Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC - Commission Recommendation and Staff Report City of Meridian | Department Report I. Project Overview HEARING DATE: 9/2/2025 Continued from: 8/12/2025 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: The Land Group SUBJECT: H-2025-0012 Touchmark – MDA, PUD, RZ LOCATION: Generally located on the south side of E. Franklin Rd. and the north side of I-84, midway between S. Eagle Rd. and S. Cloverdale Rd., in the north 1/2 of Section 16, T.3N., R.1E. (Parcels: S1116120662, S1116121055, S1116131260, S1116131400, S1116212561, S1116244261, R8509130020, S1116244270, S1116244710). PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary The Applicant has submitted the following development applications for the subject property: • Development agreement modification (MDA) to update the conceptual development plan for the overall site, which consists of approximately 121.5-acres of land, and consolidate the existing agreements [AZ-99-021 Touchmark (recorded in 2001 Inst. #101048096); April 2001 Addendum (Inst. #101048097); May 2003 Addendum (Inst. #103137119); AZ-02-018 (Bair property AZ-02-018 Inst. 102143308); MI-07-006 (Meadowlake Village North 3rd Addendum Inst. #108022885)] into one (1) new agreement that replaces all previous agreements; • Rezone (RZ) of 63.34-acres of land from the L-O to the C-C (55.17-acres) and C-G (8.17-acres) zoning districts; and • Modification to the existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) (Meadowlake Village CUP-03-005) to update the concept/use plan and include 4.6-acres of additional land, a deviation to the maximum building height allowed in the C-C district from 50-feet to 64- feet for the hotel, and inclusion of townhome dwellings as a permitted use in the C-C district. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT City of Meridian | Department Report II. Community Metrics B. Issues/Waivers As part of the PUD, the Applicant requests a deviation to the maximum building height allowed in the C-C district from 50-feet to 64-feet for the hotel (measured to the highest point of the structure); and allowance for townhome dwellings to develop in the C-C district. In regard to the request for townhouse dwellings to develop in the C-C district, townhouse dwellings are defined in UDC 11-1A-1 as, “A structure containing three (3) or more dwelling units attached by common walls where each dwelling unit is located on a separate property.” Townhouse dwellings are a prohibited use in the C-C district and therefore, aren’t allowed through the PUD per UDC 11-7-4A.2. If the property is proposed to be subdivided in the future so that each unit is on a separate property, a rezone would be required to a residential or traditional neighborhood zoning district in which the use is allowed. The proposed townhouse style units are considered multi-family residential because there are multiple units on a single property and therefore, are allowed in the C-C district. C. Recommendation Staff: Approval Commission: Approval D. Decision City Council: Pending COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Residential (single-family detached, - Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial, multi-family residential [apartments and townhome, single-family detached (aka cottages) and attached (aka villas) style units all on one property], commercial/light industry, hotel, medical office - Existing Zoning L-O (Limited Office) VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning C-C (Community Business) (55.17 acres) & C-G (General Retail & Service Commercial) (8.17 acres) Adopted FLUM Designation MU-C (Mixed Use – Community) VII.A.3 Table 2: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 2/18/2025 (PREAPP-2024-0119) Neighborhood Meeting 2/26/2025 Site posting date 7/2/2025 Table 3: Community Metrics Agency / Element Description / Issue Reference Ada County Highway District • Comments Received Yes • Commission Action Required No • Access E. Franklin Rd., an arterial street and S. Touchmark Way, a collector street. No access is proposed via Louise Dr., a collector street • Traffic Level of Service (LOS) The SH-55/Eagle intersection and other lane groups don’t meet ACHD’s LOS planning thresholds per the TIS but area roadways do (no improvements are planned in the future) City of Meridian | Department Report II. Community Metrics ITD Comments Received ITD reviewed the TIS and has no comments or requirements for this development Meridian Fire No comments were received • Distance to Station Fire Station #1 – less than 2 miles away • Response Time The service accessibility report states response time is more than 9 minutes (due to traffic delays, not the proximity of the station), which isn’t acceptable Meridian Police No comments were received • Response time The service accessibility report states it meets response time goals most of the time Meridian Public Works Wastewater See Agency Comments folder in the public record • Distance to Mainline Available Meridian Public Works Water • Distance to Mainline On-site School District(s) No comments were submitted Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions for comments received. City of Meridian | Department Report II. Community Metrics Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts. City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis Figure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts. Figure 3: Service Impact Summary Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (UDC) A. General Overview The subject property is designated Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) on the Future Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings. Non-residential buildings in these areas tend to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU- N) areas, but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional (MU-R) areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to but also walk or bike to (up City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3E in the Plan. In reviewing development applications, the City will consider the following items in MU-C areas: (staff’s analysis in italics) • Development must comply with the Functional Integration principles for development in all Mixed-Use areas. A variety of residential and non-residential uses are proposed with pedestrian connectivity throughout the development, which should reduce vehicle trips for nearby residents and/or visitors. At least three different land uses (i.e. commercial, office, residential) are proposed on the master plan in the MU-C designated area as required. Because high-density residential apartments are proposed in the multi-family area on the concept plan, commensurate levels of employment or other non-residential elements supporting residents and reducing local vehicle trips should be provided in areas planned for commercial and office uses. Neighborhood activity areas are provided in the existing retirement community. Community-serving facilities such as medical offices are planned within the development and St. Luke’s hospital and other medical offices and clinics are located nearby to the west, which should reduce extraordinary service and transportation network impacts. Supportive and proportional outdoor public and/or quasi-public spaces and places including, but not limited to, parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas and linear open space are expected and should be provided in accord with the MU-C guidelines as noted below. These areas may be located in spaces between residential and non-residential uses to provide both integration and transition between uses. Outdoor seating areas at restaurants are not considered supportive public spaces unless integrated into shared open space, natural amenities, and interconnected with cohesive pathway elements. These areas should be designed in accord with the Holistic Design principles included in the Comprehensive Plan (see pg. 3-18 and 3-19 for more information). Staff recommends a provision of the DA that requires future development applications to demonstrate consistency with the Functional Integration principles described in the Integration of Uses and Holistic Design sub-sections of the Comprehensive Plan (pp. 3- 16 thru 3-19). • Residential uses are expected to comprise between 20% and 50% of the development area, with gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre (of the residential area). The Applicant states residential uses are proposed to comprise approximately 68% of the overall site, including the built-out area, with a density of 11.5 units/acre, which exceeds the maximum development area desired for residential uses, even with the additional 15% allowed with the provision of transit. This calculation does not include the two (2) areas where the Applicant would like the flexibility to develop residential instead of medical office and commercial uses. For this reason, Staff recommends those areas develop with commercial and medical office uses and that the residential option be removed from the concept plan. • Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places should comprise a minimum of 5% of the development area are required. The Applicant states public and/or public spaces and places will comprise a minimum of 5% of the development area and will consist of pedestrian walkways, recreational areas for children and adults to enjoy daytime leisure activities such as playgrounds, open green space, dog areas and functional spaces that promote general health and wellness. Future development City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis applications shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement by providing spaces and places consistent with the Functional Integration principles in the Comprehensive Plan. • Where the development site has transit available or stops are planned, an additional 15% of the site may be dedicated to residential uses. Alternatively, this bonus may be applied where the development an identified employment area, and where last-mile transportation features are incorporated into the site including thoughtfully located and integrated ride share parking, commensurate with potential trip capture. Other innovations to reduce traffic and/or parking impacts and capture local trips may be considered. Transit is available to this site and is within one (1) mile of a future identified transit facility. Therefore, an additional 15% of the site may be dedicated to residential uses. • Sample uses appropriate in MU-C areas include: All MU-N categories, community scale grocers, clothing stores, garden centers, hardware stores, restaurants, banks, drive-thru facilities, auto service station, retail shops, and other appropriate community-serving uses. Sample zoning includes: R-15, R-40, TN-R,TN-C, C-C, and L-O. The proposed project consists of 121.5 acres of land within a larger MU-C designated area totaling approximately 164 acres and includes a mix of uses consisting of commercial, office, light industry and a variety of residential housing types as shown on the “bubble” plan below in Section VII.E consistent with the Plan. A couple areas on the concept plan are shown with two (2) possible uses – the medical office/townhomes along the southwest boundary of the site and the commercial/multi-family along the north side of the site along Franklin Rd. If the demand for office space doesn’t come to fruition, the Applicant proposes an alternate use of townhomes (50- 55 units) in that area. Commercial use similar to the commercial proposed to the west along Franklin is proposed on the other area with the flexibility for multi-family residential (number of units/density is not specified but the Applicant states the area could support 115-140 units using the same density as the other multi-family area) – the multi-family use would be at a larger scale than the townhomes and an increase in density. Because more intense commercial uses are desired along arterial streets in the MU-C diagram in the Comprehensive Plan transitioning to lesser intense uses and because the percentage of residential uses exceeds that desired in the Plan for MU-C designated areas, Staff recommends the concept plan is revised to only reflect commercial use on that portion of the property. The Commission did not agree with Staff’s recommended change and wanted to allow flexibility for residential uses for long-term future growth. A rezone of 55.17 acres to the C-C district and 8.17 acres to the C-G district from the L-O district is proposed for the undeveloped portion of the site included in the master plan to accommodate the proposed uses. Because the concept plan is proposed to be revised, it must comply with current UDC provisions, which prohibit retail, hotel, self-service storage, light industry or multi- family residential uses in the L-O district. The previously developed areas of the site will remain L-O. A modification to the existing Planned Unit Development (Meadowlake Village CUP-03-005) is also proposed to update the concept/use plan and include 4.6-acres of additional land, a deviation to the maximum building height allowed in the C-C district from 50-feet to 64-feet for the hotel (measured to the highest point of the structure), and inclusion of townhome dwellings as a permitted use in the C-C district. In regard to the request for townhouse dwellings to develop in the C-C district, townhouse dwellings are a prohibited use in the C-C district and therefore, aren’t allowed through the PUD. This would require a rezone to a residential or traditional neighborhood zoning district in which the use is allowed as set forth in UDC 11-7-4A.2, which states, “Allowed uses. Applicant may request that specific conditional or accessory use(s) allowed in the district be allowed as principal permitted use(s).” Note: Townhouse style units may develop in City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis the C-C district where individual units are not on individual lots as they are then considered a multi-family residential use. The existing community is proposed to remain unchanged except for the small golf course, which at some point in the future may redevelop with villas (i.e. duplexes). The open space amenities are also evolving and as the golf course is redeveloped, the required open space amenities will be reprogrammed in other areas of the project. Before changes can be approved to this area, the Applicant must demonstrate compliance with the terms of the previously approved PUD in regard to site amenities with removal of the golf course. Per the code in effect at that time (12-6-7E.5), at least 10% of the gross area of the PUD was required as open space, exclusive of required street buffers and buffers between incompatible land uses. The developed area consists of 61.50 acres of land, therefore, a minimum of 6.15 acres of qualified open space is required to be provided. An exhibit should be submitted showing the existing qualified open space without the golf course area. An open space exhibit was submitted as requested, included below in Section VII.J, that depicts a total of 6.45 acres (or 10.49% of the site) of common open space consisting of grassy areas of at least 5,000 sq. ft. in area and common areas with pathways or other amenities, excluding the pond and golf course area. Note: Many of the residents in Touchmark are against removing the golf course and replacing it with more dwelling units (see public testimony). The new development plan includes approximately 114,000 sq. ft. of medical office space, approximately 300-400 non-age restricted market rate multi-family units (both apartments and townhouses) with a possibility of 165-195 additional units through the alternate uses proposed, 20-25 single-family attached units (aka villas), three (3) single-family detached units (aka cottages), 75,546 sq. ft. of self-storage (i.e. light industry), 45,000 sq. ft. of general office space, 45,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail space and an approximate 126-room hotel. A phasing plan, included below in Section VII.H, which depicts four (4) phases of development, is anticipated to be completed between 2030 and 2040. Phase 1 is the villas and cottages (2-5 years), Phase 2 is the apartments and townhomes (3-10 years), Phase 3 is the commercial, self- storage, additional multi-family and hotel along Franklin Rd. (3-15 years), and Phase 4 is medical office, daycare, post-acute care and townhomes (4-15 years). Staff recommends a subdivision application is submitted for each phase of development and recorded in order to have a legal parcel for development purposes. Table 4: Project Overview Description Details History CPA-99-004/AZ-99-021/CUP-99/039 (Touchmark, Ord. #01-917, DA Inst. #101048096, April 2001 Addendum (Inst. #101048097); "May 2003 Addendum" (Inst. #103137119); AZ-02-018 (Bair property, Ord. #02-983, DA Inst. 102143308); CUP-03-005 (Meadowlake Village PUD); AZ-05- 022; PP-07-009 (expired)/CUP-07-008 (expired)/MI-07-006 (Meadowlake Village North 3rd Addendum Inst. #108022885); H-2016-0058 (modified CUP-99-039 to remove the alley depicted for access to 7 of the SFR homes); FP-04-025 Phasing Plan 4 phases from 4-15 years Residential Units 524 units (as stated by Applicant; however, concept plan depicts 300-400 with a possibility of an additional 165-195 through alternate plan) Open Space 486,842 sq. ft. (or 11.18 acres) (see open space exhibit for more info) Amenities Clubhouse, water feature (fountain), existing dog park, playground, multi - use pathways (3,700 ft.), bicycle storage Physical Features The Ridenbaugh Canal runs along the east boundary of the site Acreage 121.5 acres (DA boundary) Density 13.5 units/acre based on 524 units on 38.7 acres of land City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis B. History In 1999, an amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan was approved from single-family residential to Mixed/Planned Use Development (CPA-99-004). This property was also included in two (2) different annexation and zoning applications, the first in 2000 (AZ-99-021 Touchmark) and the second in 2002 (AZ-02-018 Bair property) with L-O (Limited Office) zoning – Development agreements (DA’s) were required as a provision of annexation with both applications (Touchmark Inst. #101048096; April 2001 Addendum - Inst. #101048097; May 2003 Addendum Inst. #103137119 and Bair property Inst. #102143308). A third Addendum to the Touchmark DA was approved in 2008, which included a new conceptual development plan (MI-07-006 Meadowlake Village North Inst. #108022885)]. A conditional use permit (CUP-99-039) for a conceptual planned unit development (PUD) in the L-O zoning district was approved with annexation of the property in 2001. It included Phase 1 but required future phases to obtain separate CUP approval for each phase. The PUD was for a continuing care retirement community comprised of 250-300 units of independent and assisted living, 450 units of residential including single-family, duplex, townhomes and multi-family, a community senior health and fitness center, medical office parks, commercial and retail businesses. Since that time, approximately 428 residential units have been built in the retirement community along with a senior health and fitness center and many amenities including open green space and walking trails, a community garden, coffee shop and bistro, salon and barbershop, a library, theatre, dining venues, pickleball courts and other on-site amenities. This plan didn’t include the 4.6-acre Bair property located at 3975 E. Franklin Rd. that was later annexed in 2002. In 2003, a conditional use permit (CUP-03-005) was approved for revisions to the previously approved conceptual planned unit development (i.e. CUP-99-039) to include the Bair property, consisting of 318 residential units and approximately 600,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings on 138 acres of land with reduced building setbacks in the L-O district. The approved conceptual development plan is included below in Section VII.E. In 2007, a preliminary plat (PP-07-009) was approved for 52 single-family residential lots, two (2) office/commercial lots and 10 common lots. A CUP (CUP-07-008) was also approved to modify the conceptual planned development for the Touchmark Living Centers/Meadowlake Village development and an amendment to the DA (MI-07-006) was approved to amend the construction requirements for Phase III of the development. C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): Approximately half of the site has already been developed as part of the Touchmark at Meadow Lake Village development. There is an existing driveway from the site onto Franklin Rd. east of Touchmark Way before the proposed access in alignment with Truckee Ave. on the north side of Franklin that is required to be removed with development. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The proposed development, which will provide of mix of residential housing types (i.e. apartments, attached and detached units, and townhome units), commercial, office and light industry uses, provides a mix of uses as desired in Mixed Use designations. Further, the mix of uses is consistent with those desired in MU-C designated areas. City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Compliance with the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-C and C-G zoning districts is required, as applicable, unless otherwise approved with the PUD (see below). 4. Planned Unit Developments (UDC 11-7): A modification to the existing Planned Unit Development (Meadowlake Village CUP-03- 005) is proposed to update the concept/use plan and include 4.6-acres of additional land area. and inclusion of 2 and 3 story townhome dwellings. Note: The Applicant is not proposing to subdivide the property, therefore, townhomes are not proposed or allowed – townhome style units, which are considered multi-family, are allowed through the PUD. The purpose of the PUD requirements is to provide an opportunity for exemplary site development that meets the following objectives: • Preserves natural, scenic and historic features of major importance; Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic and historic features that need to be preserved. • Allows for innovative design that creates visually pleasing and cohesive patterns of development (including, but not limited to, residential development at densities greater than eight (8) units per acre where design guidelines are in place for development and where garage doors are generally not fronting the street); and The 6.56 acres proposed to develop with 50-100 townhome style units would result in a gross density between 8 and 15 units/acre. The 9.45 acres proposed to develop with 250 to 300 multi-family apartments would result in a gross density between 26 and 32 units per acre. The 0.63 acres proposed to develop with three (3) single-family detached style units (aka cottages) would result in a gross density of 5 units per acre. The 4.78 acres proposed to develop with 20 to 25 single-family-attached style units (aka villas) would result in a gross density of 4 to 5 units per acre. Overall, the 21.42 acres proposed to develop with 323 to 428 residential units would result in a gross density of 15 to 20 units per acre. Density calc’s are rounded to the nearest whole number. If the 8.16 acres planned to develop with medical offices develops instead with 50 to 55 townhome units, it would result in a gross density of 6 to 7 units per acre. There is no unit count listed if the 4.32 acre commercial property develops instead with multi-family apartments. The multi-family apartment and townhome-style residential portions of the development will exceed 8 units per acre. Rather than proposing design guidelines for the development, the Applicant states future structures will comply with the design standards in the City’s Architectural Standards Manual and that garage doors will generally not front a street. • Creates functionally integrated development that allows for a more efficient and cost- effective provision of public services. The proposed pedestrian pathway plan and vehicular connectivity shown on the concept plan should assist in creating functionally integrated development as required. It is not the intent that the PUD process be used solely for the purposes of deviation from the dimensional standards in the district. Per UDC 11-7-4, the Council may approved planned unit developments, upon recommendation by the Commission, in accord with the following standards: ➢ General Use Standards: City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis i. Deviations from underlying district requirements – Deviations from the development standards and/or area requirements of the district may be approved through a PUD. The Applicant requests approval of a deviation to the maximum building height allowed of 50 feet in the C-C district to allow a maximum height of 64 feet for the hotel, measured to the highest point of the structure. ii. Allowed uses – Applicant may request that specific conditional or accessory use(s) allowed in the district be allowed as principal permitted use(s). The Applicant requests the following uses be allowed in C-C and/or C-G districts, as applicable, as principal permitted use(s) so long as the use is located generally on the project where shown on the concept plan and complies with the specific use standards in the UDC: • Multi-family development [includes single-family detached (aka cottages) and attached units (aka villas), and townhome style units] – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 – Multi-family development is required. • Townhouse dwellings (i.e. 3 or more attached units) – these are considered multi-family as they’re on one property – such dwellings on individual properties are not allowed. • Single-family detached dwellings (aka cottages) – these are considered multi- family as they’re on one property – such dwellings on individual properties are not allowed. • Single-family attached dwellings (i.e. 2-attached units – aka villas) – these are considered multi-family as they’re on one property – such dwellings on individual properties are not allowed. • Hotel – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-23 – Hotel or motel is required. • Daycare center – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-9 – Daycare facility is required. • Live/work residential project – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-50 – Live/work residential project is required. • Light industry (only allowed in C-G zone) – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-34 – Industry, light and heavy is required. • Self-service storage facility (only allowed in C-G zone) – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-34 – Storage facility, self-service is required. • Warehouse (only allowed in C-G zone) – compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-42 – Warehouse is required. iii. Interconnected uses – The uses within the planned unit development are interconnected through a system of roadways and/or pathways as appropriate. Private streets and service driveways may be permitted, if designed and constructed to the transportation authority standards and in accord with UDC 11-3F Private Street Requirements. A pathway plan is proposed, included below in Section VII.G, that depicts 10’ wide multi-use pathways through the site, existing sidewalks and 5’ wide proposed sidewalks along streets and drives for pedestrian connectivity within the site and to adjacent properties. Private drives are proposed internally within the site for vehicular access and interconnectivity. iv. Building clusters – Buildings shall be clustered to preserve scenic or environmentally sensitive areas in the natural state, or to consolidate small open spaces into larger, more usable areas for common use and enjoyment. City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis A “bubble” plan was submitted for the concept plan, which doesn’t depict building locations. Staff recommends buildings are arranged to comply with this standard as a condition of the PUD. ➢ Private Open Space: In addition to the common open space and site amenity requirements set forth in Chapter 3, a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping entryway and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. A site amenity plan is proposed, included below in Section VII.I, which includes amenity information for the multi-family development but not for the townhome, cottage or villa portions of the development – site amenities and open space will be required with development of those areas based on the total area (i.e. 4.02 + 2.54 + 0.63 + 4.78 = 11.97 acres) at a minimum of 15% open space and one (1) site amenity point for each 5 acres of gross land area being developed. Future residential development should comply with this standard as a condition of the PUD. ➢ Residential Use Standards: i. Multi-family – Notwithstanding the provisions of UDC 11-2, multi-family dwellings may be an allowed use when approved through a planned unit development. As noted above, the Applicant requests multi-family development be a principal permitted use in the C-C district with the PUD. ii. Housing types – A variety of housing types shall be included within a single planned development, including attached units (townhouses, duplexes), detached units (patio homes), single-family and multi-family units, regardless of the district classification of the stie, provided that the overall density limit of the district is maintained. A variety of housing types is proposed consisting of single-family detached and attached, townhomes and multi-family apartments. iii. Density bonus – A residential density bonus may be given for dedications of land for public use such as school, park, fire station or recreational facility provided to the public entity by donation or at a cost less than, or equal to, the applicant’s predevelopment cost for that land. No such dedications of land are proposed. ➢ Infill Planned Developments - Properties of five (5) acres or less within the City of Meridian, that are located in areas already substantially developed (at least eighty (80) percent of the land area within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the parcel). Upon recommendation of the commission, the council may approve exceptions to other sections of this chapter as an incentive for infill development as follows: • The decision-making body may allow up to a twenty-five (25) percent increase in the density permitted for the district in which the site is located. • The decision-making body may also waive one (1) or more of the amenity requirements set forth in this section depending on the size and scale of the planned development. The subject property is over 5 acres in size; thus, this is not applicable. ➢ Approval: Conditions – In approving the planned development, the Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, additional conditions, bonds, and safeguards in conformity with this title that: 1. Minimize adverse impact of the use on other property. City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis 2. Control the sequence and timing of the use. 3. Control the duration of the use. 4. Assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly. 5. Designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development. 6. Require the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services. 7. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required in this title. 8. Require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, which provides services within the city. 5. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): Compliance with the specific use standards for the following uses is required: • Multi-family development (UDC 11-4-3-27) • Light industry (UDC 11-4-3-25) • Hotel (UDC 11-4-3-23) • Live/work residential project (UDC 11-4-3-50) • Self-service storage facility (UDC 11-4-3-34) • Daycare center (UDC 11-4-3-9) • Warehouse (UDC 11-4-3-42) D. Design Standards Analysis In accord with the Comprehensive Plan, non-residential buildings should transition to and compliment adjacent residential buildings in mass and form; and transitions between different land uses should include highly connected open space. 1. Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-19): Compliance with the structure and site design standards in UDC 11-3A-19 is required for the non-residential portion of the development. 2. Qualified Open Space & Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3G): Compliance with the qualified open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 27C, D is required for the multi-family portion(s) of the development. 3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): ➢ Landscape buffers along streets A minimum 35’ wide street buffer is required to be provided with development along E. Franklin Rd., an arterial street and entryway corridor; a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Touchmark Way and E. Louise Dr., both collector streets, landscaped in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. ➢ Parking lot landscaping Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided with development per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C. ➢ Landscape buffers to adjoining uses A 25’ wide landscape buffer is required to be provided on C-C and C-G zoned property with development adjacent to residential uses per UDC Table 11-2B-3 with landscaping in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C. City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis ➢ Tree preservation Tree mitigation is required for all existing trees 4” caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10C.5. ➢ Storm integration Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B- 11C. ➢ Pathway landscaping Landscaping is required along all pathways with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. 4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): Off-street parking is required to be provided for each dwelling unit based on the number of bedrooms per unit in accord with the standards for single-family detached, single-family attached, townhouse and multi-family dwellings in UDC Table 11-3C-6. Off-street vehicle parking is required to be provided for non-residential uses in accord with the standards in UDC 11-3C-6B.1. Bicycle parking is required per the standards in UDC 11- 3C-6G. 5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan, Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the commercial, light industry, hotel, medical offices, multi-family and townhome, single-family detached (aka cottages) and single-family detached (aka villas) style multi-family, included below in Section VII.F. The Applicant’s narrative states commercial buildings are proposed to generally front Franklin Rd. and be at a scale compatible with adjacent development; the commercial/light industry will be at a scale and height sensitive to the existing residential homes to the south. Modulation and variation in materials will help define different tenant spaces. Glazing will be provided at grade to activate the street front and high-quality materials will be utilized. The building’s massing and materials will be designed to comply with the UDC and Architectural Standards Manual (ASM). The townhomes are proposed to be 2- and 3-stories in height with 3-stories along Touchmark Way, while the cottages and villas will be 1-story in height. The multi-family structures will transition from the townhomes to 3-stories in height. Final design of all structures is required to comply with the design standards in the ASM. 6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): Any fencing constructed within this development should comply with the standards listed in DUC 11-3A-6C and 11-3A-7, as applicable. 7. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways should comply with the standards for such in UDC 11-3A-17E. The minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees is 8’; class II trees are preferred parkway trees (see UDC 11-3A-17E for more information). 79,932.6 E. Transportation Analysis The proposed development is located in close proximity to the Eagle Rd. interchange and I-84, St. Luke’s hospital and medical offices, and The Village at Meridian shopping center, and is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy #2.02.01E, Encourage the development of high quality, dense residential and mixed-use areas near in and around Downtown, near employment, City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis large shopping centers, public open spaces and parks, and along major transportation corridors, as shown on the Future Land Use Map. Public transit is available to this site and is within one (1) mile of an identified future transit facility. Area roadways meet ACHD’s Level of Service (LOS) planning thresholds; there are no planned improvements for this area – Franklin Rd. is fully improved with 5-travel lanes, curb, gutter and 7’ wide attached sidewalk abutting the site; Touchmark Way is fully improved with 2- travel lanes (3-lanes at the intersection with Franklin Rd. with a 9’ wide parkway), curb, gutter, a 7’ wide parkway and detached 5’ wide sidewalk; and Louise Dr. is fully improved with 2-travel lanes, curb, gutter and 7’ wide attached sidewalk. No new public streets are proposed. A new access to Franklin Rd. is proposed in alignment with N. Truckee Ave. to the north, which has been approved by ACHD. An updated Traffic Impact Study (TIS) was submitted for the updated concept development plan. Based on ACHD’s review of the TIS, the following is required at the Franklin Rd/Truckee Ave. intersection: construct a curb return type private road/drive aisle onto Franklin Rd. located in alignment with Truckee Ave. on the north side of Franklin Rd. across from the site; restrict the driveway to right-in/right-out only while continuing to allow full movements to and from Truckee Ave.; and construct a dedicated eastbound right-turn lane on Franklin Rd. at the intersection with the proposed private road/drive aisle. The drive access nearest Franklin Rd. on Touchmark Way is required to be restricted to right-in/right-out only due to the existing center median; the other two (2) accesses via Touchmark at the roundabouts are allowed as proposed. Other than the accesses specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited via Franklin Rd., Touchmark Way and Louise Dr. 1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): The concept plan depicts one (1) new driveway access via E. Franklin Rd., which ACHD is requiring be a right-in/right-out, and driveway access via S. Touchmark Way, a collector street. Either public or private named streets should be provided within the development for addressing purposes. The Applicant should coordinate with an addressing technician and the Fire Dept. on which streets should be constructed as private streets and named if public streets aren’t provided. Staff recommends a drive/private street is provided from the north/south drive in alignment with Truckee Ave. on the north side of Franklin to the Commercial/Light Industry designated property at the northeast corner of the site for a functional integration of uses as desired in mixed use designated areas. A cross-access ingress/egress easement should be granted to the abutting property to the east (Parcel #R5262140050) for egress from the site to Franklin Rd. If an easement doesn’t already exist to this property from the abutting parcel to the subject property, a reciprocal agreement should be recorded if possible. 2. Multiuse Pathways (UDC 11-3A-5): A pathway plan was submitted that depicts 10’ wide multi-use pathways for pedestrian and bicycle access and connectivity within the development, included below in Section VII.G. 3. Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-8): A pathway plan was submitted that depicts a 5’ wide existing and proposed sidewalks for pedestrian access and connectivity within the development, included below in Section VII.G. 4. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17): A 7’ wide attached sidewalk exists along Franklin Rd., an arterial street; a 5’ wide detached sidewalk exists along S. Touchmark Way, a collector street; and a 5’ wide attached sidewalk exists along E. Louise Dr., a collector street. Minimum 5’ wide detached sidewalks are required to be constructed along collector and arterial streets per UDC 11-3A-17; however, City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions because the existing sidewalks are in good condition and there is a significant grade difference along Franklin, Staff does not recommend those sidewalks are reconstructed as detached walkways. Five-foot wide attached (or detached) sidewalks are required along local and private streets as set forth in UDC 11-3A-17 and 11-3F-4B as proposed on the concept plan. 5. Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4): If public streets are not provided internally within the site, private streets should be provided for addressing purposes and should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. The developer should coordinate with an addressing technician to determine which drives should be named and constructed as private streets and submit an application for private street approval. F. Services Analysis The subject property was annexed into the City many years ago but has only partially developed and demonstrates consistency with Comprehensive Plan Policy #2.02.02, Maximize public services by prioritizing infill development of vacant and underdeveloped parcels within the City over parcels on the fringe. 1. Waterways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-6): The Ridenbaugh Canal, a large open waterway, runs along the eastern boundary of the development. A maintenance road exists along the west side of the canal. A wrought iron fence exists between the existing residential development and the maintenance road and canal. A minimum 6-foot tall wrought iron fence should be constructed with development on the undeveloped portion adjacent to the canal for public safety. This site is not within the floodplain. 2. Pressurized Irrigation (UDC 11-3A-15): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided in each development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in accord with the adopted standards, specifications and ordinances; design and construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the City per UDC 11-3A-18. 4. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities for the proposed development are required to be installed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-21. Public utilities are available and immediately adjacent with capacity to serve the project. Water service and sanitary sewer service will be provided via extensions of main lines in Touchmark and Franklin Rd. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division Development Agreement Modification/Rezone 1. A new DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s), and the developer. The subject property identified in the legal description in Section VII.C shall no longer be subject to any previous agreements. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of the date of City Council City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision & Order for the subject application. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: i. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations, pedestrian plan, phasing plan and amenity plan submitted with this application and the provisions contained herein. ii. A minimum 6-foot tall wrought iron metal picket fence shall be constructed with development on the undeveloped portion of the site along the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal for public safety in accord with UDC 11-3A-6C. iii. Pedestrian pathways and walkways are required to be provided with development in accord with the Pedestrian Pathway Plan included in Section VII.G. iv. All future structures constructed on this site shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual and the holistic design principles included in the Comprehensive Plan for Mixed Use designated areas (see pp. 3-18 and 3-19). Garage doors for single-family detached and townhome style units shall generally not front the street in accord with UDC 11-7-1A.2. v. Other than the accesses specifically approved with this application by the City and Ada County Highway District (ACHD), direct lot access is prohibited to Franklin Rd., Touchmark Way and Louise Dr. vi. Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places shall be provided that comprise a minimum of 5% of the development area and shall be integrated within the residential and commercial/office portions of the development in accord with the Comprehensive Plan principles for Functional Integration in Mixed Use designated areas. Future development applications shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement. vii. Future development applications shall demonstrate consistency with the Functional Integration principles described in the Integration of Uses and Holistic Design sub- sections of the Comprehensive Plan (pp. 3-16 thru 3-19). viii. A subdivision application shall submitted for each phase of development and recorded prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for development within that phase. Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development Modification The concept plan shall be revised prior to the Council hearing as follows: i. Depict a drive/private street from the north/south drive in alignment with Truckee Ave. on the north side of Franklin to the Commercial/Light Industry designated property at the northeast corner of the site. The Commission directed the Applicant to work with the irrigation district and the City for connectivity to the east boundary. ii. In the two (2) areas where residential (i.e. multi-family and townhomes) is depicted as an alternate development option, remove residential and only depict commercial and medical office in those areas. iii. Before villas can be approved to replace the small golf course in the existing development area, the Applicant must demonstrate compliance with the terms of the previously approved PUD in regard to open space with removal of the golf course. The original PUD required a minimum of 10% of the gross land area of the PUD to be qualified open space, exclusive of required street buffers and incompatible land uses. An open space exhibit was submitted, included below in Section VII.J, that excludes the pond City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions and golf course area, and depicts a total of 6.45 acres (or 10.49% of the site) of common open space, which exceeds the minimum requirement of 6.15 acres (or 10%). Open space areas consist of grassy areas of at least 5,000 sq. ft. and/or common areas that include pathways or other amenities. City Council should determine if the requested change should be approved – many residents of Touchmark are against removing the golf course amenity from the development. 2. A deviation to the maximum building height allowed in the C-C district is allowed for the hotel use from 50-feet to 64-feet, measured to the highest point of the structure. 3. The following uses shall be deemed principal permitted uses through the PUD so long as the use is located generally on the project where shown on the concept plan and complies with the specific use standards for such in the UDC, as applicable: • Multi-family development (includes apartments and single-family detached, single- family attached and townhome style units) – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27. Note: If the land where single-family detached/attached and/or townhome units is subdivided in the future so that units are on individual lots, a rezone is required to a zone in which the use is allowed. • Hotel – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-23 • Daycare center – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 • Live/work residential project – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-50 • Light industry (in C-G zone only) – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-25 • Self-service storage facility (in C-G zone only) – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-34 • Warehouse (in C-G zone only) – comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-42 4. Either public or private named streets shall be provided within the development for addressing purposes. The developer shall coordinate with an addressing technician and the Fire Dept. to determine which streets should be named if public streets are not proposed. All private streets require a separate private street application to be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. 5. Buildings shall be clustered to preserve scenic or environmentally sensitive areas in the natural state, or to consolidate small open spaces into larger, more usable areas for common use and enjoyment as set forth in UDC 11-7-4A.4. 6. In addition to the common open space and site amenity requirements set forth in UDC 11-3, a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided for each residential unit as set forth in UDC 11-7-4B. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks, and enclosed yards. Landscaping entryway and other accessways do not count toward this requirement. 7. Submit a recorded cross-access ingress/egress easement to the abutting property to the east (Parcel #R5262140050) for egress from the site via the existing driveway to Franklin Rd. If an easement doesn’t already exist to this property from the abutting parcel, a reciprocal agreement should be recorded if possible. 8. Open space and site amenities shall be provided for the townhome, cottage and villa portions of the development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-3G-4 based on the total gross land area of those uses (i.e. 11.97 acres). A minimum 15% common open City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings space shall be provided along with a minimum of one (1) point of site amenity for each five (5) acres of gross land area being developed. 9. The conditional use permit for the planned unit development is valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the Applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6. A time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-5B-6F. Other Agency comments may be accessed in the project file in the public record. Copy and paste the following link into your browser: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=398918&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y FINDINGS A. Rezone (UDC 11-5B-3E) Upon recommendation from the commission, the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment to the C-C and C-G zoning districts and conceptual development plan complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development plan complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed districts as the C-C district allows a larger scale and broader mix of retail, office and service uses with access to arterials or non-residential collectors; and the C-G district is the largest scale and broadest mix of retail, office, service and light industrial uses in close proximity to interstate (i.e. I-84) and arterial intersections (i.e. Eagle/Franklin Rd.), which supports the proposed development plan. Further, the Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development plan complies with the purpose of the commercial districts in that it provides for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Commission finds the proposed map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited to, school districts; and The Commission finds the proposed 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. City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings 5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city. The Commission finds the proposed rezone is in the best interest of the City as it will result in the development of more commercial services, office and residential opportunities in close proximity to I-84, the hospital and entryway corridors (Eagle & Franklin Rd.) into the City. B. Planned Unit Development (UDC 11-7-5) 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 a planned development request, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The planned unit development demonstrates exceptional high quality in site design through the provision of cohesive, continuous, visually related and functionally linked patterns of development, street and pathway layout, and building design. The Commission finds the proposed planned unit development demonstrates high quality in site design through the provision of continuous pedestrian pathways and streets and drives for pedestrian and vehicular connectivity throughout the development. Future development and building design should demonstrate an exceptional high quality of architectural design. 2. The planned unit development preserves the significant natural, scenic and/or historic features. The Commission is unaware of any significant natural, scenic and/or historic features that need to be preserved with development. 3. The arrangement of uses and/or structures in the development does not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. The Commission is of the opinion the proposed conceptual development plan and uses proposed will not cause damage, hazard, or nuisance to persons or property in the vicinity. The proposed concept plan demonstrates a good transition in uses from lower density residential uses to higher density residential uses, office and commercial uses. 4. The internal street, bike and pedestrian circulation system is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions contained within the development, nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area. The Commission finds the internal street and pedestrian circulation system, which includes a 10’ wide multi-use pathway, which can be used for bikes, is designed for the efficient and safe flow of vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians without having a disruptive influence upon the activities and functions within the development, nor place an undue burden upon existing transportation and other public services in the surrounding area. 5. Community facilities, such as a park, recreational, and dedicated open space areas are functionally related and accessible to all dwelling units via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways. The Commission finds the central common open space area with a pond provides a dedicated open space area that’s accessible to all residents via pedestrian and/or bicycle pathways. 6. The proposal complies with the density and use standards requirements in accord with chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title. The Commission finds the proposed residential portion of the development will comply with the density and use standards requirements in UDC 11-7-4. City of Meridian | Department Report VI. Action 7. The amenities provided are appropriate in number and scale to the proposed development. The Commission finds the proposed amenity plan for the multi-family development (i.e. apartment units), included in Section VII.I, in addition to the amenities required to be provided in the other multi-family portions of the development (i.e. single-family detached, single-family attached and townhome style units) per the standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-3G-4 will be appropriate for the proposed development. 8. The planned unit development is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. The Commission finds the proposed planned unit development will be in conformance with the comprehensive Plan with the provisions included in Section IV above. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed MDA, PUD and RZ applications with the provisions noted above in Section IV. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on July 17, 2025. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject PUD and RZ requests. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group; Ryan Benson, Touchmark b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: Sandra Cruise d. Written testimony: Tamara Thompson, The Land Group (Applicant’s Representative – response to the staff report) e. Staff presenting application: f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) of public testimony: a. The Applicant requested Commission approval of changes to the following conditions in the staff report: 1) #A.1.ii. request for 6’ tall wrought iron fencing along the Ridenbaugh Canal to be replaced with metal picket fence or full privacy to match existing fence; 2) CUP/PUD #i. request for a drive/private street to not be required from Truckee Ave to the east to the light industry designated property as it would be difficult and likely not achievable as there is an existing gravity ditch where flows will need to be maintained and a severe grade difference of approximately 27’ – internal drives will be provided if possible but should not be a requirement as this may be engineeringly infeasible; 3) CUP/PD #ii. Request for the optional residential uses to remain and not be removed as recommended by Staff – the applicant requests the flexibility of up to 65% of the land area included in this application to be allowed as residential uses (up to 524 units). Note: The percentage noted in the Comp Plan is based on the overall MU-C area and not just the site area. b. Request for the existing black locust (?) tree along the periphery of the site to remain and not be removed due to it being a home for many raptors; question as to if the Ridenbaugh Canal will be concrete-lined in the proposed development area; and request for consideration of the height of structures along the east boundary of the site to transition to existing residential homes in Edgeview Subdivision. 3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission: a. Recognition of the need to change the concept development plan as the development evolves and needs change. b. General support of the proposed development plan. c. Fencing type along the Ridenbaugh Canal and the Applicant’s request for a change to Staff’s recommendation to provide wrought iron fencing. City of Meridian | Department Report VI. Action d. The differences between townhome and multi-family units – townhomes are considered multi-family residential if more than one unit is located on a lot. e. Desire for acre-to-acre replacement of the area proposed to be converted from a golf course to villas elsewhere in the new development portion of the site. f. Request for the Applicant to provide an update at the Council hearing pertaining to the possibility of retaining the existing black locust tree on the site. g. Concern pertaining to the traffic impacts the proposed development will have on area roadways and intersections. h. Support of Staff’s recommendation. 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Ensure the fencing proposed along the Ridenbaugh Canal complies with City code – the metal picket fencing proposed by the Applicant is an approved fencing type; in the two (2) areas where commercial and residential uses are proposed as development options, commercial is preferred but residential is allowed as an option for flexibility for long- term future growth; define townhomes as multi-family residential on concept plan; include an exhibit for open space that doesn’t include the golf course; and work with the irrigation district and the City for connectivity to the east boundary. 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. Update from the Applicant regarding the provision of a vehicular connection to the east boundary of the site; and the retention of the black locust tree on the site. b. City Council should determine if it’s appropriate to remove the golf course amenity from the existing development and replace it with 20-25 additional dwelling units as proposed on the concept plan. C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps (link to Project Overview) 1. Aerial 2. Zoning Map City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits 3. Future Land Use 4. Planned Development Map City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits 5. Map Notes Recent Area Preliminary Plats: H-2018-0126 H-2021-0075 H-2016-0112 H-2017-0104 H- 2021-0103 Recent Area Conditional Use Permits: H-2020-0123 H-2021-0012 H-2021-0033 H-2021- 0075 H-2023-0002 H-2017-0011 H-2024-0013 H-2024-0045 H-2024-0046 H-2025-0001 City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits B. Service Accessibility Report City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits C. Development Agreement Legal Description & Exhibit Map City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits D. Rezone Legal Descriptions & Exhibit Maps City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits E. Existing Conceptual Development Plan Included in Planned Unit Development (CUP-03- 005) that is Proposed to be Modified City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits F. Proposed Conceptual Development Plan & Conceptual Building Elevations to Replace Existing Plan (dated: 10/23/2024 8/26/25) - REVISED City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits G. Proposed Pedestrian Pathway Plan City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits H. Proposed Phasing Plan (dated: 7/10/2024) City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits I. Proposed Site Amenity Plan (dated: 4/17/2025) City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits J. Open Space Exhibit Excluding Pond and Golf Course Area City of Meridian | Department Report VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts ADDITIONAL NOTES & DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS, TABLES, AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days. Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel. Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0 (i.e. excludes most HOA area, transitional development, government, and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2 < 5.0; R-4 < 2.0; R-8 < 1.0; R-15 < 0.5; R-40 < 0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones, may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates, usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries (TAZ’s). B. Mixed Use Analysis Notes This data is derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Data considered for analysis are only those areas overlapping the overall Mixed Use boundary area. Mixed Use areas across arterial roadways are distinct, separate, and not considered as they do not meet the mixed use principles in the Comprehensive Plan (e.g. pedestrian safety, transportation efficiency, etc.). Mixed Use parcel areas may be greater or smaller than the future land use area designation boundary due parcel size, configuration, right-of-way, and other factors. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. C. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources, including sewer main lines, sewer trunksheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times, police crime reporting, pathway information, existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review, using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria (not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city (higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores, whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. D. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service (LOS). LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver’s experience with a letter ranking from A to F. Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go City of Meridian | Department Report VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD considers Level D, stable flow, to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians, nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP). The IFYWP marker (yes/no) indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary, from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP marker (yes/no) indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years.