application tonight. I agree, I wish we had a crystal ball and knew what was going to happen exactly with the roads and when Highway 16 opens, but we don't, but I think we need to trust our partners. This is a good application in a great spot that will kick off kind of the start of what I believe is going to happen out there and I'm going to believe that our partners are going to do their very best to mitigate traffic as they see fit and after they know what's going to happen with Highway 16. So, again, I will be in support of it. Simison: If there is no further comments ask the clerk to call the roll. Roll Call: Cavener, yea; Strader, nay; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea; Whitlock, yea. Simison: Five ayes. One nay. The item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE NAY. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or do I have a motion for Executive Session? Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Real quick before I -- I make a motion. I just -- I want to flag for -- for Council next week in our work session we will be hearing from MDC. Our -- our good clerk passed out a memo that MDC had provided, but hadn't necessarily been forwarded on to us. I would encourage you all as part of your weekly preparation -- I know you go through all the application. This may not have necessarily been seen on the agenda, so I wanted to flag it for you that it's in your inbox. It is sections of the destination downtown report, but some questions that MDC is asking of us. So, would encourage you to review those questions and be prepared to provide a perspective. We are going to be talking about design standards next week. Moving forward. I have also asked MDC to provide this to us on a little bit more of an earlier update, so we have time to prepare particularly here is what they are going to present and maybe what questions they are going to ask of us. So, it's a little bit more of an efficient process moving forward. EXECUTIVE SESSION [Action Item] per Idaho Code 74-206(1)(f): To communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated. Meridian City Council August 19,2025 Page 61 of 61 Cavener: And with that, Mr. Mayor, and move we go into Executive -- Executive Session pursuant to Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(f) and (1)(d). Strader: Second. Simison: Have a motion and a second to go into Executive Session. Is there any discussion? If not Clerk call the roll. Roll Call: Cavener, yea; Strader, yea; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor, yea; Whitlock, yea. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and we will go into Executive Session. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:20 p.m. to 10:02 p.m.) (Motion and second -- out of Executive Session - Cavener/Strader.) (Motion and second to adjourn - Cavener/Strader.) MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:02 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 9-2-2025 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 9-2-2025 E IDIAN;--- /hl R AGENDA ITEM Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Council may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET Date: August 19, 2025 Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic. Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum: • DO NOT: o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3-minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum) Name (please print) Brief Description of Discussion Topic E1' 01 Y''z i. �,� � Or krL PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: August 19, 2025 ITEM # 2 PROJECT NAME: City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2026 Proposed Budget I wish to testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing (mark X (Please Print) HOA? if yes) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: August 19, 2025 ITEM # 1 PROJECT NAME: City of Meridian Fiscal Year 2025 Amended Budget I wish to testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing (mark X (Please Print) HOA? if yes) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 C� E IDIAN Planning and Zoning Department Presentation and Outline Changes to Agenda: None Item #3: Grammercy Townhomes (H-2025-0019) Application(s):  Rezone  Preliminary Plat  Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 6.98 acres of land, zoned C-G, located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 Wells Avenue. History: In 2021, the subject properties were approved for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units on 5.24 acres of land. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Regional Summary of Request: Rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zone to the TN-R zone, a preliminary plat for 82 buildable lots and 8 common lots, and a development agreement modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. The subject properties fall within the Mixed-Use Regional (MU-R) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation. The intent of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail, and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. The MU-R designation should make up between 10% and 30% of the total development area, with gross residential densities ranging from 6 to 40 units per acre. The MU-R area, located at the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Overland Road, encompasses approximately 165.2 acres. Of that total, roughly 41.5 acres are designated for residential use, including the proposed development, accounting for 25.1% of the MU-R area in this quadrant, which aligns with the Comprehensive Plan's vision and density targets. The proposed development plan depicts eighty-two (82) townhomes with the Traditional Neighborhood Zoning (TN-R) as the single use for the subject properties. While the TN-R zoning requires two different types of housing, staff finds that the surrounding garden-style apartments, single-family detached, and townhomes provide the mix of units desired in the area. The proposed townhomes range in size from 1,650 s.f. and 1,750 s.f. with three (3) and four (4) bedroom units. Net density for the development exceeds the minimum net density of 6 dwelling units per the TN-R standards (19 du/acre) In addition to the townhomes, the development plan depicts a 0.60-acre common open space with parkways, on-street parking, and alleys. The applicant has provided an internal pathway to connect with the ten (10) foot multi-use pathway on the southern boundary to help residents connect with Mountain View High School and Gordon Harris Park to the south. The project exceeds open space requirements, providing 1.31 acres (18.8% of the site) against a 15% minimum. Amenities include a large central open space and a dog waste station, totaling 3.5 amenity points, well above the required 1. Each townhome includes four parking spaces, and 46 guest spaces are also provided throughout the community. Access is proposed via three (3) drive aisle connections: one to the north connecting to an existing drive aisle and commercial property, and two to the east to connect to S. Wells Avenue. These drive aisles are currently not named and are considered commercial drive aisles. However, the applicant is proposing to add six private streets in the development that require a minimum of one connection to a public street. Staff has discussed this with the applicant and determined the southern connection on the eastern boundary would be best as it aligns with Blue Horizon on the east side of S. Wells Avenue. This will take coordination with the neighboring property owners to name the existing private drive aisle. The applicant has indicated that the buildout timeline for the development depends on demand; however, they anticipate developing the project in five (5) phases, with the first phase consisting of the large open space, amenities, and roads. Commission Recommendation: Approval Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Mike Chidester and Hethe Clark ii. In opposition: N/A iii. Commenting: N/A iv. Written testimony: Emily Prumers – Concerns regarding traffic and congestion becoming worse, specifically at the Overland and Eagle intersection and being in close proximity to the Goddard School (daycare center); incompatible density in area (gross density of 11.74 units/acre); deviation from the previously approved concept plan for 164 age-restricted apartments; Strain on public services ie. Utilities, parks, schools, fire/police; No transition from commercial uses. v. Key Issue(s): N/A Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Commission discussed the shift from the original entitlement and the new one. There was discussion about the viability of the two projects, and the commission found that the new proposal would be a good infill project for the area due to its proximity to schools, parks, and existing commercial areas. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. None Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2025-0019, as presented in the staff th report for the hearing date of August 19, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0019, as presented during the th hearing on August 19, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2025-0019 to the hearing date of _____ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: Rockwell Greens Subdivision (H-2025-0002) Application(s):  Annexation  Preliminary Plat  Alternative Compliance (Director Approved) Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 51.15 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, generally located at the NW corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Road. History: The applicant had a previous application that was submitted in 2024, but the applicant withdrew this application to obtain additional land to incorporate within the subdivision. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential Summary of Request: Annexation of 51.15 acres of land with the R-15 zoning district; a preliminary plat consisting of 412 building lots, 27 commons lots; and alternative compliance for the city's standards for developments abutting a state highway. This property lies within the Fields Sub-Area Plan, a four-square-mile planning area located in the northwest corner of the City’s Area of Impact. The boundaries of this sub-area are Ustick Road to the south, Can-Ada Road to the west, Chinden Boulevard/US Highway 20/26 to the north, and McDermott Road/State Highway 16 to the east. The Fields Sub-Area Plan envisions a cohesive “modern rural” character across all new development. This theme should be reflected in housing design, public amenities, streetscapes, open spaces, and commercial areas. Design guidance in the plan emphasizes the use of natural landscaping such as tall fescue and wildflowers, split rail fencing, street trees, public art, and appropriately themed signage. Multi-use pathways and on-street bike lanes are also encouraged to promote connectivity. High-quality design and implementation of these character elements are expected throughout the area. The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates the area proposed for annexation as Medium Density Residential (MDR), which supports residential development at a density of three to eight dwelling units per acre. The proposed development is planned at a density of 8.05 units per acre, placing it at the high end of the allowed range. Although the proposed density is within the MDR designation, staff has concerns due to the current lack of connectivity to commercial and neighborhood-serving uses, the absence of a regional park, and the overcapacity of nearby public schools. To address this, the applicant has exceeded the Unified Development Code’s requirements for amenities and open space and has indicated that a new elementary school being constructed in Star, and the boundary lines will be adjusted in the 2026-2027 school year, which is anticipated to relieve some of the existing capacity issues. WASD has confirmed this as well. Staff has communicated these concerns to the applicant and recommends that both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council consider whether it is in the city’s best interest to annex and develop this property before supporting infrastructure and services are in place. An open space exhibit was submitted, that depicts 17.1% (or 8.78-acres) of open space that meets the required quality and qualified open space standards. Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum of thirteen (13) amenity points are required to be provided. The amenities proposed are a swimming pool facility, playground, pathways, pickleball courts, dog parks and several open space areas. The applicant’s amenity points total is 26.5 exceeding the UDC requirements. However, the applicant needs to provide an amenity from the multi-modal group in order to meet the required standards. Another key consideration is the subdivision’s proximity to the future State Highway 16, which is expected to be completed and operational by late 2026 or early 2027. According to the Comprehensive Plan’s Existing Conditions Report, state highways are identified as hazardous due to high speeds, accident frequency, and impacts on air quality. Staff is particularly concerned about the effects of locating a higher-density subdivision directly adjacent to this known hazard, as more residents could be exposed to health and safety risks compared to a lower-density development. To mitigate these impacts, the applicant has requested alternative compliance from the city's standards for highway-adjacent development (UDC 11-3H-4). Their proposal includes a six-foot wall placed on top of a six-foot berm, additional amenities and open space, a sound engineer's report, and sound-attenuating construction methods for homes located near the highway. However, the applicant has requested that these enhanced construction practices be deferred to the building permit phase, rather than being guaranteed at the time of plat approval. In addition to this, the applicant has worked with city staff to propose thicker vegetation coverage along SH-16 in the form of 1 tree for every building lot and 1 tree every 20 feet in the open space, instead of 1 tree every 35 feet as required by code. Additionally, the applicant has agreed to meet 80% vegetation coverage along SH-16 instead of 70%, excluding the 12-foot irrigation district road. The sound engineer used the expected distance of 150 feet from the centerline to the nearest residential area to gauge the expected noise levels. This led to the result of an expected hourly Leq (peak hour) to be 72.7 dBA (Decibels A-weighted) and 74 dBA DNL (Day Night Average Sound Level). Another calculation using traffic patterns from long-term measurements collected a other highways in Idaho shows the DNL is 73 dBA for the peak hour Leq of 73 dBA. However, when accounting for the factors of the distance between the highway, wall/berm, property lines, and height of the wall/berm, the noise is expected to see a reduction of 9 and 11 dB for most traffic noise sources. With these mitigation measures proposed by the applicant the expected outdoor worst-case hour Leq for the project site is between 62 and 64 dBA, which is deemed acceptable. The sound engineer concludes that the traffic noise levels are expected to be less than 65 dBA DNL, the berm and barrier are required to help mitigate the noise, and residential building along the first row nearest to the highway should have additional consideration for the floors above the ground floor as the six (6) foot wall and six (6) foot berm may not adequately block the line of site from SH-16 to these spaces. Access to the property is proposed from N. Ersatz Place, a future collector roadway on the western portion of the site. This collector road is a shared drive between the proposed subdivision and the future Cole Valley Christian School. The applicant is proposing three access points off N. Ersatz Place. The northernmost access point is not supported by staff, as UDC 11-3A-3 requires limiting access points to collector and arterial roadways. In addition, the applicant shall submit documentation with the final plat that the southern access is in alignment with the future Cole Valley Christian Schools curb cut. However, it is important to note that per IFC D107.1, the subdivision will be limited to thirty (30) single-family homes with only fire access points. The applicant's phasing plan indicates more than thirty (30) homes are proposed off the southern access point. To avoid conflict with the fire code, the applicant shall revise the phasing plan to provide adequate secondary access or shall construct the local roads prior to exceeding thirty (30) single-family lots in the subdivision. Since the publication of the staff report, the applicant has worked with MFD to propose a new plan that will work for secondary access. The applicant has stated that the first homes would be occupied in 2027, with a projected build-out rate of 50 to 60 homes per year. Full build-out is anticipated between 2035 and 2037. In summary, staff finds the proposed preliminary plat and the R-15 zoning designation to be generally consistent with the Future Land Use Map. However, due to the development’s density, its location next to a future state highway, and current service limitations in the area, staff recommends that the Commission and Council closely evaluate whether this proposal aligns with the broader goals and readiness of the surrounding area. Staff has worked with the applicant since the publication of the staff report to modify some conditions. Please see the presentation for this. Commission Recommendation: Approval with the changes as presented at the hearing. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: vi. In favor: Hethe Clark vii. In opposition: None viii. Commenting: ix. Written testimony: Craig Cooper and Shawn Freeman. x. Key Issue(s): Concerns about traffic, quality of life, density, and overcrowding of schools. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: ii. Commission discussed the density of the subdivision along SH-16, traffic, and schools. While the commission had some concerns with the subdivision, they determined that the density at this location made sense. However, there were still concerns with traffic in the area, as the intersection of McMillan and McDermott has no improvements in the near future. Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: ii. Commission adopted the changes staff presented to them. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Consider whether the density of the subdivision is appropriate next to a hazard in SH-16. We still do not know the full impact SH-16 will have, as it is not functional yet. School overcrowding is a concern; however, West Ada and the applicant have indicated this will be relieved starting in the 2026 -2027 school year. Timing of the subdivision is another consideration, and whether this is the right time for the annexation, considering there are few services in the area for residents. ACHD's acceptance of Ersatz Place is another consideration, as ITD constructed it, but it has not been accepted by ACHD yet. Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2025-0002, as presented in the staff th report for the hearing date of August 19, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2025-0002, as presented during the th hearing on August 19, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2025-0002 to the hearing date of ____ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) h2 City Council MeetingAugust 19, 2025 Zoning MapAerialFLUM Zoning MapAerialFLUM •lowered to six (6) feet.beThe maximum fence height in a residential district is six (6) feet in height. The eight (8) foot fence around the pool shallpool area. The applicant may request alternative compliance in accordance with the UDC to permit the proposed eight (8) foot fence arounCondition 3.f•by code to help mitigate for sound attenuation and air quality.instead of the 70% required (not including the gravel access road) Lot 58, Block 4 shall be landscaped with 80% vegetation coverage Condition 3.c•. In other open spaces along State Highway 16, provide trees every twenty (20) feet.for sound attenuation and air quality28) feet) along State Highway 16 to help mitigate 20(eight -within every residential lot (approximately every twentyProvide one (1) tree Condition 3.b•subdivision with the primary open space and amenities.”to provide better connectivity for the residents in the northern portion of the sidewalks along the west side of N. Camp Creek Avenuein alignment with the proposed , Block 8 4336, Block 8 and Lot 1522through Lot separate from the existing common driveway 8-3A-in the form of a micro pathway in a minimum of a fifteen (15) foot common lot in accord with UDC 11Provide a pedestrian connectionCondition 2.f•Block 12.”in alignment with the pedestrian connection located on Block 4 Lot 108, “Provide a pedestrian connection to W. McMillan Road through Condition 2.e•with the first final plat application.”such agency an approval from for the frontage improvements along N. Ersatz Place and submit or ACHD (as applicable) “The applicant shall obtain approval from ITD Condition A.F. -School project. Provide documentation of this with the final plat.n aDA Provision E: Align the southernmost entrance along N. Ersatz Place with the curb cut approved with the Cole Valley Christi-Avenue to parcel #S0429417250.GallsonCondition 2c: Provide a stub road in alignment with N. V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Gramercy Townhomes (H-2025-0019) by Elton Development Company, located at 1873, 1925 and 2069 Wells Ave. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0019 A. Request: Rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zone to the TN-R zone. B. Request: Preliminary Plat for 82 buildable lots and 8 common lots. C. Request: Development Agreement Modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: August 19, 2025 ITEM # 3 PROJECT NAME: Gramercy Townhomes (H-2025-0019) I wish to testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing (mark X (Please Print) HOA? if yes) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,,--, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 8/19/2025 Legends® DATE: - Project Location �'•J'� �' TO: Mayor& City Council Area of Impact �= City Limits FROM: Nick Napoli,Associate Planner O Analysis @. ; s 208-884-5533 nnapoli@meridiancity.org C _ 3 I APPLICANT: Mike Chidester SUBJECT: H-2025-0019 , T Gramercy Townhomes � i - LOCATION: Located at 1873, 1925, and 2069 Wells � '��. Avenue in the NE '/4 of Section 20, - T.3N.,R1E. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Rezone of 6.98 acres of land from the C-G zone to the TN-R zone, a preliminary plat for 82 buildable lots and 8 common lots, and a development agreement modification to establish a new concept plan and remove the age restriction on the property. B. Recommendation Staff. Approval with a development agreement and conditions. Commission: Approval as presented in staff report. C. Decision Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report I. Project Overview I1. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential - Existing Zoning C-G(General Retail and Service Commercial District) VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning TN-R(Traditional Neighborhood District) Adopted FLUM Designation MU-R(Mixed Use Regional) VII.A.3 Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 11/19/2024 Neighborhood Meeting 2/18/2025 Site posting date 7/31/2025 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IV.D • Comments Received Yes - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Private streets are proposed for the development. - ITD Comments Received Yes;No comment Meridian Public Works Wastewater IV.B • Distance to Mainline Available at Site • Impacts or Concerns Yes, See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Meridian Public Works Water IV.B • Distance to Mainline Available at Site • Impacts or Concerns Yes, See Public Works Site Specific Conditions School District(s) West Ada School District IV.0 • Capacity of Schools Pepper Ridge Elementary:Architectural 675,Program 575 - Lewis and Clark Middle: 1000 Mountain View High: 2175 • Number of Students Enrolled Pepper Ridge Elementary:471 - Lewis and Clark Middle: 899 Mountain View High: 2479 Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received, or see the public record. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics Figure l: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:R3238520110 Date Retrieved:2025/5/5 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infiii Indicator: 441 Surrounding Area 313 0 '� 7 �p Notcty ® City Limits 2,894 1,512. ■ Not City Household Household& Population Growth ■ Households 02020 Population Change:15.2°I° Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses ■ Single-family 31% 25% 0% ® Multi-family 69 55 ® Commercial Notes: See Error! Reference source not found..Error! Reference source not found.. Figure 2: Service Impact Summary ImpactService . . Ready Marginal Caution 2q, e��t �o°a Fite o��L2 s�aAy a�y\� ���°� 0 fro" Q-° Notes: See Error! Reference source not found..Error!Reference source not found.. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview The subject properties fall within the Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R)Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation. The intent of the MU-R designation is to provide a mix of employment, retail,and residential dwellings and public uses near major arterial intersections. By integrating a variety of uses together,the goal is to avoid predominantly single-use developments such as a regional retail center with only restaurants and other commercial uses. Development should be anchored by uses that have a regional draw with appropriate supporting uses. This designation supports a diverse and integrated community where residents can live,work,and shop without needing to travel far. According to the Comprehensive Plan,the MU-R designation should make up between 10%and 30%of the total development area,with gross residential densities ranging from 6 to 40 units per acre. The MU-R area, located at the southwest corner of Eagle Road and Overland Road, encompasses approximately 165.2 acres. Of that total,roughly 41.5 acres are designated for residential use,including the proposed development, accounting for 25.1%of the MU-R area in this quadrant,which aligns with the Comprehensive Plan's vision and density targets. The proposed development plan depicts eighty-two (82)townhomes with the Traditional Neighborhood Zoning(TN-R)as the single use for the subject properties. While the TN-R zoning requires two different types of housing, staff finds that the surrounding garden-style apartments, single-family detached, and townhomes provide the mix of units desired in the area. The proposed townhomes range in size from 1,650 s.£ and 1,750 s.£with three (3)and four(4) bedroom units. In addition,TN-R zoning requires detached sidewalks with parkways. While the applicant has provided detached sidewalks along the front of each unit,the sidewalks running north—south are attached. Staff has determined that the combination of detached sidewalks with parkways and on-street parking in front of the units meets the intent of the TN-R zoning. Furthermore,the attached north—south sidewalks are appropriate due to site constraints and are expected to enhance pedestrian connectivity within the development. The private streets provide accurate and easy to find address points that will be beneficial for Fire,EMS,and Police. In addition to the townhomes,the development plan depicts a 0.60-acre common open space with parkways, on-street parking,and alleys. The applicant has provided an internal pathway to connect with the ten(10)foot multi-use pathway on the southern boundary to help residents connect with Mountain View High School and Gordon Harris Park to the south. The applicant has indicated that the buildout timeline for the development depends on demand; however,they anticipate developing the project in five(5)phases,with the first phase consisting of the large open space, amenities, and roads. West Ada School District has indicated that the development is expected to generate approximately nineteen(19) school-aged children across all grade levels. Pepper Ridge Elementary and Lewis and Clark Middle School both have adequate capacity to account for the addition of school-aged children from the development. However,Mountain View High School is over capacity with 2479 students enrolled and a capacity of 2175 students. Overall,the proposed townhome development is an allowed use within the MU-R designation and contributes to the area's intended mix of residential and commercial activity.Beyond the project boundaries, staff also considered surrounding uses and finds that the site's proximity to commercial/employment areas, a child care facility/charter school, and regional pedestrian infrastructure supports the MU-R designation's broader land use goals. • "Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents."(2.01.02D) City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis The proposed for-sale townhomes will provide additional housing options in the area that will blend in with the surrounding developments. This will provide a townhome product to the area which is in close proximity to Mountain View High School and Gordon Harris Park. • "Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services."(3.03.03F) City water and sewer services are available and can be extended by the developer with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. • "Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe."(2.02.02) The subject site is already annexed and in a widely developed area. However, the subject sites are undeveloped and have been vacant for more than a decade as commercial only properties. It is one of the last areas of the Gramercy development to be developed and the Applicant believes constructing high-end townhomes will provide needed housing and stimulate the neighboring commercial businesses. • "Avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area; provide for diverse housing types throughout the City."(2.01.01 G) Traditional three-story, garden-style apartments are currently under construction throughout the City, which makes the proposed three-story townhome concept desired in this area.. Table 4: Proiect Overview Description Details History H-2021-0023;H-2021-0022;A-2019-0200;A-2021-0238;TED-2023- 0006 Phasing Plan 5 Phases(Depending on Demand) Residential Units 82 Single Family Attached Units Open Space 1.31 Acres; 18.8% Amenities Dog Waste Station(.05)and Open Space Commons(3) Acreage 6.98 acres Lots 82 Building Lots and 8 Common Lots Density Gross Density: 11.74 units/acre Net Density: 19.04 units/acre B. History/Development Agreement Modification In 2021,the subject properties were approved for a multi-family development consisting of 164 age-restricted units on 5.24 acres of land. The applicant then filed for a time extension in 2023 to extend the CUP,however,the applicant did not move forward with the project as the market changed, and demand was no longer there for age restricted units. Currently,the development agreement from this application governs the site. The existing development agreement restricts the site to the previous concept plan and age restricted units. The applicant is requesting an addendum to the existing DA to remove the age restriction and amend the concept plan in favor of the proposed townhome development. The new development proposes 82 townhomes,which is approximately half of the units proposed in the previous application. The applicant is not proposing an age restriction for the new development and will be constructing it in five(5)phases. Additionally,the applicant has proposed open space exceeding the 15%required by the UDC and amenities meeting the UDC City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis requirements. Staff is supportive of this change to the concept plan and development agreement as it provides another housing type to the area. C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): The subject properties are annexed into the city with the C-G zoning and have utilities stubbed to the site. The site currently sits vacant. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The applicant is seeking a rezone and proposing eighty-two(82)townhomes,which are listed as a principally permitted use in the UDC Table 11-2D-2 for the TN-R zoning district.As mentioned above,the TN-R zoning requires a minimum of two(2)housing types. Since the subject development lies within the MU-R FLUM designation, staff finds that the surrounding mix of housing types(multifamily, single-family detached,townhomes)provides the mix of housing the city envisioned for this area. In addition to this,the design of the development varies from those of the neighboring uses as the development is anchored by a 0.60-acre common open space with on-street parking and parkways. Staff finds the proposed subdivision to be in compliance with the TN-R zoning district and FLUM. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C encourages the applicants to maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. The larger MU-R area provides different housing types, lot sizes, and densities in close proximity to commercial, employment, schools, and parks. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 G states development should avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City. The larger MU-R area has a mix of different housing types in the form of single-family detached, single-family attached, and garden-style apartments(multifamily). Comprehensive Plan policy 2.06.02D encourages a diversity of housing, recreation, and mobility options to attract and sustain the local workforce. The proposed subdivision provides a unique design that provides the traditional neighborhood feel that the TN-R zoning district calls for. With the neighboring commercial, schools,and regional parks in close proximity, it will allow future residents to live,work, and play in the immediate area. 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The preliminary plat and future development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2D-6 for the TN-R zoning district. All proposed lots and public streets appear to meet UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. This includes lot sizes ranging from approximately 1,461 to 1935 square feet. The subdivision is proposed to develop in five (5)phases with the central open space being developed with phase one (1) as depicted in Exhibit VII. Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Qualified Open Space &Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3G): Based on the standards in UDC Table 11-3G-3, a minimum of 15% (or 1.05 acres)of qualified open space is required to be provided within the development.An open space City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.G,which depicts 18.8% (or 1.31 acres)of open space that meets the required quality and qualified open space standards. In addition to the open space provided in the development,the subject development is within approximately 850 feet of Gordon Harris Park and directly abuts Mountain View High School's ball fields. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum of one(1)amenity point is required to be provided. The amenities proposed are a dog waste station and open space commons as the central open space exceeds 20,000 square feet. The applicant's amenity points total is 3.5 exceeding the UDC requirements. In addition to the amenities proposed,the subject development abuts Mountain View High School's ball fields and is approximately 850 feet from Gordon Harris Park. 2. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC Table 11-2D-6 requires eight(8) foot parkways with class II trees along local streets for the TN-R zoning district. The applicant is proposing private streets built to local street standards with eight(8)-foot parkways and class II trees in compliance with the UDC standards. ii. Parking lot landscaping The landscaping for parking on Lot 2,Block 1, abutting the central open space shall meet the standards listed in UDC 11-313-8. This includes a planter island with a minimum square footage of fifty(50)and a minimum of five (5)feet wide. In addition, a tree is required at each end of the parking rows inside a planter island.Alternative Compliance can be applied for to relocate these trees. The applicant shall either revise the plan to incorporate planter islands with trees or apply for alternative compliance to relocate these trees, this shall be done with the final plat application. iii. Tree preservation Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten-inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four-inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees). Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within common open space, and when used as focal elements in landscape design. The applicant shall provide mitigation calculations with submittal of the final plat if any trees are being removed from the property. iv. Storm integration Per UDC 11-313-11,the applicant shall meet the intent to improve water quality and provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the integration of vegetated,well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green stormwater facilities into required landscape areas,where topography and hydrologic features allow if part of the development. v. Pathway landscaping Pathway landscaping shall comply with the requirements outlined in UDC 11-313-12. The applicant must provide a landscape strip at least five(5) feet wide along both sides of the City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis pathway. To enhance design flexibility,variations in the strip's width are encouraged to allow trees to be planted farther from the pathway,reducing the risk of root damage. However,the landscape strip must maintain a minimum width of two(2)feet to ensure proper pathway maintenance. The strips shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs, lawn, and/or other vegetative ground cover. The applicant is not proposing a multi-use pathway; however, they are proposing a central micro pathway to connect with the existing multi-use pathway on the south boundary of the site. It appears the applicant has provided five (5)feet of landscaping on both sides of the pathway. 3. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Residential parking analysis Off-street parking is required to be provided for each home based on the total number of bedrooms per unit as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. On-street parking is also available on portions of the proposed streets. The townhomes consist of three(3)and four(4)bedroom units that require four(4) parking spaces to be incompliance with UDC Table 11-3C-6. The applicant has indicated each townhome has four(4)parking spaces,two(2)inside a garage and two(2) on the parking pad. In addition to the 328 parking spaces for the townhomes,the applicant has provided forty-six(46)parking spaces along the streets and near the common space for guests. The applicant is requesting to reduce the parking pad width to eighteen(18)feet for all parking spaces outside of the garage for the townhomes. The reason for the reduction is to provide a break in the concrete plane in the form of planters as depicted on the site plan. Additional overflow parking is being provided throughout the development to offset the width of the parking pad. This was at the request of city staff. The applicant shall apply for an alternative compliance application to request this reduction with the submittal of the design review application. ii. Bicycle parking analysis The UDC does not require bicycle parking in single-family attached, detached, and townhomes developments.However,the applicant is proposing five(5)bicycle parking spaces at the eastern end of the central common open space. 4. Building Elevations (Comp Plan,Architectural Standards Manual): Goal 5.01.02D of the Comprehensive Plan highlights the need for effective building design and landscaping to buffer, screen,beautify,and integrate commercial,multifamily,and parking areas with existing neighborhoods. In response,the applicant has submitted a conceptual elevation package. The materials included in the elevations are brick,board and batten, fiber cement,vinyl windows, standing seam metal roofs,and asphalt shingles. The applicant has provided varied setbacks to provide different unit profiles on the attached units and has incorporated architectural elements such as gable roofs,pedestrian-scale lighting, and awnings. The buildings are proposed to be approximately thirty-nine(39) feet in height with variations in unit counts, such as a five-plex, six-plex, seven-plex, and eight-plex. The townhomes require design review approval and are subject to the traditional neighborhood design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. This shall be submitted prior to submitting for a building permit. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis 5. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7. No fencing appears to be proposed; any future fencing shall comply with UDC 11-3A-7. Alternative compliance shall be submitted for the standards listed in 11-3A-7 for fencing along pathways and common open space. These standards require fencing to distinguish common space from private property. The applicant shall submit this prior to approval of the final plat. 6. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17): Per Comp Plan policy 3.07.01C appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.) is required. Per the UDC the minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be eight(8) feet. The width can be measured from the back of curb where there is no likely expansion of the street section within the right-of-way;the parkway width shall exclude the width of the sidewalk. Class 11 trees are the preferred parkway trees. The applicant is proposing parkways along Traverse Lane, Ainsley Lane, Blazer Lane, and Foresight Lane that appears to be in compliance with this standard. The applicant shall comply with the standards for UDC 11-3A-17 with submittal of the final plat. E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-311--4): Access is proposed via three (3) drive aisle connections: one to the north connecting to an existing drive aisle and commercial property, and two to the east to connect to S.Wells Avenue. These drive aisles are currently not named and are considered commercial drive aisles. However,the applicant is proposing to add six private streets in the development that require a minimum of one connection to a public street. Staff has discussed this with the applicant and determined the southern connection on the eastern boundary would be best as it aligns with Blue Horizon on the east side of S. Wells Avenue. This will take coordination with the neighboring property owners to name the existing private drive aisle. The intersection of Blazer Lane and the planned extension of E. Blue Horizon Drive is offset due to site constraints. However,after discussions with the applicant and ACHD, it was determined that the offset is not a concern, as the general alignment remains consistent and the intersection is expected to experience low traffic volumes. In addition,the applicant shall provide traffic calming along Stadia Lane and Starfish Lane in the form of bulb-outs, speed bumps, or other approved methods to reduce vehicle speeds and enhance pedestrian safety(see private street analysis below). 2. Multiuse Pathways and Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-8, UDC 11-3A-5): Comprehensive Plan policy 4.04.01A ensures that new development and subdivisions connect to the pathway system. The subject site does not have a multi-use pathway that runs on the property,however,there is an existing ten(10)foot multi-use pathway on the southern boundary that connects to Mountain View High School and Gordon Harris Park. The applicant has proposed an internal pathway system that connects to the 10-foot multi-use pathway and to the property to the north. 3. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): All sidewalks constructed as part of this proposal are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. The TN-R zoning requires detached sidewalks with parkways. While City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis the applicant has provided detached sidewalks along the front of each unit, the sidewalks running north south are attached. Staff has determined that the combination of detached sidewalks with parkways and on-street parking in front of the units meets the intent of the TN- R zoning. Furthermore, the attached north—south sidewalks are appropriate due to site constraints and are expected to enhance pedestrian connectivity within the development. 4. Private Streets (UDC I1-3F-4): Six(6)private streets are depicted on the plat as Stadia Lane, Traverse Lane,Ainsley Lane, Starfish Lane,Foresight Lane,Blazer Lane. The purpose statement for private streets in UDC 11-3F-1, states it's not the intent to approve private streets for single-family developments other than those that create a common mew through the site design or that propose a limited gated residential development. A mew is proposed on the central portion of the development; the development is not proposed to be gated. A private street application must be submitted for approval of the proposed private street that complies with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4 and may be submitted with the final plat application.Approval from the transportation authority(i.e.ACHD) and the Fire Dept.is required.Approval of the street name is also required from the Ada County Street Name Committee. 5. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6): i. Block face UDC 11-6C-3-regulates block lengths for residential subdivisions. The intent of this section of code is to ensure block lengths do not exceed 750 ft, although there is the allowance of an increase in block length to 1,000 feet if a pedestrian connection is provided. In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred(1,200)feet, unless waived by the City Council. The applicant is compliance with the block length requirements in the UDC. F. Services Analysis 1. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-I S): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be installed to provide irrigation to each lot in the subdivision in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-15. 2. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments by the City's adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practices as adopted by the City as outlined in UDC 11-3A-18. 3. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21): Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development. All utilities are available to the site. Water main, fire hydrant and water service require a twenty- foot(20)wide easement that extends ten(10)feet past the end of main,hydrant, or water meter.No permanent structures,including trees are allowed inside the easement. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.03.03G require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments,including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities. City of Meridian I Department Report I1I. Staff Analysis IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. The amended DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the modification. The addendum shall, at a minimum, incorporate the following provisions: The applicant shall comply with the provisions in the existing development agreement (Instrument#2022-001214)with the addition/modification of the following provisions. a. Modify provision#13 to state: "Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminaryplat,landscape plan,phasing plan, open space and amenities, and the conceptual building elevations for the single- family attached dwellings included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein." b. Add a provision stating: "Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development." c. Modify Provision#15: "Applicant shall connect to the regional pathway system along the southern property boundary and the business on the northern property boundary by constructing at least one(1)pedestrian crosswalk across the drive aisle with either stamped concrete,brick pavers, or similar material to clearly delineate the pedestrian connection to the pathway system and businesses. d. Remove provision#14: "The multi family units• ithi this eet shall be " r-eso yeafs r-the ApplieavA's proposal." e. Remove provision#16: " (rcrr3-S-Wells emu„u�, Par-eel-n-=c�✓v v240) shall rNOT zixcrac� I rcr- ,,-L;,,g areas a d utility inst"11"4:ons by the subje t,.,-,.pert,.and Par-eel required when it develops if sueh proposal is ineensisten4 with the exisfing £ Remove provision#17: "Prior to Cei4 fie to of Zoning ComNlianee " "' Property T2,,,,,.,,da-y A djusrm epA shall be obtained by the A,.plie=t to r-eeentipr-e the lots eonsistent with the proposed site pla-, " 2. The final plat/landscape plan shall include the following revisions: a. Depict the required street buffers on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner or homeowner's association as set forth in UDC 11-313-7C.2a. b. Provide parking lot landscaping in accordance with UDC 11-313-8 or apply for alternative compliance to relocate the trees to a different location. c. Add a plat note and graphically depict the easements encumbering the buildable lots along the alleys and private street frontage. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions d. Add a plat note stating"This plat is subject to the terms and conditions of the development agreement recorded on(add date)as instrument number (add instrument number). e. Depict any proposed fencing and provide a fencing exhibit. f. Provide a landscape strip at least five(5) feet wide along both sides of the internal micro-pathways in compliance with UDC 11-3A-8 and 11-3B-12. g. Implement traffic calming measures along Stadia Lane and Starfish Lane, such as bulb-outs, speed bumps, or other approved methods,to reduce vehicle speeds and enhance pedestrian safety. h. The applicant shall connect to the regional pathway system along the southern property boundary and the business on the northern property boundary by constructing at least one(1)pedestrian crosswalk across the drive aisle with either stamped concrete,brick pavers, or similar material to clearly delineate the pedestrian connection to the pathway system and businesses. 3. Stormwater integration shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-11C. 4. All townhome units shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual.A design review application shall be submitted for approval of the proposed structures prior to submittal of building permit applications. 5. Submit an alternative compliance application for the reduced parking pad width from twenty (20)feet to eighteen(18) feet concurrent with a design review application. 6. Submit an alternative compliance application to allow for no fencing around the common lots and micro-paths concurrent with the design review application. 7. Depict the fifteen(15)foot easements required along the micro-pathways running through the site on the final plat. 8. The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2D-6 for the TN-R zoning district. 9. The applicant shall comply with the open space exhibit approved as part of this plat application that depicts 18.8%(or 1.3 acres) of qualified open space and the required amenity points as proposed(3.5 points). 10. Comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to cul-de-sacs, alleys,driveways,common driveways, easements, blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 11. The final plat shall substantially comply with the approved preliminary plat as set forth in UDC 11-613-3C. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 12. The preliminary plat shall become null and void if the Applicant fails to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the final plat within two(2)years of the approval of the preliminary plat as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7A; or obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7C. 13. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD's conditions of approval. 14. The Applicant shall record the plat prior to submitting a building permit. 15. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC 11-613-7. 16. Staff s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. 17. A private street application shall be submitted concurrently with the final plat application for approval of the private street. Compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-317-4 is required. B. Meridian Public Works PRE-PLAT CONDITIONS �'a�Se+are' • VW;I xr to*wrr Awa"ble at eite 5rv-'m'-f-4 • y-r�{r3hrd EsUmmed Prom Sd�e bpplwaun 5Wwq FRU'% • 1YRftFf]e[bn:ryl IW4ntr • f'MjM C stefrt Yts with ww M•stw Pian FXJl Plan Imp�ttsfabllmrnx Florr�6arfurvtteai 5Aq Pol7i9t 11W+'ks �#07Gfic[I�i#ipfq water . • thi"rice to Water A4arahle at&*site. 5eraxes • Presslrr�die • rvi ruled FNOjff We appl"On Water ERU,% cbr*mmt • Najw{omweni Yes *th wilder Mesta+ Rldrq • Lvwct%Xw"rr4 $to Pm 1eWwksSlntSpedFirCOW%ns Pu iur W ons DEPAxnLI L%r KWlfiW['011"O f ad hpryrasall I F wA Fha*or 6g dekrlopmon will and m 64 nwdekd la o-r fy mi nhk-n fl rc flaw q mainninod, 2. ► utr unduwa-P to pmlLel hWim t.'W awff—mi%NAt Irye ulfMtiep cenkwrd. 3. Wacu ma s.tm hr'dramis.nn$was r wnwu"ime i Nr eawmgnl with the Ills MMCTed.Cohr rat wig 4arxInmi nsmdb lit'paw ilk dead and muon hydmhl.of wwaf a rm.W oaf}Nis ftquind. d_ toemm o4 iro skown on Lhe C'Y411 artd faltdw-I P4 plafls d6 fldl nt11[h.tinswt 11W tllaj e7alth on foal plat an41hatillm area cmffi 6s wifhtrco and wqumd sasamem. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 5- Ensure no permanent structures(trees,bushes,buildings,carports,trash receptacle walls,icnccs, inrltraticm tmnchcs,light poles,etc-)are built within the utility easetent.Applicant sillI reypOn:5ible fqr raining all lsrtdvsping rt4uiremenLs and should a xmlinalc with their plannor if there ale any questions. 6- Ensure no sewer services pass dhrough infttiration trr11C11es- 7- SLrectlighis will be required for the devvlopmem of Lhis property, - Teoos an not allowed withim the required easement-Ensure that no irees will be widh tk hydrawL or water meter easeme rLq- 9- Wstor meter;LhaL must be in drivew4y6 need to have Lraf tic raW]ids and meter lx5xes.Provide conerrtc joints 2'from the m,Cleron all sides similar to the Tolled edges ofsidcwalk panels to make it easier to nrnove and repair concrete in the future. 10- if a well is located on the si to it must be abandoned per Tegulawry rcyuiremenis and proof of abandonmoni must be provided to the City- 1 1- If Liam arc any exi-aint-hlrnv-off uatvrs that will hr removrd,callous xmc)val- C:cacral Canditiuns o1 Apprnwat I. Applicant shall coordmaie water and wweT main size and routing with the Public Work s a,panineni,and execute standard farms of easements for any mains that are requited is provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet. i f cover from top of pipe to Sub-pidr is Ins shun three kL i than ultorrate materials gall be used in con forntaaccofCity ofh+lcridian Public Works DcpartmmtsStand"Specifications. 2, Per Meridian City Code(MCC).the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and waigr mains to and through this developmcnL. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursemein agreement for infrasiructure eahancemeni per MCC 9.6-5. 3. The appl ieant shall provide eAsement(s)for ftl l public wftWrlsewer mains oumid,e of pu0t:Tight of way(include all wrist-r services t5nd hydrants)- The ca_n=ent widths shal l b.,20-Feick wide fw a singlc utility,or Wfcct wide for two. The casxmcnLs shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian`s standard forms-The casement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purpascs. Submit an executed easement(on like form available From Public Works),a legal description prepared by atti Idaho Lico!t tic professional Lt]nd Surveyor,which must include the area of dte rasememt(marked E HiDIT A)and an 1 i"reap with bearings and distances(marked E 141BIT a)for review,both cxhibils must be sealed,signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor.DO NOT RECORD- Add a note to the plat referencing this domimcni. All ememenis must be submitted,feviewed,and approved prior to developmeni pram approval. 4- The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation,systems be supplied by a year-round yourre of water(TJDC 1 1-313-6).ne npptieant sbould be rnquired to use o-my exiSiing Surface or well water for the primary source. If a surfaec or well souTxc is not available,a singlc-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If u singlespoint oonncction is utilir.ed. the developer will be responsible for the payment ofaswssinenis for the cotntnon areas prior Lo prior to receiving development plan approval. S- A]l rxisting wulcrures LhaL arc required to bu mmoved shatl be prior to 6gdftture em the Final plul by the City Engingmm Any 4iruciuwN'that are slluwe4 tQ remain shall be sukject to Cvaluution and possible reassignment ofslrcet addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 6- Al I irrigation ditches-curial s,laterals,or drains,exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, craassing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided slfall be addresstkd par UDC 11-3A-6- In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idalko Code 42-]207 and rosy 011kCr applicable law Of regutAtion- City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 7_ Any weals that wiI I not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according ho Idaho Well C'onsirtnetion Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Wawr Resouroas, Tht Do-eloprr's Engintvr sbull provide 4 St$Lemt-ni addrmLging whether there are any existing wells in the dc"kgmcnt,and if so,how they will continue to be used.OF prMide record of their abandonment- 8- Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinan Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 S. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and insp-�ctions(208)375-5211. 9_ StWt Signs art to be in plate,sanitary 5ewcr fund water System shall br approved and artiv=d. matt base appmYcd by the Ada Cotmty Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision steal l be recorded,prior to applying far building permits_ 10_ A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of I IOy will be rctluired for all uncomplelod fencin-,]andscapin$,amen€ties,etc_,prior io signattree on the final plat. 11_ A]1 impMvrererntS related to public lifr,sazfrty and health shell he completed prior to oar r—cy of the strur'lwm%Anccw approved by the City Digioccr,an owner m ay post a pCrfWManec surety for such improvemcuts in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as Sel forth in UDC I1-5C-313_ 12_ Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review,and construction inspection fees,as determ€ned durEn the plan review process,prior to the issttamee of a plan approval letter. D, It shall be the responsibility ofthc applicant to ensure that all development fcatum wpnply with the Arncricans with Disabilities Act xnd the Fair Housing Act. 14_ Applicant shall be responsible for application and comp)iance with any Section"herhniWnit that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers_ 15_ Devoloprr shall coordinaw mailtwx lormtit ms with the Meridian Pcxst Office_ 16_ Compactirm lest rrsults shall be submi"to thr Meridian Building Drpmiment For all building pads rcr'civing cngiuccrcd b,'tcicfil1,whe c footing would sit atop fill material, 17_ The design engineer slial l be required to cent fy that the street ocnterl ine elevations are act a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevalion_ This is to ensure thal the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of horn es is at least I-foot above_ 18_ The appl irants design enginver shall ho responsible for inspection of al l irrigation andior drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdicticm of an irrigation distract or ACHI).Ric&sign cnginccr shall provide ccrufication that the facilities h tvc been irnstallcd in accordance wilh the approved design plans.This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 19_ At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible io submit retard drawings per hhe City of Meridian AutpCAD standards. Thrsc mcord drawings must be rL!crivt!d,rod:ipprL1vud prior w the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any sttuetures within the pmlcct, 20, A strccl light plan will need ua be included in the giviI sonstruciion plans.$trset light plan requirements are listed in section#-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting.A copy of the standards can be found ai htiol7ww.w_meridiatttity_or rttiublic works.aspOide272, 21_ The City of Meridian Foguires that thr owner past to the C ty a performance surely in thi amount of 125%of the town ccrostructipn east for all incomplrir sewer,water and rouse irhfrastruct urc prior to final plat signature.This surety will be verified by u line item cast cstirnaic provided by the owner to the City.The surety=be posted in the fonn of an irrevocable letter of cwd i 1.cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on IN Community Development Departm on i website. please contact Land Development Sen-ic( for more information at 8$7-221 1. 22_ Thr City of Meridian eloyuircs that the owner prxst ho the City a wan-nty surrty in the amount of 215%of the total const uctian cost for all eohrhpl cted sewer,wutCr and rcusc infrastructure for duration of two years_This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City_The surety tan be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cosh deposit or bond.Applicannt must File an application for surety,which can be found on the Caffi hunily De~vrlopmcnt Drpwtmeni wrhsite. Please contact Land DrrelopmolSetvict! for more inForrnation at P7-2211, City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions C. West Ada School District(WASD) or Other District/School MEMORANDUM: SCHOOL IMPACM CifER,1DIAN�.- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT June 18,2025 TO; Nick Napoli,Associate Planner CC: Bill Parson,Current Planning Supervisor FROM; Hether Hill,Long Range Associate Coordination Planner RE: H-2025-0019:Gramercy Townhomes MDA, PP R2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ON SCHOOLS The proposed residential development application is located at 1873,1925 and 2069 Wells Avenue, Meridian,This section of the memo looks at cumulative Impacts over a broad area and provides entitlement data in areas affected by the subject application,The following information is intended as a referen re,rather than a decisive tool,and serves to forecast the number of school-aged children,enrolled in both public and private schools,using city-wide census data_To date and w thin the last five years,there have 387 entitled units(232 single. family and 655 multi-family)approved within a 1-mile radius of the project location resuItIng In approximately 530 school-aged children, Forecasted Students Erased on Entitlements goo � 500 qw 300 ra Elemenury+ Middle High Total ■Total skKk4As ■ftMl€ ■wlvate Note_Tots+#units der+ved from enterprise Cato far pre;imOnary pats and unrelated Wadi tionai use permits in the Last 5-years, This data reftects approved projects only and excludes pending oppilicotions, including the subject application.American Community Serrvey 5-year data is used to determine persons perhausehold oad enrolment by grodes forpUNIC arrd private schools_ City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions WEST A D A SCH00L DISTRICT-STUDENT G EN E RATION RATES West Ada School District(WASD)uses a Student Generation Rate(SA3R)to determine what Im pact fut,jre development,ulII have on enrollments_Using WASU.%SGR,the following IS Clty stafPS assessment;The SG for Pepper Ridge Elementary School i50.22 for single`famlly and 0.12 for multi-family. Based on the submitted application materials,the proposed project will contain 92 single family units and 0 multi-famiIV units resulting in approximately 19 school- aged children across all grade levels,The proposed project Is within the follow Ing school boundaries,currently,and approval-of the project may affect enrollments at these schools; Srhuul AttencWnce Areas 24-ZV Enrullrnerd Architectural Program CapaEhy capaEdy Pepper Ridge Elementary School 471 675 515 Lewis and Clark Midd le School 999 1000 - Mountaln+flew High Schaal 2479 2175 Bate.Student Generation Rates-ore cakWated in reference to the designoted elementary sehacd within the subject property's assodoted schml attendance area. Thk information is Mriprrded as o reference, ratber than a decisive tool. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions D. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) Standard CondiE€ ns of Appraval f, All proposed irrigation facllllies shall be located outside of the ACHD right-of-My (Irtcluding elk easements). Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD 6ght-04-wiay {including all easements). 2. Prlvate Utilities including sewer or water systerns are peohlblted from be6g Iocaled within the ACHD right-of-way, 3. In accordance with district policy, 7203.3, the applicant may be required to update any existing non-compliant pedestrian improvernents abutting the site to most current Public Rlghl-of-Way Accessibilily Guidelines (PROWAG) requtrernenls_ ThQ en ins r sho i documentation of compliance to District Development Review staff for review. 4. Riapiace any existing damaged curb,gutter,and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the coristnuction of the proposed development_ Contact Consbipcti❑n Services at 2-D8-387-6280 (with file number)for details, 5. A license agreement and compliance with the Districd's Tree Planter pDliry is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas_ 6. All utility relocalion costs associated wkth Improving street fronlages abutling the rile shall be borne by the developer. 7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify @U axisting utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost tin ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged'by th9 applicant_ The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585) al least two full business days prior to brew king ground within ACHD right-of-way, The applicani shall contact ACHD Tragm Operailcna 387.6190 in the event any ACHD conduits(spare or filled)are compromised during any pham of construction. 8. Utility street outs in pavement less than Five years old are not alWwod unless approved In writing by the Distriol. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 208-387-6258(with file numbers) for details, 9. All design and construction shall be in amxordanc4 with the ,ACHD Policy Manuel, 15PVVC Standards and approved supptaments, Construclion Sofvioes procedures and all applicable ACHD Standards unless speciflcally waived herein. An engineer registered In the State of Idaho shall prepare and Certify all improvement plans. 10_ Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACHD prior to District approval for occupancy. 11. No change in the terms and conditions or this approval shah be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of.ACHa. the burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change f Drn ACHD. 12. If the site plan or use should change in the future,ACHE)Planning Review will:review the bite plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any charige in the planned use of the property, which is the sub)ect of this applicationr shall require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Coalitions of Approval in place at Thal time unless a walverNariance of the requirements or other legal relief is granled Dy the ACHE] Commission, V. FINDINGS A. Rezone(UDC 11-511-3E) Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan in regard to the MU-R future land use map designation for the site. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds that the proposed map amendment and subsequent development will contribute to the range of housing opportunities available in the City. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed zoning amendment will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds that the proposed amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services to this site. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. This is not applicable due to this application being a rezone. B. Preliminary Plat and Short Plat(UDC-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat,or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds thatpublic services are available and can be extended into the site to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission water and sewer and other utilities will be extended by the developer at their own cost, therefore, staff find the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Commission finds there are no natural, scenic, or historic features that need to be preserved with development of this property. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the Development Agreement, Rezone,and Preliminary Plat with the modified provision listed in Section IV. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on July 17th,2025. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject preliminga plat,rezone, and development agreement modification requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Mike Chidester b. In opposition:None C. Commenting d. Written testimony:None e. Staff presentinggpplication: Bill Parsons f Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The commission discussed the amount of paving and parking in the development.While the parking meets code,and we do not have a restriction on paving,the commission brought them up as points to potentially consider in the future. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandingissue(s)sus for City Council: a. None C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action C �84 OYE_RLANlop Aua Vo, . ��� i .,� ■■fI♦ __ }. �/ dam.- .a i a 84 — J- 01/ERL--AND yy +pma �f 1 i as Q !■i�i i... �- • _. f.��i:lama ri arrlid 8RR T lid l�J •►pG 1 ma i f ♦s + uun n ♦�:.:. ♦ � Rio � a A • uu! �w MEN man � �nu■■■ n /rar�i Sonor nnnl� Ir` ■■■■■r P --ua+■u■■ ��t� ►•J�aq L■� ■ra#rruR Z-_ ..r.ru/■/■1/i :r� . �■�I '�11 r■t�{11lIIlIpllQpilft /� -- .,. ■unam ■ :- _ a s NIa r r1 r �,w �m �1 � ��14■4a rtlana/ '� • Ilhipri3j� �e■r,aaaa �r .rare Tarr 1� ♦*nrnall■aanr ,4 = w�l, 1/t_Ina _ ' �q+ *�L♦� ■ na�r� IiiII1 • s■nnr! == °"'"' - r■aaa , �. #t#►♦ � ++ lra. 11a ♦R R� a a =inuu loci w'��� �s■s a o s . �r�.� � ■!!!!n a �RRw�y_ ♦ ♦ ' ■o. s a O Illlxwn� iinR C��� �['Rf �s rr� rrr w �■■ n!m■_ ,na _ a�+'r i^ii aC r ■, ■aa a. un uuwq- rr ►. •nj , � �__ --_ •err. , Ili - R r ru■r. ♦ C!�r+i.�. •�' �'���_-�lni a iiiii ;�� '4�.atr:�!liiliirlrl ���ii�������.��. •�■itnur�ra�.'.� rarr ' rw �I� t ar nn#a III _ _ .� �* ♦�l. •' _ .� a aaa/� ��■aa■■uus■.a r.��r.a#IIn � .�� ..•+ i�:snu ■nni.plry +$ s�s Pnnurr s►� ♦ a ++■■nlana�1111 r • . ■ ra�►�! as arr■ 11 w aarla rrral+ one,., !! ��:::aaalllllt loll :"ar�,►a�ran irM h11� •�♦ .■■■�w��ii �a R. ann �n�j •r.al���.�n n.n ■u �m Illli �I ► s -• ■r -r n_. I#a# =a■i■■��u'as r 1 --w.ram ll1a� � 1 - ionnl��trn11L �1 �1..■C' � J LU n.■mamma O VERLAND ■■■OO■.np�'� �- ■I�u■f>tME --wnor:i me w •■ �1��rl� ■o. Ii a r� Au.....r. �� �*� ♦� 1LLNi = uun.1 III. +'-.�♦ Q ♦ �juu.m..■ � �, � _- '�.L�rr,►9Y ♦�� ♦ �j� ♦+♦�'i♦�iiiiiiiii� _ ♦ f♦ ♦ ♦♦ �uu■L.= r� an■■■■■ �111 �J ■■■■A Y i li'irr.rrr■■■111 !� w� .ti err +�. .,■..■ �awnr�llroile4uir / ♦j�.i ♦\♦. +♦r■r ♦� •�al�`�O�iiiiiiilliieiii��' �ii"" n■nr _♦�.■.r■■u■r�■ •" LL ♦♦ AR ♦ -- +i��■ ,�,� . lily 1♦A � ■r. 111'• �`\\� \a• ... - �S. �� =IIIIIII 111■p...: wr■■r��r.■ r,♦♦7 11 ♦F♦��_ ♦♦♦�♦♦+�1 � ■����.�� Igp�lwul Ihi11�+����i��\+�-ii� Boom HE 12 p +�.Ss - -- - 1r�i.Mind►�1 �• rrr■nlr■ �1MEN �� 7q# .I w\�■ - . / - ♦ ■111111.1 �as h�.�♦�� AN, woo to■1 ♦ �.���■rL.....wllll r +. ..aN �#ra■r - • - • �■.'un.rl.r 1111 ■..'.'•■'�r 1 _ INN Ills: mill` _ 4.r.�__a...r....■.r�.. ;N ■■■■■n� �� OYE84 RL--AND 1+i■as�Iin■��■sna��iu � 'y S�;i�►': ���I■� Ii � _I mnwunul t�w ww�� ■ur■w ■■ >a � � .w=lmnwnn3n IIIIIIiIIHI - •••- �:••l. •� ���■��■�-,■ ti� i Illtlllllllllli- fi~�"-■I�nr-:iiiii�:lr � "`"'l'� ■�l6mrtumll �IlNlllhi r f��i�..s■■�i..■� r tall ■w ■■■. ■■I. ■■ ■E�■::::iiiiW: INN■ ► ♦ ,Aiiis:::rn C ■� 1'� � r� � AlY ♦ • uum: arum ".�■ _r.� Il* f �♦ �L..1■a ;upur y Nil �. 4�'► ♦ �uon :.■■■-■■;F iiiiiii�iiiiiiii r ■■ � ■■ r� ■umEMmnu 1��e♦e J_laab nn■n■�I�h1; ■ 1■. ■� -_-uI ■nwn ■■■■■ ■.U* Jam' .N� ■r■ ■n■� - _ �1 I■'���■� a.r�.r1111P11 n� : fir" ■r11►♦♦ {1.1In1 � ♦w.■■� 111111111fr � �■Af■ � nr■uq ■"- �.-.I oo� .. r ♦ • � r.► 4n. rl.u■rL ■urr■■ r, l ,I A� ��♦ L. r�arr ■1�►♦ AI' ♦*nwr11■L#nr ,.�� =' ta' -��S�iii ii� � ■js .� � LL��nq■� � r r■ � _nlnn ��11�Iru al ■.�, :i, �,� Il■� 1i..�q m. 11 \`�;.#. a*/fir 7 =liuui�...L =■■s��o■+ TL:...LIB i �I ■■r� \■ �- ���� f �■ Y � � �q ♦ + ♦f �- _ • ii.... - 8,�171111111111i ulll ■1, o \..�*�i �n mnn�.-- � A r■■ _ �tea•■■■■��1 vnw Illmlrl�--- w � M ,■■,i'' rw�.+s ♦• Syr I.--___=__ ■.n■■�'3�I+� v� ��i`s:�finrfl Hall Illm/�■ r�rY�nnu�y�?i,, ee:��!"_ ■un ►a►�,, ��r Q'i:■:i■li III io�\uuln■na I s �� •♦{e r 111111.■ W�•Icl':r �•. R'■ n'� . ���♦�rlllllllli 1*.-r rn■nu■. �tt\�\1'�:�i�•.L.111��J1 ,C it ifii►?y ..■■.■ 1�. ..nn■Y■Illl y f rr�Innu■r■r�r ♦ ♦♦ -w:::nnu■■IIIVr iih'�1-.i ::ii ter? ql 11u�►4[.p ti/I�♦ r■a.rn 1!: + r��ar�iiipi�LLI fh� ��r'-.nr.rrrr I�ar _,1�.��1..-s��r r�■_ 1aLirwLa p � � •r■.„■ � -� 1�■ #r#r r■.n�r� d 0 ntiR,.■.... ■■s ■I- 1-�11H� /1 ,E.■ -• j■�I■■ �. n"--._#r#### 1�l-�i■■gnu■ �� �Q ��r A„;u.._ N � B. Service Accessibility Report Overall Score: 35 68th Percentile Description . e. Lc.-ation In City Limits GREE Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains � 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yrfloodplain or > 2 ati--e£ GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOW Emergency Services Police Meets response time goals most of the time GREEN Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways GREEN Transit Within 1/4 mile of current transit route GREEN Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in masts =t-eet-- GREEN plan) matches existing (* of lanes) School Walking Proximity Within 1/2 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a ParkWalkability Park within 1/2 mile OR Neighborhood Park .:i GREEN 1/4 mile walking City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits C. Site Plan(date: 5/28/2025) I L I , ME OD ZME � I - _ FF IS � 11111}I11 - 11 1 P1-1 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits D. Landscape Plan(date: 5/28/2025) LANDSCAPE NOTES: _-_ _ 4 i� CRAi1ERCY TOLYHHOMES RSAl,-N-IOAHO l I sfiCH LGLG ate' 1 NOT A 1 PART 1 .... _ ......'__.....�mm ry__�_..._ � i� � i.. �•, ; 41V ICIN�TY O e= r.ox• __ _ -._.... i r $F{E L1,2 f• LANDSCAPING INFORMATION �� IMGATION NOTES: •,z d DISCLAIMER: k k QM'LDPER•F_NGNEER ■ — `_NOTA ` 91RYEYCYi LANOSCAPF /J'10VERALL r•, � J ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE SET SHEET INDEX SHEETS L 1.1-WaDETwnED uw$a q S. 2 S4 a u-OPEN SPADE AND AWNMEg PUN. L1.0 $MEET L2 1-LPIK SCePF MOTES AND oE�mts LANDSCAPE LEGEN❑ .� . MOT A PART .. •.M-__—_- rf{J'.,�,T:-e. ...... «e..- I� �?-!-�0' ^� I PLANT SCHEDULE - 1 = UrrA .. PART ❑`-` _ _ - ------ ---- --- ----- - --- ---- ---- ..--r....«_ it ..,.._ ... 9 41 .t I 1 ti{!! i .r' I C .r.. Z . d =.' .. .. LVITCHL�-86EL1� _� -.w�.` • ••." k. 4 TT71'�7T�['IIICT" CALLOUT LEGEND (11LRNaS1', E PLAN Z [il Y. •.-p. O x....,.......,,.-~ • CD d r --F r A . II'- M 0 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 1 1 LANCS&PE LEGEND ••• I NOT A •TCHLINE-5EE L7 7 • l PN2i �� qc••_ .. y.w ,��5.---.f • - TCHLINE-SEEU22 • .. _ ::�5'm-.= - PLANT SCHEDULE ■'� 0- - o` ..�..�..�..�..� .gC141Nf-SEE U2 .�.. .�..� ..� _ ••�- ALAiCHLiNE-SFE L1,9 • � a ••� � •-- ��LANWCAPE PLAN CALLOW LEGEND d FL1.2 6 f _ LANDSCAPE LEGEND Ef ..�..�..�..�..�.. AWlCHUNE-SEEiL2 .�..�..�..� .�..�. ..�.w.... �I TCHLJNE•SEE L73 •• � — .::�m'«"'^R »�..�.. "- «• L PLAh1TSGHEDULE • W I f�l I ;� ICI •ICI ,� - � _ — �: :.,:��� oYa-- _ RIM Zia ---__--------------------------------------------------- _ . .._ s —I o- - b — ---------------------------------------------------------------------- W f .... : y iNOTA PART�� ._• - -._ - -- _ - -- CA LL OUT LEGEND P am A DSCAPE PLAN d LI.3 # City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits E. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 5/27/2025) OPEN SPACE AND AMZNMES PLAN - - - - -- -- AMENITYLEOEND DEVELOPMENT FEATURES �F OPEN SPACE LEGEND�. LL2.Oji City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F. Preliminary Plat(date: 5/28/2025) PRnAMMAY PLAT SHOWANr GRAMERCY TONWHOMES Wir ------------- ...... ....... wwffymM -ak 9D -low F FEW? AM IN 3; ML Pi-O City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits G. Building Elevations(date: 5/28/2025) 'i1Y5 .ate Ip rl FRONT ELEVATION-&PLEX .+ � F IUY 7076 S REAR ELEVATION•6-PLEX o scow:ucr.��uu _ P C ySIOE ELEVATION•fi FLEX w E� g` City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits H. Rezone Legal Description&Exhibit Map lum 7:F.GIH{4tIH4 April 2,3On 'PraFnrl rm:24-194 EeWhlt A LDFI DesrrFptkan WARmone EnTWlS A parml of Land bring all of Lot 1,Bark 3 urGramercy Subdivision ka 1{L3eok 99,Pages 32819-31622. rmwdn of Ada County,Idaho}and all of f ranercy Suhdiui&:iw Nu.T_I&mk 100.Pager T 2961-12.952. records of Ada County,Idaho}and furrrmr uivaied in a pinion e F the Nomheast 114 or Section N. Township i Nnrtl�,Rarge 1 East,B.M.,Coy of Mcrldian,Ada County,Idaho being nwne partlrulaii♦ dR=bgd as Wows: romirinncing atthp mvm'3/4 mrnpr nF42d sectirtn Mwhich boars NOC 24'04'E a distance of 2,6i5.55 fW from the rwnter 114 mrmr of ald Sor[ion 20,thence following the westrvly line of said Nonpeeil 114,SW'24'h4'W a distance of r4X.00few Co a 1f2-larch rehar marking Oc ncrriiwes[ua•ner of said Lilt 1,1 3 and hplrg the POrr[r OF BE-MNNING. Yhpncp 1aawnng fard woovi ly Line ann FnlumniE tho northerly line of said I-W 1,Stock 9,599'35WE a distance of J"JM feet top 1lp-mr;h rehar madungthe ngriieasi aonneraf said Lai 1,Omck 3; 1h,gnna laauing;aid noathudy Imo-and following llrecastwly line of said Lot A,9kxk3,S4U'13'S8"E a distanpn of n7jgq F4Wtna➢f2-ipich reha r marking the sourhoast corner ZTf said Lot 1,9kxk 3 arebplrqg on the nnrthpnlyrhno pfsaid Gmnwnry Suhdrridon No_2; Fhcnee lea-Ang said wasierlq tine and following said rroritrerly line,599'3S'56"F a dislancrof 90.33feet to a IJB ir6 reharma:rkvtg the northeast mrncrof said Gra rcy5uhdkvi ib W..2; Therroe Ienring said narumr line and iollcwvig the ea5Ler2y Jine or Said GrBenercy SubdioSbh Ntr.7,. 5WIrS9'6 a distance of 501.;5 Feet to a Sf$inch rebur marking Lhe viu[hek9 cbrmr br upi Gramercy Subdivision NO-2; Them leaving said eastorly line and N A"ing the sovlhuly line of sa id Gramercy SvbeFai 3n fW.2, PtO'3$'$V W a 4%tancr of 42p.W FRgt to a S02 inch rehar marling the sAuth vest corner of Saki Gramerpy$ybdrarsipn no.7 end arw heinS on$ad wnsterifruseofthe korlhmst ifa; Thenpe tpasrrng Said SpUtheTbi Imp pnd'pllpwing thcwpgtuk Gnc of sad Grarrrrry Subdivision Na 2 �adso be-jigsaad westa0v lirw ofthc N4rthewst 1�41,+JQWZ WF ji distance of 50732 feet Ara S4 inch rebar marling the rbr Vi eat corner 0 said 4rnrnercy SVbdi-fi4n Hv.2(aka toeing thr southwest carrier¢f said Lot 1,gapck 3 of c+ra--cf€y5u4droiwn No.1I. Thence Ieawna the vr"eriv line of saici Gfamcr4;y$Ubdivbkw No.T and fo114vingOmvwrsterly lino of said Lot 1,BWh 3(also treinP said weskerlp Into of the Northeast 1141.NW CF a distance of 257.00 feet co thi mwr CW REGINWING, Sa,W parcel contains a total of fi.963 acres,rnore or less. r ' Attaolted Ilcraro is FrlrrLi[R arm by ibis refererxe 15 made a pa t hemO 124 9'n 03 5721 Hank 6lsmumFy Way•BaLse,Idaho 03753•298.639.6939 tmenffIp.cori City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits .. erfand Rd. POEw1 OF :OuheNCI-'VENT 43RTH 1J4 C4;+E!R SECfM 2P 5a" 30D' -13v I rt Plan Scala:S"=SSff Lit i.Blurk 3 LQL3,9101d305 r C+. LmF �S ses'3o'S51: �34.9a' �.�u Pn T OF ? BE61E+H�sti[ ' 0 h � Loe 1,&Ibck 3 � rn w lot 4.Bkxk 9 Ed S�0`35'78'E 4Ea 33` yr to Parcel A,R06 No.13%7 ae,o z Intermountain Pacific,ULC m AfN:P32385l0240, g $ R3238526110&RM9524210 WE 5,efock 3 P, tone:Chi n `" $ Proposed Zone:TN-F o o " Area;$,3B3i AC "" P n IA7�,Block 3 Pa[x.l B,RpS 1+0.1i 9�+7 r. N69'33'3E�7r C�7.o4' E �a011♦Sd01Cf�St Lot 9,@lock 3 � krn I WrT COtaHE SECTIoU Wn �a E M 6 I H E E I I H G �rri w7.r, Exhibit 8 ncu.7[[I�}aky Rex aye From C-6 W TH-R SHEET: AIFadL0t1,Falk3aFSramsrry5ub,Nue L&axvr4rmr�ffcw5ub.No.2 1 OF 1 LAtualod kn 1Ai NE 1/4 uT Secdrn 20,T3N.R1E,Bm,GRy of wleridlw,ada CDU",baho City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits C i E IDIAN.;--- Agenda Item Applicant Presentation GRAMERCY 5.20219.80Meridian City Council DA ModificationRezonePreliminary Plat TOWNHOMES Gramercy Townhomes ELTON DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER INTRODUCTIONGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 2 5.20219.8| 0| Gramercy Townhomes SITE DEVELOPMENT HISTORY and other conceptsmedical office, flex industrial, destination retail, Conceptual exercises with office, –2024 -2023Elton Development; concept killed by cost inflation55+ apartment predevelopment by –2022 -2020owned by St. Luke’s, the Y, & Charter SchoolNo active development; parcels –2019 -2016New YMCA/St. Luke’s, adjacent to –2015 -2014 SITE HISTORYGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 3 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes SITE VEHICULAR ACCESS SITE ACCESSGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 4 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes SITE DESIGN SITE DESIGNGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 5 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes SITE DESIGN SITE DESIGNGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 6 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes *Material colors not finalized Bedrooms/Laundry–Third Floor –Second Floor Garage/Bedroom/Bathroom–First Floor Three story design•Bedroom Models-and Four-Three•sale homes-For•TOWNHOME DESIGN TOWNHOME DESIGNGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 7 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes Garden City, ID Parkway Station Townhomes TOWNHOME DESIGN TOWNHOME DESIGNGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 8 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNINGGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 9 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes o 15-G and R-existing CAdds to buffer between o Already exists on south o Density is appropriate o Emphasizes alley load o R-TN•G uses-and access for CInadequate visibility •ZONINGGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | 10 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes TRAFFIC IMPACTS TRAFFIC IMPACTSGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes PHASING PLAN PHASING PLANGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes PLAN UPDATES PLAN UPDATESGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Gramercy Townhomes PLAN UPDATES PLAN UPDATESGRAMERCY TOWNHOMES | Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| Development Agreement Modification Hearing VICINITYNEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT | 6 Meridian City Council | 08.19.2025| W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Rockwell Greens Subdivision (H-2025-0002) by Laren Bailey, Conger Group, generally located at the Northwest corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2025-0002 A. Request: Annexation of 51.15 acres of land with a R-15 zoning district. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 412 buildable lots and 27 common lots. C. Request: Alternative Compliance to standards for developments abutting a State Highway. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE: August 19, 2025 ITEM # 4 PROJECT NAME: Rockwell Greens Subdivision (H-2025-0002) I wish to testify Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing (mark X (Please Print) HOA? if yes) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,­, DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 8/19/2025 Legend 0 DATE: i. Project Location r TO: Mayor& City Council .'::Area of Impact }= City Limits FROM: Nick Napoli,Associate Planner O Analysis `- ] 208-884-5533 nnapoli@meridiancity.org � APPLICANT: Laren Bailey SUBJECT: H-2025-0002 - Rockwell Neighborhood LOCATION: Generally located at the NW corner of State Highway 16 and McMillan Road (Parcels: SO429417375 and SO429449000)in Section 29, TAN., R.l W. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Annexation of 51.15 acres of land with the R-15 zoning district; a preliminary plat consisting of 412 building lots,26 commons lots; and alternative compliance to the city's standards for developments abutting a state highway. B. Issues/Waivers - The proposed subdivision borders the future State Highway 16, slated for completion in late 2026/early 2027. State highways are identified as hazardous in the Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Report(Pages 5-10 and 5-11) due to factors such as speed, accidents,and air quality.Higher-density development next to such hazards increases potential health and safety impacts for future residents.The applicant seeks alternative compliance to UDC 11-311-4 by proposing additional amenities and open space,a 6-foot wall atop a 6-foot berm,and enhanced soundproofing.Please see section III.D2 for analysis. - The subject development will be served by Pleasant View Elementary School,Star Middle School,and Owyhee High School.All three schools are currently over the capacities indicated by West Ada School District.However,WASD has indicated that the proposed subdivision will be serviced by Hunter Elementary School starting in 2026-2027 with an enrollment cap in 2025-2026.With the addition of 412 single-family homes,it is estimated that 202 school-aged children will be introduced into the area once the development is fully built out. The applicant has indicated that an additional elementary school is currently being built in Star and that the school boundary lines (see WASD comments above)will be adjusted,which is anticipated to open more room in the schools. Staff have concerns that,with capacities already over the architectural City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview capacity of the schools,further development could lead to additional overcrowding.The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council should carefully evaluate whether the proposed timing of the subdivision is appropriate, considering the school capacities. - ACHD has not accepted the construction of N.Ersatz Place from ITD,and in discussions with ACHD,this can take several years depending on whether the construction meets ACHD's standards. This will require the applicant to work with ITD on the frontage improvements. - Secondary Access currently does not meet MFD standards. The applicant has been in discussion with MFD on a solution.Until a solution is found,the applicant will be limited to 30 homes with a single access in accord with IFC D107. C. Recommendation Staff. Approval with a development agreement. Commission: Approval with the changes mentioned in section IV D. Decision Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report I. Project Overview I1. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Residential/Agriculture - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential - Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning R-15 Adopted FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential VII.A.3 Proposed FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 1/21/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 1/14/2025 Site posting date 5/23/2025 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IV.H • Comments Received Yes;Revisions are Required to Meet District Policies - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Arterial:McMillan Road - Future Collector:Ersatz Place • Traffic Level of Service McMillan:Better than"B" - McDermott:Better than"D" ITD Comments Received Yes—no mitigation is required by ITD. IV.I Meridian Fire = LA • Distance to Station 0.9 Miles from North Station Meridian Police IV.0 • Distance to Station 0.9 Miles from North Station Meridian Public Works Wastewater TA'T3 • Distance to Mainline Sewer available at the site • Impacts or Concerns See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Meridian Public Works Water • Distance to Mainline Water available at the site • Impacts or Concerns See Public Works Site Specific Conditions School District(s) West Ada School District r IV.G • Capacity of Schools Pleasant View Elementary:Architectural: 650 students, - Program: 625 students Star Middle: 1000 students Owyhee High: 1800 students • Number of Students Enrolled Pleasant View Elementary: 783 students - Star Middle: 1046 students Owyhee High: 1836 students Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see the public record. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics Figure l: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:S0429449000 Date Retrieved:2025/2/4 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infiii Indicator: 1(4� 503 1,312 Surrounding Area 61 % Not City 1; ® City Limits , 851.8 ■ Not City Household Household& Population Growth ■ Households 02020 Population Change:126.3°I° Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 2,000 4,000 6,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses ■ Single-family INUIti-family is 0% is 0% ® Commercial Preliminary Plats (last 5-years) Conditional Use Permit(last 5-years) Proposed I Proposed Pending Pending Approved Approved 0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 100 200 300 ■ Single-family INUIti-family City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics Single-family y 2.00 1,500 1.50 +' Residential 1,000 a Parcel Diversity y 1.00 7 U N 500 O Parcel Count ,,, 0.50 +� o.25 m *Average Acres 0.00 0.08_ 0 a R-2 R-4 R-15 Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average 15.0❑ y (913.28 ResidentialDensity L Q 10.00 E)6.72� 5.00 0 3.95 5.83 0.00o.00 Dwelling Units I Acre R-2 R-4 R-8 1111-15 Notes: See Error! Reference source not found..Error!Reference source not found.. Fieure 2:ACHD Summary Metrics Level of Service Planning Thresholds 1. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour{VPH} Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service "State Highway 2,0884eet Hxpress-,�vav NIA N..A 16 McMillan Road 901-feet Minor Arterial 386 Better than"E" McDermott Road 0-feet Collector 100 Better than T" Ersatz Place 2,621-feet ITD Local NIA NIA Access Road Acceptable level of service for a two-lane minor arterial is°E"(575 VPH). ` Acceptable level of service for a three-lane minor arterial is"E*(720 VPH). ` Acceptable level of service for a two-lane collector is°D" (425 VPH). r" AC HID does not set level of service thresholds for ITD roadways. Notes: See Error! Reference source not found..Error!Reference source not found.. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics Figure 3: Service Impact Summary ImpactService . . Ready Am I maim — Marginal Cautia °eye e��t \°oa �\te o\`�e �a ��y.� \��o� 5 C.°tea 01, Q- Notes: See Error! Reference source not found..Error!Reference source not found.. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designates the area proposed to be annexed as"Medium Density Residential,"which is intended for dwellings at a density of three(3)to eight(8)units per acre.Additionally,this property is located within a four-square-mile area governed by the Fields Sub-Area Plan located at the northwest corner of the City's area of impact boundary. This area is bounded by Ustick Rd. on the south, Can-Ada Rd. on the west, Chinden Blvd./US Highway 20/26 on the north, and McDermott Rd./SH-16 on the east. In accord with the Fields Sub-Area Plan,the general character, design, and identity of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is"modern rural,"which applies to housing, amenities, streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial. Additionally, some of the other thematic design elements that contribute to the desired character of the area should be adhered to such as lighting, fencing(e.g. split rail),landscaping(e.g.tall fescues,dry creek materials,wildflowers, street trees, etc.),public art,on-street bike lanes and/or off-street multi-use pathways, signage(e.g. metal roof on sign), etc.—see the Character Framework—Amenities(pg. 3-12)and Streetscape (pg. 3-13)in the Plan for more information.A high-quality design is expected in this area. To ensure consistency with the Plan, staff recommends that with each final plat,the applicant provide these details to ensure the quality of design for this development. The proposed density for the 51.15 acres of land with the R-15 zoning district equates to 8.05 units per acre. This is on the high end of the medium-density residential designation,which staff has concerns with, as there is currently a lack of connectivity to commercial and neighborhood- serving uses,no regional park, and the nearby public schools are over capacity. However,the applicant has exceeded the minimum requirements for open space and amenities as outlined in the UDC. They have also noted that a new elementary school is currently under construction in Star, and the boundary lines will be adjusted in the 2026-2027 school year,which is anticipated to relieve some of the existing capacity issues. In evaluating comparable developments west of SH-16,the Gander Creek Subdivision(approved in 2019) and Chukar Ridge Subdivision(approved in 2020)had gross densities of 3.42 and 4.0 units per acre,respectively.Additionally,the average density within a one-mile radius of the proposed site is approximately 5.83 units per acre. While the MDR Future Land Use Map(FLUM) supports densities between three (3) and eight(8) units per acre,the proposed density is on the high end of this range and highlights concerns previously outlined. Staff has communicated these concerns to the applicant, and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council carefully evaluate whether this level of density is appropriate given the current context—specifically,whether it is in the city's best interest to annex and develop this site in advance of supporting regional infrastructure such as parks and commercial/neighborhood services. Additionally,the proposed subdivision borders the future alignment of State Highway 16,which is considered a hazard in the Comprehensive Plan's Existing Conditions document(Pages 5-10 and 5-11) due to factors such as high vehicle speeds,accident frequency, and impacts on air quality. The applicant has applied for alternative compliance to the city's standards for development abutting state highways. Please see section III D.2 for analysis on the alternative compliance request, sound attenuation, air quality, and the sound engineer's report regarding sound attenuation. The applicant has indicated that the first homeowner occupancy is anticipated in 2027,with the goal for 50 to 60 homes built per year. This would extend the complete build-out timeline to 2035/2037. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis Overall, staff finds the proposed preliminary plat and proposed R-15 zoning districts to be generally consistent with the Future Land Use Map. Comprehensive Plan Policies: Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.01.01 encourages diverse housing options suitable for various income levels, household sizes and lifestyle preferences. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 G states development should avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City. The applicant has provided a mix of dwelling units that will appeal to different preferences. It is important to note that the majority of the development is single-family detached units on lot sizes ranging from 2,500 to 4,800 square feet. This development is one of the first in the Fields Sub Area Plan, so while a lack of housing diversity is currently present,following the plan will provide more diversity in the future. Comprehensive Plan policy 5.01.01 encourages the safety, health, and well-being of the community. Staff have concerns with the known hazard of SH-16 and how air quality and sound will impact a subdivision with a density on the high end of the MDR FLUM designation. Staff is recommending enhanced landscaping along SH-16, specifically increasing the tree planting frequency from one(1)tree every thirty-five(35) feet to one(1) every twenty(20) feet and increasing vegetation coverage from 70%to 80%. This is intended to help mitigate air quality impacts and provide additional sound attenuation. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.01.OIA promotes evaluating the impacts of growth and consider City Master Plans and Strategic Plans in all land use decisions (traffic, school enrollment,parks, etc). With the planned build-out timeframe of 50-60 homes per year,the applicant believes the impacts on schools and roadways will be phased as improvements are made in Meridian. Staff acknowledges that the proposed eight(8)phases of the subdivision will push completion out to 2035/2037,which will allow for improvements to be completed before the full impact of the development is realized. However, staff have concerns that the school capacity issues may not be mitigated prior to this timeframe. Comprehensive Plan Policy 4.10.00 promotes the protection ofpublic health and safety by guiding growth and development away from hazardous areas that pose a threat to people and property. The subject properties are designated as Medium Density Residential on the FLUM. The area was envisioned to incorporate different types of residential housing for city residents.However, staff have concerns about the density that is being proposed next to a known hazard in SH-16. The applicant has attempted to mitigate the known hazard,but it is important for our Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to evaluate the timing,mitigation efforts, and density of the subdivision. Comprehensive Plan Policy 4.10.01 C promotes the collaboration between ITD,ACHD, the City of Meridian, and Developers to ensure highways and roadways are designed to mitigate natural hazards and are as safe as possible. City staff have been in discussions with ITD, ACHD, and the developer on the roadway network and mitigation efforts for homes abutting SH-16. City of Meridian I Department Report 11I. Staff Analysis Table 4: Pro*ect Overview Description Details History The applicant previously applied for an application on the property but withdrew their application to obtain additional land. The applicant also completed a property boundary adjustment in Ada County to create a five-acre(5)County enclave in the NEC of the development. Phasing Plan 8 Phases Residential Units 412 Residential Units;68 Attached and 344 Detached Single-Family Homes Open Space 8.78 Acres or 17.1% Amenities Swimming pool, swimming pool changing facilities and restrooms, playground,three paved sports courts, 1500 linear feet of 10'wide multi- use pathways,and a pet waste station. Physical Features State Highway 16 Acreage 51.15 Acres Lots 412 Buildable Lots and 26 common Lots Density 8.05 Gross Density and 13.08 Net Density B. History The properties reside within Ada County and are zoned RUT. The applicant had a previous application that was submitted in 2024,but withdrew it to obtain additional land to incorporate within the subdivision. C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): The current use of the property is agricultural,no structures exist on the property.All well and sceptic systems will be abandoned as required. City utilities are required to be extended to serve the proposed development. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The applicant is proposing a mix of single-family attached homes(68 units) and single-family detached homes(344 units),which are listed as a principally permitted use in UDC Table 11- 2A-2 for the R-15 zoning district. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C encourages the applicants to maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 G states development should avoid the concentration of any one housing type or lot size in any geographical area;provide for diverse housing types throughout the City. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.06.02D encourages a diversity of housing, recreation, and mobility options to attract and sustain the local workforce. The applicant is proposing two different types of housing in the form of single-family attached and detached units. While the immediate area consists primarily of the same housing types and lot sizes,the fields sub-area plan will have a larger variety of housing to fit the needs of the city's residents and workforce. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): The preliminary plat and future development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. All proposed lots and public streets appear to meet UDC dimensional standards per the submitted preliminary plat. This includes lot sizes ranging from approximately 2,500 to 4,800 square feet with an average lot size of 3,317.5 square feet. The subdivision is proposed to develop in eight(8)phases as depicted in Exhibit VII. Development of the subdivision is required to comply with the subdivision design and improvement standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Qualified Open Space &Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3G): Based on the standards in UDC Table 11-3G-3, a minimum of 15% (or 7.67-acres) of qualified open space is required to be provided within the development.An open space exhibit was submitted as shown in Section VII.G,that depicts 17.1% (or 8.78-acres)of open space that meets the required quality and qualified open space standards. Based on the standards in UDC 11-3G-4A, a minimum of thirteen(13)amenity points are required to be provided. The amenities proposed are a swimming pool facility,playground,pathways,pickle ball courts, dog parks and several open space areas. The applicant's amenity points total is 26.5 exceeding the UDC requirements. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs,lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. The applicant needs to provide an amenity from the multi-modal group in order to meet the required standards. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.00 requires the applicant to plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample open space, and generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.02.0IB requires the applicant to evaluate open space and amenity requirements for consistency with community needs and values. The applicant is providing open space and amenities that exceed the requirements of the UDC.With no regional park currently in the area,the open space and amenities provided in the development will be crucial to the livability of the residents. 2. Developments Along Federal and State Highway(UDC 11-3H): The proposed subdivision is located adjacent to the future State Highway 16, slated for completion and operation between late 2026 and early 2027. The Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Document(Pages 5-10 and 5-11)identifies state highways as hazardous, citing factors such as high speeds,frequent accidents,and poor air quality. These elements are critical in assessing the suitability of the proposed subdivision. Staff are particularly concerned about air quality, given that the subdivision's proposed density, at the upper end of the MDR FLUM designation,would expose a larger number of future residents to a recognized hazard compared to a lower-density development. Similar developments on the west side of SH-16(Gander Creek and Chukar Ridge Subdivisions)were approved at 3.42 and 4.0 units per acre on the lower end of the MDR FLUM. Summary of the sound engineer's report: Note: These are estimates/expected levels due to SH-16 not being in operation. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis NOISE CRITERIA "The Noise Guidebook"published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)contains noise criteria.HUD has set forth the following standards for new housing construction assisted or supported by the Department.The criteria are codified in 24 CFR Part 51. This standard relies on the Day/Night Noise Level(DNL or Ldn)sound metric.In summary, these requirements for a residential site are- Day/Night Noise Level HUD Assessment DNL<65(dBA) Acceptable:No further action or noise reduction measures are needed for either indoor or outdoors aces. Normally Unacceptable:however,it can be acceptable if an interior DNL noise goal of 45 dBA is met.Sites with these noise 65 dBA a DNL a 75 dBA exposures can be used for residential development,but an analysis and noise control measures are needed to meet HUD design criteria. Unacceptable:because of the extreme degree of noise control DNL a 75 dBA required to protect indoor spaces,and the unsuitability of outdoor spaces for normal activities. The DNL(or Ldn)is an energy average of the A-weighted sound levels throughout a 24-hour period with a 10 decibel A weighted(dBA)penalty added to sound occurring at night;this penalty is added because people are more sensitive to sound during the night. Because of the variability in building construction,HUD normally uses a 65 DNL criterion for exterior residential sound levels_ The sound engineer used the expected distance of 150 feet from the centerline to the nearest residential area to gauge the expected noise levels. This led to the result of an expected hourly Leq(peak hour)to be 72.7 dBA(Decibels A-weighted) and 74 dBA DNL(Day Night Average Sound Level).Another calculation using traffic patterns from long-term measurements collected at other highways in Idaho shows the DNL is 73 dBA for the peak hour Leq of 73 dBA. However,when accounting for the factors of the distance between the highway, wall/berm,property lines,and height of the wall/berm,the noise is expected to see a reduction of 9 and 11 dB for most traffic noise sources.With these mitigation measures proposed by the applicant the expected outdoor worst-case hour Leq for the project site is between 62 and 64 dBA,which is deemed acceptable. The sound engineer concludes that the traffic noise levels are expected to be less than 65 dBA DNL,the berm and barrier are required to help mitigate the noise,and residential building along the first row nearest to the highway should have additional consideration for the floors above the ground floor as the six(6)foot wall and six(6)foot berm may not adequately block the line of site from SH-16 to these spaces. To address these concerns,the applicant has requested alternative compliance with the mitigation standards outlined in UDC 11-3H-4 for developments near federal and state highways. Their proposal includes a six(6) foot berm topped with a six(6)foot wall to mitigate noise,alongside the use of enhanced building materials designed to meet stricter sound-attenuation standards. However,the applicant is requesting that these enhanced building materials be evaluated at the building permit phase. The applicant has also exceeded the minimum requirements for open space and amenities under the UDC. This approach aligns with the alternative compliance granted to the Gander Creek Development in 2024, though the current proposal involves a higher density than the prior approval. The director supports the alternative compliance for sound attenuation, as meeting the UDC's requirement of a ten-foot wall above the centerline of SH-16 would necessitate a thirty(30)foot structure. However, details on the enhanced building materials shall be provided with the submittal of the final plat and be consistent with the enhanced material ratings used with the Gander Creek City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis Development.Additionally,UDC 11-3B requires a thirty-five(35) foot landscape buffer along entryway corridors,but with the location of the property,thirty(30) of the thirty-five (35)feet is encumbered by an irrigation easement. This necessitates the need for additional landscaping to mitigate noise and improve air quality for future residents. Staff is recommending increasing tree coverage along SH-16 from one(1)tree every thirty-five(35) feet to one(1)every twenty(20)feet and increasing the vegetation coverage to 80%instead of 70%. These enhancements are intended to improve air quality and provide additional sound attenuation for future residents. Given the known hazards associated with state highways,the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council should carefully consider whether the proposed density is appropriate. 3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): The Field Sub Area Plan calls for naturalized plants,dry creek materials, split rail fencing, no-mow fescues, and other rural landscape elements. The applicant believes they are meeting these requirements through the use of open vision wrought iron fencing, drought-tolerant plant materials, split rail fencing in the central open space, and water-efficient drip irrigation to planter beds. Additionally, low-maintenance native grasses are being used along SH-16, with low-maintenance fescues along select pathways and open spaces. The applicant provided revisions to incorporate some of these elements. However, staff is recommending that split rail fencing be incorporated in the planters along W. McMillan Road and N. Ersatz Place, similar to how the applicant did in Lot 29,Block 8. With the incorporation of this recommended change, staff finds that the applicant is meeting the intent of the Fields Sub Area plan landscaping requirements. i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC 11-2A-7 requires a twenty-five(25) foot wide landscape buffer along McMillan Road, a twenty(20) foot wide buffer along N. Ersatz Place, and a thirty-five(35)foot wide buffer along SH-16. The applicant has provided landscape buffers in compliance with UDC 11-2A-7. However, the ten (10)foot multi-use pathway along McMillan Road shall be detached from the roadway with landscaping in the parkway. This shall be revised with the final plat.Additionally, to meet the Fields Sub Area Plan, staff is recommending split rail fencing be included in the planter along McMillan Road and Ersatz Place, to match what the applicant has proposed in Lot 29, Block 8. The landscape buffer along SH-16 is required to be thirty-five(35)feet; however, a thirty (30)foot irrigation district easement encumbers thirty of the thirty-five feet. The applicant has submitted a detail of the landscaping and berm along SH-16. The applicant shall enter into a license agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to landscape the first four(4)feet behind the wall depicted in the exhibit or provide an additional four(4)feet of landscaping outside of the easement to allow for eight(8)feet of landscaping on the backside of the wall. In addition to this, the applicant has requested alternative compliance to the standards of UDC 11-3H-4 for developments along State Highways. In this request, staff is recommending one tree every twenty(20) feet instead of one every thirty-five(35)feet and 80%vegetation coverage along SH-16 to help with sound attenuation and air quality. ii. Parking lot landscaping The landscaping for the parking on Lot 16, Block 10 shall meet the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis iii. Tree preservation Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten-inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four-inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees).Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within common open space, and when used as focal elements in landscape design. The applicant shall provide mitigation calculations with submittal of the final plat if any trees are being removed from the property. iv. Storm integration Per UDC 11-313-11,the applicant shall meet the intent to improve water quality and provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the integration of vegetated,well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green stormwater facilities into required landscape areas,where topography and hydrologic features allow if part of the development. v. Pathway landscaping Pathway landscaping shall comply with the requirements outlined in UDC 11-313-12. The applicant must provide a landscape strip at least five(5) feet wide along both sides of the pathway. To enhance design flexibility,variations in the strip's width are encouraged to allow trees to be planted farther from the pathway,reducing the risk of root damage. However,the landscape strip must maintain a minimum width of two(2)feet to ensure proper pathway maintenance. The strips shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs, lawn, and/or other vegetative ground cover. The pathway running through Lot 29, Block 8 shall be in compliance with these standards, 4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Residential parking analysis Off-street parking is required to be provided for each home based on the total number of bedrooms per unit as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6. On-street parking is also available on portions of the proposed streets. 5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan,Architectural Standards Manual): Goal 5.01.02D of the Comprehensive Plan highlights the need for effective building design and landscaping to buffer, screen,beautify,and integrate commercial,multifamily,and parking areas with existing neighborhoods. In response,the developer has submitted nine (9) conceptual building elevations and floor plans that illustrate the appearance of future homes in the development(see Section VII.H). The applicant states the homes in the Rockwell Greens Subdivision will include 412 homes with a mix of different product types,two-story and single-story detached single-family homes, and two-story attached single-family homes.. In accord with the Fields Sub-Area Plan,the general character, design and identity of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is"modern rural,"which applies to housing,amenities, streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial. Stafffinds that the proposed single-family detached elevations comply with this standard. However, stafffinds that the single-family attached does not meet the same theme. Elevations for the clubhouse were submitted with this application, but will be subject to the standards in the ASM, Field Sub Area Plan, and Comprehensive Plan. The applicant shall apply for design review for the single-family attached units prior to submitting for building permits.Additionally, the applicant shall apply City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis for Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review for the clubhouse and pool open space/amenity space. Homes on lots that abut W.McMillan Road, an arterial street,N. Ersatz Place,a collector street,and SH-16, a state highway will be highly visible; therefore,the rear and/or side of structures on these lots(i.e. Lot 1,Block 1; Lots 1-10,Block 2; Lots 1-14 and 44-54, Block 8; Lots 98-124,Block 4; Lots 30-97,Block 4; ) shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs), bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. Comprehensive Plan policy 2.01.01 C encourages the applicants to maintain a range of residential land use designations that allow diverse lot sizes, housing types, and densities. 6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. According to the submitted landscape plans, the applicant is proposing three types of fencing throughout the site, vinyl solid fencing, split rail, and wrought iron semi privacy fencing. The applicant is proposing an eight(8)foot fence around the pool, which is not in compliance with the UDC. The maximum fence height in a residential district is six(6)feet in height. This revision shall be revised with the final plat. 7. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17): Per Comp Plan policy 3.07.01C appropriate landscaping,buffers, and noise mitigation with new development along transportation corridors(setback,vegetation,low walls,berms, etc.) is required. Per UDC 11-3A-17,the minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be eight(8)feet. The width can be measured from the back of curb where there is no likely expansion of the street section within the right-of-way;the parkway width shall exclude the width of the sidewalk. Class 11 trees are the preferred parkway trees. The applicant is proposing a parkway along N. Ersatz Place that appears to be in compliance with this standard. The applicant shall comply with the standards for UDC 11-3A-17 with submittal of the final plat. E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): N. Ersatz Place was constructed by the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) and remains under ITD ownership, and is the only access provided to this development. This collector road is a shared drive between the proposed subdivision and the future Cole Valley Christian School. The applicant is proposing three access points off N. Ersatz Place. The northernmost access point is not supported by staff, as UDC 11-3A-3 requires limiting access points to collector and arterial roadways. In addition,the applicant shall submit documentation with the final plat that the southern access is in alignment with the future Cole Valley Christian Schools curb cut. A traffic impact study(TIS)was required with this application. Summary of the findings: City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis Staff CommentsJRecommendations:Staff comments are provided by District Traffic Services and Development Review staff. Intersections McDermott Road&McMillan Road The TIS recommends that the McDermott Road and McMillan Road be signalized. However, there is not enough right-of-way to construct a signal at this intersection making this improvement infeasible. Additionally, staff does not recommend signalizaticn of this intersection as part of this application,as traffic patterns are anticipated to change ance SH-16 is constructed and ape for public use. Therefore,no mitigation is required. Ersatz Place&McMillan Road The TIS recommends that Ersatz Place be full access at its intersection with McMillan Road. Staff is supportive of this proposal as Ersatz Place was constructed by ITD to align with Glassford Avenue on the south side of McMillan Road across from the site. The applicant should be required to construct a center left turn lane and dedicated right turn lane on McMillan Road at Ersatz Place. Owyhee Storm Avenue&McMillan Road To achieve acceptable LOS,the TIS recommends adding additional turn lanes and modifying the signal timing as follows: • Dedicated northbound,eastbound,westbound,and southbound right-tum lanes • Permissiveloverlap phasing for the eastbound right-tum • Permissive phasing for northbound,westbound,and southbound right-tums There is not enough right-of-way at the intersection to construct the recommended turn lanes making this improvement infeasible. ACHD will evaluate any modifications to the signal timing in this area after SH-16 is constructed and open to the public. Therefore, no mitigation is required. Roadway Segments McMillan Road,Owyhee Storm Avenue to McDermott Road The TIS recommends widening of McMillan Road to 5-lanes between Owyhee Storm and McDermott Road. The widening of these segments of McMillan Road is infeasible due to limited right-of-way. Additionally, these roadway segments are listed as funded improvements in ACHD's CIP. Therefore,con sistentwith ACHD's Alternative Mitigation policies,no mitigation is required. ACHD's staff report calls for revisions to the applicant's plan to meet all of the district's policies. The applicant shall comply with all of ACHD's conditions of approval. Please see below for some of the pertinent conditions of approval: - Once Ersatz Place is under ACHD's jurisdiction,the roadway will be limited to 3,000 vehicle trips per day. Because of this,prior to plan approval on the final plat that contains the 140'single-family building lot, secondary public street access shall be available. - Construct the following roadways as 33-foot wide local street sections with curb, gutter,and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks. (Snow Currant, Gem Prep, Gallson— Avilla to Gem Prep,Riverdale—Gem Prep to Double Rock,Double Rock- Gallson to Riverdale,Avilla-Gallson to Riverdale,Riverdale—Avilla to Levenberg,Riverdale—Levenberg to Apgar Creek). - Dedicate additional right-of-way to total 50-feet from centerline of McMillan Road abutting the site. - Construct one stub street to the north to parcel No. S0429140010. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street which states,"THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." - Provide written documentation from ITD that the use of Ersatz Place to access the development prior to the roadway being accepted into ACHD's public street inventory is allowed. ITD may have additional conditions or limitations on use of the roadway while SH-16 is under construction. It is important to note that per IFC D107.1,the subdivision will be limited to thirty(30) single-family homes with only a single fire access point.The applicant shall submit a City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis revised secondary access plan approved by MFD with the first phase final plat to ensure access is adequately addressed. Additionally,staff and ACHD are recommending a stub street to the five(5)acre parcel (#SO429417250)in alignment with N.Gallson Avenue. Comp Plan policies 3.03.04 and 6.01.01H discuss planning for transportation and pedestrian connectivity to county enclaves to promote neighborhood connectivity. Staff believes that by requiring this stub street, it will promote a more integrated approach between the two developments that will provide more ingress/egress opportunities for residents,meeting the intent of the comprehensive plan. 2. Multiuse Pathways and Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-5 and UDC 11-3A-8): Comprehensive Plan policy 4.04.OIA ensures that new development and subdivisions connect to the pathway system. UDC 11-3G-5 emphasizes the importance of common open space and amenities being located in areas that maximize pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Multi-use pathways shall be constructed in accord with the city's comprehensive plan,the Meridian Pathways Master Plan,the Ada County Highway District Master Street Map and Roadways to Bikeways Master Plan. Detached ten(10)foot wide sidewalks(multiuse pathway) shall be provided along W. McMillan Road and N. Ersatz Place. In coordination with Meridian Park's Department,it was determined that the multi-use pathway along SH-16 would be redirected to both sides of N. Ersatz Place to make a connection to the north once development continues north. The applicant has depicted the 10-foot multi-use pathway along W. McMillan Road but not along N. Ersatz Place. The pathway along N. Ersatz Place shall be widened to 10 feet with the submittal of the final plat. In addition,the 10-foot multi-use pathway along W McMillan Road shall be detached. Additionally, staff is recommending a pedestrian connection to W. McMillan Road through Lot 108,Block 4 in alignment with the pedestrian connection located on Block 12. Staff is also recommending a pedestrian connection through Lot 22,Block 8 and Lot 36,Block 8 in alignment with the proposed sidewalks along the west side of N. Camp Creek Avenue to provide better connectivity for the residents in the northern portion of the subdivision with the primary open space and amenities. All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. 3. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): All sidewalks constructed as part of this proposal are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. 4. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6): i. Common driveways Per UDC 11-6C-3D, common driveways shall serve a maximum of four(4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three(3)dwelling units be located on one(1) side of the driveway unless alternative compliance is applied for. The applicant is proposing one common drive to have 4 units taking access off one side due them being attached units. The applicant shall apply for alternative compliance with the submittal of the final plat. ii. Block face City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis UDC 11-6C-3-regulates block lengths for residential subdivisions. The intent of this section of code is to ensure block lengths do not exceed 750 ft, although there is the allowance of an increase in block length to 1,000 feet if a pedestrian connection is provided. In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred(1,200)feet, unless waived by the City Council. The applicant is compliance with the block length requirements in the UDC. F. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-6): The West Tap Sublateral runs along the southern portion of the site parallel with W. McMillan Road. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be installed to provide irrigation to each lot in the subdivision in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-15. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments by the City's adopted standards, specifications, and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practices as adopted by the City as outlined in UDC 11-3A-18. 4. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21): Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development.All utilities are available to the site. Water main, fire hydrant and water service require a twenty- foot(20)wide easement that extends ten(10)feet past the end of main,hydrant, or water meter.No permanent structures, including trees are allowed inside the easement. Sewer service to this site will be provided from the Can-Ada Lift Station. Comprehensive Plan policy 3.03.03G require urban infrastructure be provided for all new developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks,water and sewer utilities. IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A final plat shall not be submitted until the DA and Ordinance are approved by the City Council. Currently, a fee of$303.00 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,incorporate the following provisions if City Council determines annexation is in the best interest of the City: A. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan, common open space/site amenity exhibit,and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. B. Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions C. Homes on lots that abut W.McMillan Road, an arterial street,N. Ersatz Place,a collector street,and SH-16, a state highway will be highly visible; therefore,the rear and/or side of structures on these lots(i.e. Lot 1,Block 1; Lots 1-10,Block 2; Lots 1-14 and 44-54, Block 8; Lots 98-124,Block 4; Lots 30-97,Block 4; ) shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs), bays,banding,porches,balconies,material types,or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story structures are exempt from this requirement. D. Provide a revised phasing plan that is approved by MFD, indicating how secondary access for emergency services will be provided prior to submission of the first final plat. E. Align the southernmost entrance along N. Ersatz Place with the curb cut approved with the Cole Valley Christian School project.Provide documentation of this with the final plat. F. The applicant shall obtain approval from ITD or ACHD(as applicable)for the frontage improvements along N. Ersatz Place and submit an approval letter from ITD such agency with the first final plat application. G. Future development shall promote no-mow fescues,naturalized plants, dry creek materials, split rail fencing,and other rural landscape elements in landscape buffers and open space as listed in the Fields Sub-Area Plan H. With each final plat application,the applicant shall provide details to ensure the quality of the design is in accord with the Fields Sub-Area Plan. The general character,design,and identity of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is"modern rural,"which applies to housing, amenities, streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial.Additionally, some of the other thematic design elements that contribute to the desired character of the area shall be adhered to such as lighting, fencing(e.g. split rail), landscaping(e.g.tall fescues, dry creek materials, wildflowers, street trees, etc.),public art,on-street bike lanes and/or off-street multi-use pathways, signage(e.g.metal roof on sign),etc.—see the Character Framework—Amenities (pg. 3-12)and Streetscape(pg. 3-13)in the Plan for more information. A high-quality design is expected in this area. 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Add a plat note stating"direct lot access to W. McMillan Road and N. Ersatz Place is prohibited except for where approved with this application." b. The applicant shall apply for alternative compliance to allow for four(4)lots taking access from a single side of a common drive. The future final plat submission shall match the common drive exhibit and provide a note on the final plat that addresses maintenance and access on the specified lots as shown in Exhibit VI.J. c. Provide a stub road in alignment with N. Gallson Avenue to parcel#SO429417250. d. Depict the ten(10)foot multi-use pathway along W.McMillan Road as a detached pathway in compliance with UDC 11-3B-7C.Widen the multi-use pathways along N. Ersatz PI to ten(10) feet as required by the pathway master plan. Provide a pedestrian connection to W.McMillan Road through Lot 108,Block 4 in £ Provide a pedestrian^ ^^tier in t4e foF of^ mier-epathw Um of a fifteen (1�Qtee of in aeee d with TarvDG 11 3A-8 through Lot 2-215,Block 8 and Lot 3643,Block 8 in City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions Greek ^vefine to provide better connectivity for the residents in the northern portion of the subdivision with the primary open space and amenities. g. Provide a revised plat to show the parkway and pathway extending down N. Ersatz PI as depicted on the landscape plan. h. Remove the northernmost entrance along N. Ersatz Place in alignment with W. Snow Currant Street to be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-3, and replace it with a micro path lot. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Include mitigation calculations on the plan for existing trees that are proposed to be removed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-IOC.5. The Applicant shall coordinate with the City Arborist(Kyle Yorita jgorita(iDmeridiancity.org)to determine mitigation requirements prior to removal of existing trees from the site. b. Provide one(1)tree within every residential lot(gpproximatelery twen eight (2-028) feet) along State Highway 16 to help mitigate for sound attenuation and air quality. In other open spaces along State Highway 16,provide trees every twenty(20) feet. c. Lot 58,Block 4 shall be landscaped with 80%vegetation coverage(not including the gravel access road) instead of the 70%required by code to help mitigate for sound attenuation and air quality. d. Widen the multi-use pathways along N. Ersatz PI to ten(10) feet as required by the pathway master plan. e. Provide split rail fencing in the planters along W. McMillan Road and N. Ersatz Place to match the split rail fencing proposed in Lot 29,Block 8. The applicant may request alternative compliance in accordance with the UDC to permit the proposed eight(8)foot fence around the pool area. The maximum f nee height in a residential distr-iet is six(6) feet in height. The eight(8) foot fenee ar-otmd the pool shall be lowered to six(6) kaet, g. Provide details on the type and location of shrubs, ornamental grasses,and perennials that will be used. 1} Provide a pedestrian connection to W.McMillan Road through Lot 108, Block 4 fin i. Provide a pedestrian (15)feet eommon lot in aeeor-dwrth UPC 3A-8 through Lot 2-215,Block 8 and Lot 3b43,Block 8 in Greek ^. enue to provide better connectivity for the residents in the northern portion of the subdivision with the primary open space and amenities. j. The applicant shall enter into a license agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to landscape the first four(4) feet behind the wall abutting SH-16 as depicted in the irrigation easement or provide an additional four(4) feet of landscaping outside of the easement to allow for eight(8)feet of landscaping on the backside of the wall. k. Remove the northernmost entrance along N. Ersatz Place in alignment with W. Snow Currant Street to be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-3, and replace it with a micro path lot. 4. The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 zoning district. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions 5. The applicant's alternative compliance request is approved by installing one(1)tree per twenty(20)feet along State Highway 16,increased vegetation coverage of 80%, and upgraded building materials for sound attenuation. This will be verified with the Final Plat applications. 6. Provide an amenity from the multi-modal group in order to meet the required standards per UDC 11-3G-4. 7. The applicant shall comply with the open space exhibit approved as part of this plat application that depicts 17.1%(or 8.78-acres)of qualified open space and exceeds the required amenity points as proposed. 8. Comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to cul-de-sacs, alleys,driveways,common driveways,easements, blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 9. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 10. The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-313-5,UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-3B-14. 11. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 12. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the proposed changing rooms and pool area prior to submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structures shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19; the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 13. A Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the single-family attached homes. The design of the structures shall comply with the standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual and the Fields Sub-Area Plan to provide a consistent design theme throughout the development. 14. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD's conditions of approval. 15. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC 11-613-7. 16. Staff s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. B. Meridian Public Works https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Doc View.asp x?id=390573&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity C. Meridian Police Department https://weblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=390585&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC Lty D. Meridian Park's Department https://weblink.meridianciU.ory WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=390591&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions E. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) Communities ties in Motion (CIM) Development,Review Checklist Development Name: Rockwell Greeros CIM Vision Category: Future Neighborhood Consistent with CIM YES McMillan in New Households: 412 New Jobs: 0 .: Safety Economic Vitality Haw safe and comfortable is the nearest To what extent does the project major road(minor arterial or above)for enable people, government, and bicyclists and pedestrians? Analysis is businesses to prosper? limited to existing roadway conditions. McDerrnott Road Economic Activity Center Access Pedestrian level of stress Impact on Existing ; Surrounding Farmland Bicycle level of stress Net Fiscal Impact Convenience Quality of Life a What services are available within 0.5 Checked boxes indicate that miles (green) or 1 mile (yellow)of the additional information is attached" pmjerL? Active Trsnaportation Nearest bus stop Automobile Transportation Nearest put9ic school Public Tranaportat3on Nearest public park Roadway Projects ' Improves performance (�?) Does not improve or Reduces performance reduce performance Comments: Based on the site plan provided, COMPASS has no additional comments. Who we are: The Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho(COMPASS) is the metropolitan planning organization for Ada and Canyon Counties, This review evaivates whether land developments are consistent with Communibes in Motion, the regional long-range transportation plan for Ada and Canyon Counties. This Eheckiist is not intended to be prescriptive, but rather a guidance document. Past checklists are available online. See the Deveioyment Review User Guide far mare information on the red,yellow,and green checklist thresholds. dM https.//compassidaho.Drg/ COMPASS info0compassidaha.orq Sent: 3/27/25 L City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions Fiscal Impact Analysis Below are the expected revenues and costs to local governments from this pro)ect.The purpose of this analysts is to help the public, stakeholders, and the decl sl on-ma ke rs better manage growth. Capital and operating expenditures are determined based on service and infrastructure needs, including persons per household, student generation rates, lot slxes, street Frontages, vehicle trlp and trip adjustment Factors, average trip lengths, construction values, income, discretionary spending, and employment densities. Nat Fiscal Impact by Agency City County Highway District School District Breakeven point across all agencies; 1 Year Disclaimer: This tool only looks out 20 years and does not Include replacement costs for infrastructure,public utifftie5, or anfurded transportation needs lrr the project area. Maf-e Ofonmadoo about the COMPASS f7scaf Impact roof is available at: hms.L11compassidaho.orglfr5caf-fmgact-tools Short-Tern, Funded Capital Projects R.plc.-r.l451PJxtK.n1{r. I' Inll#ac LP&Lft&a71Y.4: L4W�#4..h 11 her ITD wiP-LOYTR hshc<"ffir 20a^rx2-0FR T.U:@)MA_Alk—ft—SWA21 5e1e1� Taal PrpuJ nmd RwWN:#31AN Ta1.I CIM fP—..P.Ar .r tt34.3ZI Prtl.el B..[Iiotloe Carap+�raw.JlWmil d Bl...Hlpr"y lE tram Lltlk Rk uid to lA52CM 1h du prl d lhwdan arc OJsi c.."Tlr.isu� ymi Aurra. r..a uaaa In Judh 6d i-W%r.ya6�rr�w 6—.V.&k Tho.d-d LIB 2&70.-1"*r.-arc cff­&,Iu m.f.w nm 3haapn Wah AM:nuudm an wrnx:.}kkLWW1 Rmd and FM Wo Crnk• 91 Waal llamap Ia d.Ia uaa IaT coca..' s,serr.arc]r..Petm Yluivra lkg' drq"+aJ xuY ar,dprko�nseo.<ak:prr .p.W1 lKNaYM7 IOeI g%.—tuft MmU_ t..§"W.10. - -JAY-'+A': bYW*&% 1�� Curl V 1=.y 4Y:nnr I.VMr AYo WIN- [m�rJ.Xo. [an�rrum 76W F~*h" I,WMWr C.M. er..�..r.. Lv.nx.rn. errq�.mq C0'hirnr,Q _;s : .. n 9 7.2W MPOP I 21..W 4 ,.•;� runs Toles: Source: The COMPASS Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). The TIP is a short-range (seven-year) budget of transportation projects for which federal fends are antreipated,along with non-federally funded projects that are regitioaffy signifxant and is avaifabie at: http.s./Icompassidaho.org/transiportation-imPrDvement-prDqraml City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions F. Irrigation Districts 1. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District https:llweblink.meridianciiy.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=392677&dbid=0&repo=Meridi anCi C. West Ada School District(WASD) or Other District/School a � ±vA West Ada SCHOOL DISTRICT i May 20,2025 RE:Rockwell Greens Subdivision H-2025-0002 ALT,AZ,PP Dear Meridian City Planners: West Ada School District has experienced significant and sustained growth in student enrollment during the last ten years. Based on current enrollment data specific to the area surrounding this proposed development,we estimate a development consisting of412 single-family units and 0 multi-family units could house approximately 202school aged children.Approval of this application will affect enrollments at the following schools in West Ada School District. Enrollment Ca aci Pleasant View Elementary Schaal 783 625* Star Middle School 1046 100O Owyhee High School 1836 1800 *Program Capacity West Ada School District supports economic growth; however, growth fosters the need for additional school capacity. Future developments will continue to have an impact on the district's capacity.Should a school exceed capacity,to meet the need foradditional school capacity in this area one or more of the following may need to be implemented: • Trans porting students to an alternate school: tl avai'--lb--c a=sr-oms.Elementary students may be bussed to the Staror East Meridian area schools dire to pessicle er-oliment caps, • Attendance area adjustments if there Is availability in a nearbyschool.The Long Range Planning Committee will reconvene in September 2025to consider needed adjustments. • Passage of a bond may be needed in the next 5-8 yearsto build new schools and fit the enrollment needs. • Portable clas5nooms placed onthe propertyat the Middle or High School.Please note the option of addinga portable is not applicable at Pleasant View Elementary dueto space constraints. West Ada School District requests developers' consideration for providing safe walkways, bike paths, and pedestrian access for our students to schools and community resources. Sincerely, Miranda Carson, Director of Planning and Transportation City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions H. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) MInVA,0,11d, t +lexls Pickrng Vke-Presiont 4entGoldthorp CorrrvmlWner�CVpvc McKinnoy,Car isjonmr 1-4& Pa M[&Nilsson,Cwrwnisslaner Date: August 11,2025 To: Laren Bailey Staff Contact Kara Leigh Troyer,Planner Project Description: Rockwell Neighborhood Trip Generation: This development is estimated to generate 3,638 vehicle trips per day,260 vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour based the traffic impact study. -I"- wism1no ri Yes on ACHD Policies If yes, is m itigati 7 Area Roadway Level af 6 1� 0 M-M. � I Lng-) ' I Planned o area roadways ACHOrs LOS Planning Performance Meagures the future with planned MIN&W Is Transit Available? connecti gyou to more Ada Goun4r Highway UsWca-51104 N L+eekerAvenue•6olre,ID-9FT13-PH ZCe-367-6-�44-FX}45-76M-wwwachdldahaarg https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=386723&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions I. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.oLglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=393541&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ky V. FINDINGS A. Annexation(UDC 11-5B-3E) Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds annexation of the subject site with the R-15 zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Medium Density Residential FLUM designation for this property, if the Applicant complies with the provisions in Section IV. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the lot sizes and layout proposed will be consistent with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that housing opportunities will be provided consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds that the map amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare if the applicant complies with the provisions in Section IV. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and The school district states the schools in the zone are beyond district capacity. This proposed development will impact Pleasant View Elementary, Star Middle, and Owyhee High, which are already at or over capacity with the current enrollment. West Ada School District is currently under construction for a new elementary school in Star and will be adjusting the school boundaries, which is anticipated to relieve the overcrowding, but these impacts have not been realized yet. Due to WASD indicating that the schools are anticipated to have more capacity at the time this development gets its first occupancy, the Commission find that the map amendment will not result in adverse impacts. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the property is developed in accord with the provisions in Section IV. B. Alternative Compliance(UDC 11-513-5E) In order to grant approval for an alternative compliance application,the Director shall determine the following: 1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or Due to State Highway 16 having an overpass over W. McMillan Road, to meet the requirements for developments along state highways the applicant would be required to engineer and construct a structure exceeding thirty(30)feet in height. The director finds that this makes adherence to the standards in UDC 11-3H-4 not feasible. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and The applicant has requested alternative compliance with the mitigation standards outlined in UDC 11-3H-4 for developments near federal and state highways. Their proposal includes a six-foot berm topped with a six-foot wall to mitigate noise, alongside the use of enhanced building materials designed to meet stricter sound-attenuation standards. However, the applicant is requesting that these enhanced building materials be evaluated at the building permit phase. The director finds that the alternative compliance provides an equal to or superior means of meeting the requirements if the applicant provides enhanced landscaping in the form of one(1) tree per twenty(20)feet along SH-16, increases the vegetation coverage to 8001o, and provides details for the enhanced building material with the final plat submittals. 3. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties. The director finds the alternative means will not be material detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties if the applicant follows the provisions in Section IV. C. Preliminary Plat(UDC-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; The Commission finds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section IV. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Commission finds public services can be made available to the subject property and will be adequate to accommodate the proposed development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; The Commission finds the proposed plat is in substantial conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's Capital Improvement Program. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Commission finds the proposed development is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare if the applicant complies with the provisions in Section IV. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Commission finds the development does not have any significant natural, scenic, or historic features that need to be preserved. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and preliminary plat per the conditions of approval included in Section IV in accord accordance with Findings in Section V. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on June 5',2025. At the public hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject Annexation,Preliminary Plat and Alternative Compliance requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Hethe Clark b. In opposition: None c. Commenting. None d. Written testimony: Shawn Freeman and Craig Cooper both have concerns with the proposed density,traffic, school overcrowding, and decline in quality of life. e. Staff presenting application: Nick Napoli f Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. The Commission discussed the proposed densi . being higher than that of the neighboring subdivision that also abut SH-16. This spurred a further discussion about traffic but the Commission determined that after hearing the proposed build out is 50-60 homes a,year, they felt the effects would be phased. 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. The Commission adopted the changes proposed by Staff as reflected above. 5. Outstandingissue(s)for City Council: a. Density of the subdivision along SH-16,traffic concerns along McMillan Road, school overcrowding, and whether the timing of the subdivision is correct. - Condition 2c: Provide a stub road in alignment with N. Gallson Avenue to parcel #SO429417250. -DA Provision E: Align the southernmost entrance along N. Ersatz Place with the curb cut approved with the Cole Valley Christian School project. Provide documentation of this with the final plat. C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report I. ' 1 1 - . . • .. • CNR, EN • • �-T. - Mom' IL i W . 1 fliinli - b �i • CH�INDEN �' '- rrr a �•� ,...•... i� Q lirinr=rrrr ��if r ua� err�_�. 11;;11fA 11111 11111i�i�r��� n 1 IIIIC Ilnll � �#� �+fir f<N a:�nn�nnl�u` i� � moon nnn �_�►' yti{lf� :�.'i�►' nrnlll nnu 111 I ��1«11 y 11RR *` Q� �1,flr l 1�Iilllr Mr. --'1'•• � flrmlr �� i.leo rr r� .. ♦ ::nuu. .��111 If}1 i �llllllll 11 I = MCMI.L-LAN -? 11111111 1 p Ilnnn 1 e IIf111S llinllllls inlln RIIII ►•,, aaaa: # #� In nm unnnn Iuu1 I- Iff11�:Ilurr � 7arrp; '##"+t#jg 1�����h111nAY111�nnuln!1W1 - - Inlllnri+in- 1##ltalila�- ����IIIIH11111 ="�. u .bl 40 l� wI/.j • -CHINDEN �`�'rsa 11M, I Subare ON Plan _ Minon Irinu'ff++miff. ■ •umuw ' ��r r fl H„�Illlllll IIq urn Hullo 1 _• ur��nunu ul� Bill �IIIIIIIII•IIIIP 11l1ln1r1 =:mmm° "mnuulrl uunwn au�41i1i 11111 :I�Pr ►rr i - • - • ::nap i�•!r (nReside7. o IIIIIII / � I�IIIIlllll i'w::ieiiiii •�rllnn IIIlB,111111, n11 �Inlllll IIuG►`�1uun�,uu II 11i i nnnnnunnn- 'li:;','. � IIII A !! :11111Mill1 nm°°°nnl unmtuwn ill l.all...f IIIIIII IIn11111- fafan.uulll - - •�! -�1 III .11111 11i11r1111�1111111111 11111111111tol Lmnllmn- ' ill 1111111111�= u nun' 111111111111 I � �.. IIIIIIlllil� F- MCMILL-AN - • • , / .�- __: 'E._ �!lI: 111111 ugllU. !1IIIIIII rwi;111111111111, �� 11l�.: _�_= 1 _ ,1 �j -nnu„1 a{!!11#y�� ♦�iun unln��nluulwona � � r+A , lt...� ^r••S'II��I,1JJ 11l 4l!„!a��aflll���'•r j���tlln ll1111111111111111 1111P - • - • 1 / _ ,III iiiii 3r �r1U rl'rrllrlr7�h11#l+O Mill n,r11r ruin=e,i � �=�xuw rain+ri�; �:.mlaiuHl 1.-IIIIn•F,nnmu �. ni �� ■ 10. IIIIIII= � •*w Illllri `I411f alailala, 7 Illljiflrl 7ffifill,� �Vi��flllll k I�■ - Hli � J ■__,tA �R���■ uiulw ==�: [Ira•'./ iiiiiiu ?��"', r r � Baal r ulll!!1 IIII C:Rnlu��elnnlr ul� 1:7CC7[ llll'i111111iin 11,11111111■��1'1 f�f<ll'I�e�mnulm -- u�111n nm � � ■111��:nul {n 8 umwnt=__' �IIIIIII� I� �Illlln!#�..:riiilii 7 ■ 11111E I,111 - - ►� �11111I11 IIIIr�•lll[IIII mn IIII llllllla��llllllllllllllll[- - 'C:Y.'.� Ill! B IIII IIIIIII'� Il:annf . All I1111 IIIIIII Illllllq- aarla:aarlr- III .11111 IU1111111 I11111111I Illllll11111= oi�ni=.r I I IIIIIII 11111 o 111111 111111111,111111111 ,9 mnnlunu p r ,,irnill,=1 Ir f dllllllll Illll I; 1 --� 111111 �IIIIIrAllli�i �� M�CMI�L-AN� r � tl�,tl,t,l_,�. -..111nu11uu1r1111*� ,�illnuuu11u11uulinulu111111.: ■�.inai.-���n.'1. ielW p r1.11i11111111111111r1� 1111111111!II•IIII11I�1i11r111111 11111 lama - :'.`.: nnu„ �•s1111#y��' I�ill„unul�7inlnne Iona }7■Ix,unr_ N,,: Illllp``�ulu ,!a��wall1 ♦� tl!nl111111111111111 IIIIP llnl ql. 0 l,ry! !l1111111f,.', r�IIIIl11np1 r4111111111 11111 riluW. „ r'+Ii11 rlrf!„+��IIIIII1111I _;gnnm our ~•41i1 ee-'•,•Iffrffi= !U rlliliil III:�nlunlHll�=noon Homo rmr ulifir nnf `�='==' ` 11rAal�rr � ��IInNI11H1.=uuull',nnnlu 5' 4:3r `us rL ,�' f" u � .-;may. �. � , •tom, ,w�. �. � �,��,�� �-t��`yc vy�•1�'Y �,ow�i� v.. ., f ��~;���. ~�` ' " {t�,� —.r,�� `l",� u:sc .,l+F'.✓� .rs3,.•-:ut �e 5r„�cx n��7.,.f t;� r{ �:'�':;:,_?� a. ��. _ !d _ NO -� � � .� � � Tim �` •r P-- A y� u Ping- if+rd City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits C. Service Accessibility Report Overall Score: 17 3rd Percentile Criteria Description Location Within 1/2 mile of City Limits YELLOW F Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft.from parcel GREEN Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or a�- E-, GREEN Emergency Services Fire Response time < 5 min. GREEN Emergency Services Police Not enough data to report average response t n-iE- RED Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathway;; GREEN Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit rc.ate RED Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (*of lanes in master street= YELLOW plan) > existing (# of lanes) & road IS in 5 yr%,-c--< slar School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking GREEN Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GREEN (existing or future) Park Walkability No park within walking distance by park type RED City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits A Concept Plan (date: 3/5/2025) ROCK ELL GREENS SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT LANDSCAPE PLAN M€RI61AN- ID City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits E. Landscape Plan(date: 3/5/2025) ... Imo.. . . .._ .. -_ � _ f t ROCKWELL GREENS SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT LANLISCAPE PLAN MERIDIAN. 14) - •.•. .ARCH s.MS If 74 _� ---- - --.w -�- --_ mew.^ 11 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 1 IIIIIIIIII� C - E INCH lrp CVIR i ��: ;Imo■ �v �� ������ E - n a V - 1 - J b I IAN CITY BUFFER 4 3iY IRR.EASEMENT = w � oc = 2:1 SLOPE b'FENCE UNMOWN FESCUE GRASS 2' f- 47 { 2' S J GRAVEL ROADWAY EXISTING 4 � 0-72' GROUND i' CREASON LATERAL 6%SLOPE —------------- --------------------------------- ±6' �}� 12 12' BERM DETAIL M."T PALF= ' �Pde � cc«cr-�,e xas2.a,,,eu,r wa.L ��� �„a� �'��tle,..�,,,,,.�e•^-` Lu PLFH16i G/f ®5c �� w"m ••�� a.a�wow r��vo "" } ic LANG5GA?°!GAir.I -ATION5 LAM 1°L CZWASE 9 4b `•••• e C yML0PWEW DATA ■..r „`„„ MAMA City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 3/6/2025) --- j H ROCKWELL GREENS , HFR C1AH Ott IIM CIXMY q.grx]s i 4 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits G. Preliminary Plat(date: 3/6/2025) ROCKWELL GREENS PRELIMINARY PLAT UP A PART[1F THE EAST 12 OF THE SOLffHEAST IH OF SECTION 24,lY?WNSHIP 9 NURTH,RANGE]WIiST,GUISE MERIDIAN � MERIDIAN,ADA UIRTNTY,1DAHS? iheel Lkl ia61e Ln 4wi liY L'f 1w5.[.hlw YIn�wAr IrF:Hlkh[.H[111:4 ` xmt� — � fNH[p�}YI{H[liyS ifi(1�41N.v 1-1Y1[ R rAM9 )R SRi hU� r I a "(, rr [iIAYF].PAIPLI HlY•ALPIT•v -u erxnvr�xY lP ••• V-'F- 31 w i ate. W v �TLAH } �iw iorsr :is -; [7 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits x I _ T.__� Iy b x --f-- n 3 R o- I _ Al 31 I 1- - - a �d - - A - P 31 ilt -- f 1 k 6 _ rn IN MI�Ni K]NR ? l � u 0 C'T.T City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits v; 7 Y.4M[IRSjRT a n a nI. IT 14 11 h a� -� - - . F. xuYi I f -�. uYxt• - { -' �60]INfNLC ikMmViN![M� RO[fllf [23 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits H. Building Elevations(date: 1/23/2025) Single-Family Attached r = 0 MEN Single-Family Detached City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits A City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits I. Annexation Legal Description& Exhibit Map LLC 213Wn.'Am4l"F1,:._r..F++ mV,113 a2Z 17 Rrl¢ #BE11RIf/B5 s S.I}t°17L 4r w hewmcC'rr i ft%ntl alumkrwm rep mmlc 1p tm LN wrhm mnnw w sectmn 4and 29 End NiM hra%apnWrUq trePm MLUNM&5&%Pn29,T.4'.1..P.1 VI..B.M, bda fir.LdStO. A Plrcxh of WM W3W h the U12 of the SE.04 or 6e[Ga�A,T.4 H..R.3 W.,Mae M&G4r,A45 Carl', Waft Whore PwbatrrF ikmT4 ed m rullnrm I CU""OCLNG al drh Arrlpllm pp,9Ls 3622 m"Idog the ll4 CWN c4rrhrrhon to,»ns 28 arrd 29: Tl g N.$W22'35'W.,mruftrrt wdh CM ftorlh Lrh!Q1 sad NF101 dtte Mi4�a Uk Ka SX ah M fmt la a 5r'8'rehar w11h tap PLS 1 LS?d,eM CM FG4fiT OF Bf637OUHQ1 I i-. r S DV SS SV W 517-W NW tp a S S'ceder w.Ur hnrr PL5 L 034r TN ow 5-99'22'lih FT M6.90 feet to the ea9L 4rhe d s7o SE114 mid the[BRBrfn7e of MCVwK t RINt *emh LS.U3'h76'ii'WP ONhditlWM$adarKmdreandejdedgeIlhr,Pmmsfeettran198'reb&ewnCap PIS 11574 fftar64hp UM 511144WW Damon m kVbi 29 MA 23h; Ti,mur omhhn",�L OP f AI'W,.r4M(WCrK WtM Sala%mtzr§he arhd sd6 Whg W-Dr 133$.36 kron a bms rap PLS&%A r+Ertr%tip ifrLl tV Comer d said SoGGn 2% Theete W W*2155'W..9*cMnL AKh the sth.ah lne fil Sao 5EU4r a dlsterh)!of L321.36 r&K to?n yumnun W poi 7M rnhrkhrg the 13116 Darner mr"'+M W Sard 5BOVE 23 and 29; rhn N.C09559'E,1101rtodeq wth um nea hm of said SEA a¢Sypr or 1315.21 feet tD M a0umIDWih rdp rhlr4.lhp c he SEV16 cpnhp-r Thmm omrhn hj%i1.11d'S5 A'C„omttk*tr[wth idle wax krq,1315.19 Wee m an PVT&Lrn cap PLS?BW rrar Whg the CEl+ld oEhri ThMn S.%W22'36'E„QUhhJQWt hwh said nonh 5m 530.41 r"tip lhr rmnr oP BCGSNKNO. .LId pnroel owtmr M.SS9 arrt5. #kri6 r-' a 115 k 3ACM { F.1 MZI r=mn=99-Af147L PAILS SF.IRVEY53.nvey�dfdYflp N9O�PL14rG� RoelwuR Orerel Papo 11 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits I ! ! 'l i 11�574 +1 d Qi Q6kQ I ' �r awe7+anaa�: R whu&-Y ryWCA acre♦ ecPYFWF.rarr�r Ersrrzzr iPJ 7 ' OFF*rJ M'rk r 43 F*P m,&b( my� Jn(2fld 39E�J04 ++tam*i GFdEiCTY.7Mli r:<x h t n.,RJR aa.rc+nrrr,wiu WAWSAWTOOThTJ-G[W J 2 ' C !a t i i g9IM 7 r 1157# 7lrSf3J &kG I} POW. I�W�tino'vt: - mrc+ earhUWrEXMW aoaas w�w7r+r.�cx1 ram. 7 � EMr�Frr JkR36�� a ywrMAN ATgPk Kt av #*w'A6t P.f�q&f33R�t70f th �� F(20�135R�J�5appg IGi P'U1Yf3'.AIFIR a� }i4a7+ ��,,,�,�,� 9M'1i'1'!.S{YlfCOT7iiLS,LOr�f lertt City of Meridian ! Department Report VII. Exhibits C i E IDIAN.;--- Agenda Item Applicant Presentation Vicinity Map Comprehensive Plan Area Plan-Fields Sub•Elementary SchoolOwyhee HS and Future •School Site as Neighbor•Mixed Use Areas•Varied uses planned:•R area -MD• Fields Sub New Sewer Infrastructure•Meridian Northwest Police Station•Fire Station # 8•City Investing in Infrastructure•Residential Neighborhood Planned For This Site•Sets Stage for Development in Area•Adopted in 2021•Area Plan- Infrastructure Ready western boundarySewer shed ends on •Highway 16pulled under alreadyWater and sewer • Next Logical Development Fulfilling the Plan– Fields Sub updated landscape planWorked with staff, 11)-“Modern Rural” Thematic (4 Area Plan- Site Plan Open Space Code Requires 15%Rockwell Open Space = 8.78 Ac. acres or 17.1% Pedestrian Connectivity Approximately 2,215 L.F. total of Regional Pathways Amenities Regional and Internal PathwaysFenced Dog Park Three Pickleball CourtsFenced Play StructuresCommunity Pool and Changing Rooms(Only 10 Required)26.5 Amenity Points Home Elevations (SingleLevel)- Home Elevations (TwoStory)- Home Elevations (Attached) School Capacity Future Elementary School Site Already Exists•Prior to Arrival of Residents•New Star Elementary School Opens July 2026 •Up Meetings this Fall re: Boundaries-Follow•Hunter Elementary Boundary Change / Cap•Capacity:Three Answers to Elementary School H16 Noise Attenuation & Landscape Buffer Conditions In agreement with revised conditions presented by Staff• Thank You Elementary Redistricting Redistrict LetterWest Ada Updated City 50 High School Students•50 Middle School Students•100 Elementary Students•Approximately =•10 years-8–over 8 Phases 202 Total Students Generated • Elementary School Enrollments Willow CreekHunterPleasant View Willow Creek0.8 miles54352019)-654 (20189Hunter0.8 miles49347319)-816 (2018Pleasant View0.8 miles68278465025)-784 (2024Elementary SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment per WASDCapacity Peak Enrollment Middle School Enrollments Heritage2.5 miles104599719)-1346 (2018Sawtooth3 miles85682417)-1080 (2016Star Middle6.5 miles9541042100025)-954 (2024Middle SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment WASDCapacity per Peak Enrollment HeritageSawtoothStar High School Enrollments Meridian3.6 miles1757168720)-1959 (2019Rocky Mt.2 miles1841181820)-2446 (2019Owyhee4 miles176218271800High SchoolDistance24-2023Enrollment 25-2024Enrollment WASDCapacity per Peak Enrollment MeridianRocky MountainOwyhee School Enrollment Today25’-24’8.15.2025–WASD Website 4.21.2025 Source: West Ada School District or 2 Elementary Schools915Difference of Grade = 2439 st 1Grade = 3354 th 12As of 4.21.2025–Students Student by Grade– Secondary Access Secondary Access Road Temporary- ITD OverpassMcMillan HWY 16 and – Project Phasing 8 phases over approximately 10 years How will they get to Costco? • AMC in muIn a - � . - — RAT IAmm In mImI In mm �w In WI, li + s s w- - - ) , r •ss•1 on I yf � H, � — _ — i ;E ' .S m I Int I VII I -- 41 mml — *'" Inc - In I - In _ , . . ,cL s _ am pImmov. , om I I In In YY;- — � — — _ — IT mmI& - - - - - 1 z . +� In ) , mmmmm- I 4�. IVI IN In h . In Ik mmm nk r � � > - 4 «+r s - 1 — - . n � . 8 - Aff In m IN OnIni I a is I In ` �g i mom a 1 F .e ,`C� Im LI 6?m In or �j}�^� � v et �, , gay