HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC - Commission Reommendation and Staff Report
City of Meridian | Department Report I. Project Overview
HEARING
DATE:
10/21/2025
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Sonya Allen, Associate Planner
208-884-5533
sallen@meridiancity.org
APPLICANT: Givens Pursley
SUBJECT: Pine 43 Mixed Use Subdivision – ALT,
AZ, CUP, MDA, PP, RZ
H-2024-0071
LOCATION: Generally located on the north and south
sides of E. Pine Ave., between N. Locust
Grove Rd. and N., Hickory Ave., in the
West ½ of Section 8in the west 1/2 of
Section 8, T.3N., R.1E.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
The Applicants, HPC Buyer and DMB Companies, request the following:
• Annexation and zoning (AZ) of 7.21-acres of land with I-L (5.29-acres), C-G (1.36-acres)
and R-15 (0.56-acre) zoning districts (Parcel #S1108233755, #S1108233850, #S1108233950,
#S1108233995 and #S1108233986);
The Applicant, DMB Companies, requests the following:
• Modification to the Development Agreement (H-2017-0058 - Inst. #2018-000751) to update
the conceptual development plan for the 36.58 acres of land that lies south of E. State Ave. to
allow for the development of 904 new residential units consisting of a mix of townhomes (30
units), multi-family apartments (271 units) and vertically integrated residential (603 units)
above ground floor commercial/office, 481,020 sq. ft. of commercial space including a
128,880 sq. ft. hotel and 71,800 sq. ft. of other retail/restaurant commercial space, 221,340
sq. ft. of office space - 90,000 sq. ft. of which is intended for med-tech uses, 59,000 sq. ft. of
commercial/office in the vertically integrated residential buildings, and 8.3 acres of private
and public open space; inclusion of additional land area (i.e. 1.92 acres); and updates to
certain provisions in the agreement;
• Rezone (RZ) of 3.08-acres (0.91 + 2.17) of land from the C-G to the R-15 zoning district;
• Preliminary plat (PP) consisting of 41 buildable lots and 3 common lots on 36.58-acres of
land in the R-15 and C-G zoning districts;
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT REPORT
City of Meridian | Department Report I. Project Overview
• Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 139-unit multi-family development on 2.87-acres of land
on Lot 2, Block 1 in the C-G zoning district. The request includes Alternative Compliance to
UDC 11-4-3-27B.3, which requires a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open
space per unit, to allow studio units without such space;
• Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 132-unit multi-family development on 3.41-acres of land
on Lot 2, Block 3 in the C-G zoning district. The request includes Alternative Compliance to
UDC 11-4-3-27B.3, which requires a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open
space per unit, to allow studio units without such space; and to UDC Table 11-2B-3, which
limits building height to 65 feet in the C-G district, to permit a maximum height of 76 feet;
and,
• Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a height exception for a vertically integrated residential
building on Lot 2, Block 2 from 65-feet to 87-feet in the C-G zoning district.
Additionally, alternative compliance (ALT) is requested from the Director to UDC Table 11-2B-3
to allow an increase in the maximum building height in the C-G zoning district from 65 feet to 76
feet on Lots 1-3, Block 4 and Lot 2, Block 3 (hotel, multi-family building & 2 vertically
integrated residential buildings); and to UDC 11-4-3-41G, which requires a minimum of 50
square feet of private, usable open space per unit, to allow studio units without such space.
B. Issues/Waivers
As noted above, a CUP is requested for a height exception for the vertically integrated residential
building proposed on Lot 2, Block 2 from 65-feet to 87-feet in the C-G zoning district.
Alternative compliance is requested with the CUP for a multi-family development on Lot 2, Block
3 to UDC 11-4-3-27B.3, which requires a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space
per unit, to allow studio units without such space; and to UDC Table 11-2B-3, which limits
building height to 65 feet in the C-G district, to permit a maximum height of 76 feet; and,
Alternative compliance is also requested from the Director to UDC Table 11-2B-3 to allow an
increase in the maximum building height in the C-G zoning district from 65 feet to 76 feet on
Lots 1-3, Block 4 [hotel and two (2) vertically integrated residential buildings); and to UDC 11-4-
3-41G, which requires a minimum of 50 square feet of private, usable open space per unit, to
allow studio units without such space.
C. Recommendation
Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed development plan per the provisions listed
below in Section IV with the exception of the two (2) multi-family residential developments and
the vertically integrated residential project located south of E. Pine Ave. in Blocks 1 and 3. Staff
does not support residential uses in this area, as the previously entitled commercial plan is
considered more beneficial to the City by providing needed employment opportunities and
services for nearby residents, while also reducing vehicle trips and supporting trip capture. In
addition, Staff does not support the vertically integrated residential use on Lot 1, Block 1 as it is
not compatible with adjacent industrial uses and operations.
Staff recommends the Commission and City Council consider reducing the number of vertically
integrated residential units proposed north of E. Pine Ave. and requiring commercial/office uses
above the first floor to provide a more commensurate level of employment and services to
support nearby residents and reduce vehicle trips.
Commission: The Commission recommended approval to City Council of the proposed
development, including the two (2) multi-family residential developments and the vertically
integrated residential project located south of E. Pine Ave. in Blocks 1 and 3.
City of Meridian | Department Report II. Community Metrics
D. Decision
City Council: Pending
COMMUNITY METRICS
Table 1: Land Use
Description Details Map Ref.
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land -
Proposed Land Use(s) Townhomes, multi-family residential, vertically integrated
residential project, professional services (i.e. office, med-
tech), commercial/restaurant, hotel
-
Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County; C-G VII.A.2
Proposed Zoning R-15, C-G, I-L
Adopted FLUM Designation General Industrial & Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) VII.A.3
Table 2: Process Facts
Description Details
Preapplication Meeting date 12/20/2024
Neighborhood Meeting 10/8/2024
Site posting date 6/26/2025 & 8/8/2025
Table 3: Community Metrics
Agency /
Element
Description / Issue Reference
Ada County
Highway District
• Comments
Received
Yes
• Commission
Action
Required
No
• Access N. Webb Way, residential collector street; N. Webb Ave., local street; E.
Pine Ave., minor arterial street; and E. State Ave., residential collector street
west of Webb and local street east of Webb – all existing streets
• Traffic Level
of Service
Area roads meet ACHD’s LOS Planning Thresholds
ITD Comments
Received
ITD has no comments on this application
Meridian Fire Fire Dept. will provide service to this development but their response
will be inadequate due to staffing and equipment. See comments in
Section IV for more information.
Meridian Police See comments in public record
• Distance to
Station
0.9 miles from headquarters & 7.7 miles from North station
• Response
Time
Meridian Public
Works
Wastewater
City of Meridian | Department Report II. Community Metrics
• Distance to
Mainline
Sewer available at site
• Impacts or
Concerns
Meridian Public
Works Water
• Distance to
Mainline
Water available at site
• Impacts or
Concerns
See site specific conditions
School District(s) West Ada School District
• # of students
estimated
for
development
185-191
• Enrollment
capacity
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 II. Community Metrics
Figure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics
Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts.
Figure 3: Service Impact Summary
Note: No park within walking distance is noted as “caution”. Distances for determining an acceptable
walking distance are as follows: 1 mile – regional park; 0.5 mile – community park; and 0.25 mile
neighborhood park. Distances are based on the approximate centroid of a project.
Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes & Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
STAFF ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code (UDC)
A. History
• In 2007, this property was included in the annexation (AZ-07-006, Ordinance #08-1348),
rezone (RZ-07-010), preliminary plat (PP-07-008) for Pinebridge Subdivision, which
consisted of approximately 170 acres of land. A development agreement was required as a
provision of annexation, recorded as Inst. No. 108022893. Several time extensions were
approved for the preliminary plat (TE-09-015, TEC-11-002, TEC-13-004, and TEC-15-002),
which expired on May 7, 2017.
The conceptual development plan included in the agreement shown below depicted
approximately 3,000,000 sq. ft. of commercial, light office, and multi-family residential uses
and a medical campus and included the 50+/- acre property that is now the Scentsy Commons
Campus located east of N. Machine Ave. The property was granted C-G zoning based on the
development plan approved with the application.
• In 2011, a modification to the development agreement (Inst. No. 108022893) for Pinebridge
was approved which removed the Scentsy property from the agreement (outlined in red on
the map below) and required a new development agreement for that property (Scentsy
Campus MDA-10-010, Instrument No. 111052691). A subsequent amendment was approved
in 2021 (H-2021-0002 – Inst. #2021-059867) that included the abutting parcel to the west
(outlined in blue on the map below) that was later acquired by Scentsy, which resulted in the
50-acres east of N. Machine Ave. on the south side of E. Pine Ave. to N. Eagle Rd. being
removed from the original Pinebridge DA. Since then, Scentsy has built approximately
567,000 sq. ft. of office and manufacturing space with space for future expansion.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
• In 2017, another modification to the development agreement was approved for Pine 43,
which updated the conceptual development plan for the site and certain provisions in the
agreement (Inst. #2018-000751). A rezone of 58.72 acres was also approved from the C-G to
the R-15 (31.24 acres) and R-40 (27.48 acres) districts on the portion of the site north of E.
State Ave. shown as Areas B and C on the plan below. The updated plan included
commercial components of office and retail and a variety of residential housing types [i.e.
single-family detached and attached homes, townhomes and multi-family (apartments)] on
approximately 120 acres of land as shown below.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
A total of 737 residential dwelling units were approved to develop on the site north of E.
State Ave. consisting of 504 apartment units on the east side of Webb Ave.; and 123 single-
family detached units and 110 single-family attached and townhome units (19 of which could
include vertically integrated residential units) on the west side of Webb Ave. This area has
since developed with a total of 713 residential units consisting of 480 multi-family apartment
units and 233 single-family residential and townhome units.
Approximately 493,000 sq. ft. of commercial non-residential uses (102,000 sq. ft. of
commercial and 391,000 sq. ft. of office) was proposed based on the building footprint area
shown on the concept plan. The development plan was deemed to be consistent with the
vision of “The Core” designation in the Comprehensive Plan for this area, which has since
been removed from the Plan. The Core focused on fostering an environment for health
sciences, technology and business centers to create sustainable jobs, development products,
training and research – a business diversity of the future with jobs in research, development
and manufacturing that couldn’t be outsourced. The diversity of housing choices was
anticipated to provide nearby housing options for employees in this area.
Approximately 146,000 sq. ft. (86,000 sq. ft. office and 60,000 sq. ft. commercial) of the
commercial area has been constructed in Areas A & D and the red outlined areas in F & G on
the plan shown above, which leaves approximately 347,000 sq. ft. yet to build out of the
approved 493,000 sq. ft.
The Use Comparison/History Table included below (and in Section VII.X) submitted by the
Applicant summarizes the change from the original 2008 Pinebridge approval, through the
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
2018 amendment, and up to the current built environment as of 2025 and the proposed Pine
43 modification.
B. General Overview
Annexation and zoning (AZ):
The Applicants (HPC Buyer & DMB Companies) propose to annex and zone a total of 7.21-acres
of land with I-L (5.29-acres), C-G (1.36-acres) and R-15 (0.56-acre) zoning districts to
accommodate future development and a property boundary adjustment (PBA) between the
subject property and adjacent properties in the City. A legal description and exhibit of the
annexation area is included below in Section VII.F. The property is currently a County enclave
surrounded by City annexed land.
The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for this property is Industrial. Because FLUM
designations are not parcel specific, an adjacent abutting designation, when appropriate and
approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application, may be used as long as
it doesn’t apply to more than 50% of the land being developed. The Applicant proposes to use the
abutting Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) designation on 1.92 acres of the north and northeast
portions of the annexation area where R-15 and C-G zoning is proposed. Staff is supportive of
this request as it’s less than 50% of the land being developed and will accommodate the proposed
development plan.
The HPC Buyer Applicant owns the property and business (Harvey Performance Company)
located at the southwest corner of the annexation area and plans to eventually expand the business
into the 5.29-acre portion of the property proposed to be zoned I-L. The remaining 1.92-acres is
planned to be incorporated into the adjacent Pine 43 development through a future PBA once the
property is annexed, which will resolve a deeded parcel split that occurred previously between the
subject property owners that didn’t go through the proper process.
A conceptual development plan, phasing plan and building elevations were submitted, included
below in Section VII.I, that show how the existing industrial business on the abutting parcel is
eventually planned to expand into the I-L zoned area in the future. Four (4) phases of
development are proposed with a parking area and access driveways via Pine Ave. and Locust
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
Grove Rd. and a shared access via Pine with the adjacent property to the east. The concept plan
also shows how the areas proposed to be zoned R-15 and C-G will integrate into the adjacent
development. Access points to adjacent streets are not approved with the concept plan and will be
evaluated with future development applications.
To ensure future development is consistent with the proposed conceptual development plan,
phasing plan and building elevations, Staff recommends a Development Agreement (DA) is
required as a provision of annexation of the property proposed to be zoned I-L that includes
the provisions noted below in Section IV.A.1.
Note: The 1.92-acres proposed to be zoned R-15 and C-G will be included in the proposed
amended DA for Pine 43. A property boundary adjustment application should be submitted
and finalized prior to City Council approval of the amended DA to create the parcel subject
to the DA and to transfer ownership of the property.
Rezone (RZ):
The Applicant (DMB Companies) proposes to rezone 3.08-acres (0.91 + 2.17) of land from the
C-G to the R-15 zoning district. A legal description and exhibit of the rezone area is included
below in Section VII.G. The FLUM designation for this property is MU-C.
A conceptual development plan was submitted, included below in Section VII.E, that shows how
the area to be rezoned is proposed to develop with 17 townhomes. The proposed zoning, use and
density is consistent with the MU-C development guidelines. Note: The overall density of the
area (3.59 acres excluding adjacent right-of-way) proposed to be zoned R-15 between the
annexation and rezone applications and developed with 30 dwelling units is 8.36 units per acre,
which is consistent with the desired density of 6 to 15 units in MU-C designated areas.
The development agreement modification concurrently proposed with this application will
include the subject rezone area. Future development of the rezone area must substantially comply
with the conceptual development plan included in Section VII.E.
Development Agreement Modification (MDA):
The Applicant proposes to amend the existing approved conceptual development plan for the
undeveloped 36.58 acres of the site located south of E. State Ave. depicted as Areas E, F and G
on the existing concept plan above, excluding the areas that are outlined in red, which have
already developed with non-residential commercial uses. This area is currently entitled to develop
entirely with commercial uses. The proposed updated conceptual development plan is included
below and in Section VII.E of this report.
The Applicant proposes to develop a large portion of the commercial area with 904 new
residential dwelling units consisting of 30 townhome dwelling units, 270 multi-family residential
apartment units and a maximum of 604 vertically integrated residential units above ground floor
non-residential space. This is an increase of 880 dwelling units over what is currently entitled
to develop in Pine 43 and that is already built out.
The remaining area is proposed to develop with 481,020 sq. ft. of non-residential space, including
a proposed 128,880 sq. ft. hotel with a restaurant, lounge and conference area and 71,800 sq. ft. of
other retail/restaurant commercial space; 221,340 sq. ft. of office space, 90,000 sq. ft. of which is
intended for med-tech (i.e. medical office, research and technology) uses; and 59,000 sq. ft. of
commercial/office in the vertically integrated residential buildings. This is an increase of
134,020 sq. ft. of non-residential space over what is currently entitled, which is not yet been
built out in Pine 43.
A total of 8.3 3.10 9.23 acres (or 23 8.5 25.2% of the site) of private and public qualified open
space is proposed, including developed green spaces, amenities, and a 41,464+ sq. ft. centralized
public plaza consisting of the “qualified open space”, and “open space on non-residential lots”
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
and “private open space” as depicted on the open space exhibit in Section VII.N. Note: The
private “common open space” is provided as part of the vertically integrated residential projects,
and multi-family and office developments and is mostly not accessible to the public, except for the
areas along adjacent streets.
The subject property, together with the portion of the Pine 43 development area north of E. State
Ave., is designated as Mixed Use – Community (MU-C) on the Comprehensive Plan’s Future
Land Use Map (FLUM). To evaluate consistency with the MU-C designation, the following
analysis considers the broader 121.69-acre Pine 43 development area.
In reviewing development applications, the City will consider the following items in MU-C areas:
(Staff’s analysis is in italics)
➢ Development must comply with the Functional Integration principles for development in all
Mixed-Use areas.
Integration of Uses:
o Mixed Use projects are to be developed with an overall master or conceptual plan for the
larger mixed-use area; during an annexation or rezone request, a development agreement
will typically be required for projects with a Mixed Use, future land use designation.
A conceptual master plan exists for the portion of the site north of E. State Ave., included
in the development agreement (DA); an amended master plan is proposed with the
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
subject application for the portion of the site south of E. State Ave., proposed to be
included in an amended DA.
o Mixed use areas must include at least three land use types within a designation.
Exceptions may be granted for Mixed Use designations smaller than 10 acres on a case-
by-case basis. Individual projects within a large mixed-use designated area may not
warrant a mix of uses, provided compliance with a larger vision and integration of uses.
A mix of uses consisting of residential, commercial (including retail, restaurants, etc.)
and office have been provided to then north of State Ave. and are proposed to the south of
State Ave. as shown on the proposed conceptual master plan.
o High intensity residential (higher density or significant percent of an overall mixed-use
area) requires commensurate levels of employment or other non-residential elements
supporting residents and reducing local vehicle trips (see specific allowances of
residential and non-residential within each sub-category). The specific allowance of
residential is 20-75% with transit available; there is no allowance for non-residential in
the MU-C designation.
In the overall development, 64.4% of the site is residential at a gross density of 20.75
units per acre based on 1,617 units on 78 acres of land.
Staff is concerned that commensurate levels of employment or other non-residential
elements supporting residents and reducing local vehicle trips may not be proposed.
o Mixed use projects must inherently support intentional opportunities for neighborhood
and community services such as recreation centers (e.g. – specialized gyms), daycares,
and office (e.g. professional offices). Some of these uses do not need prominent arterial
road visibility to be successful, but instead rely on strong connectivity and access nearer
to residential and employment areas. See also figures: FB2, FB3, FB5.
Professional office uses, including med-tech, are proposed within the development as
shown on the conceptual master plan; a daycare or other community serving uses may be
provided but are not specifically proposed. Staff recommends neighborhood and
community services as noted are included on a revised concept master plan.
o Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools, civic
buildings, or public safety facilities are expected in most mixed-use developments
thereby reducing extraordinary service and transportation network impacts.
No such facilities are proposed; Staff recommends the concept plan is revised to
include such in accord with the Comprehensive Plan for mixed-use designated areas.
o Supportive and proportional outdoor public and/ or quasi-public spaces and places
including, but not limited to, parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas, linear open space,
and schools are expected. 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. See also figures: FB4, FC5, FC7.
The exhibit in Section VII.N depicts open space on non-residential lots but appears to
include portions of the street buffers along Pine Ave. on Lot 3, Block 3 and Lot 2, Block
4, and Lot 1, Block 2, which should not be included. Staff recommends a revised open
space exhibit is submitted prior to the City Council hearing that excludes street buffers
with details of the public/quasi-public spaces and places with amenities, landscaping,
pathways, etc. A revised open space exhibit was submitted along with renderings of
public-quasi-public spaces and places with amenities (see exhibit below in Section BB).
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
No schools are proposed within the site; however, there is an existing school southwest of
Block 3.
Holistic Design:
o Mixed use areas are to be centered around spaces that are well-designed public and quasi-
public centers of activity. Spaces must be designed with community supportive purpose,
incorporate permanent design elements with features to promote frequent use, and
support amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from relaxation to play.
These areas must be strategically integrated into the overall development, interconnected
with meaningful points of interest, prioritize pedestrian infrastructure, be highly visible
and accessible, and designed to enhance both the adjacent uses and larger mixed-use area.
See also figures: FB5, FC6, FC7.
This site lies in four (4) separate quadrants divided by collector and arterial streets. The
public plaza area in Block 4 is the main focal point and gathering area of the
development and is surrounded by townhomes, two (2) vertically integrated residential
buildings, a hotel and a couple of restaurants. Other such spaces are provided by the
med-tech buildings and by the east restaurant on the north side of Pine as shown on the
open space exhibit in Section VII.N. All of these areas are highly visible and accessible
by pathways and vehicles. The other common areas within the development are private
and are associated with the multi-family and vertically integrated residential
developments.
Staff recommends details are submitted for the public and quasi-public spaces prior to
the Council hearing that include permanent design elements with features to promote
frequent use, and amenities that foster a wide variety of interests as noted. Renderings
were submitted, included below in Section VII.BB, as requested.
o In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed, the
buildings should be arranged to create some form of common, usable area, such as a
plaza or green space. See also figures: FC8, FC9, FD2.
The med-tech buildings at the northwest corner of the development have a plaza area in
between the buildings for a common usable area. The other med-tech building south of
Pine has an internal plaza area and an open space area at the side of the building. The
office appears to have a plaza area between the front of the building and the street.
o Open space should be purposeful in supporting a visible community and utilized to
enhance synergies between residential and non-residential uses. See also figures: FC7,
FC9, FD2.
Open space is highly visible and located between residential and non-residential uses
and should enhance interactions between uses.
o Open space should be prioritized along natural or naturalized amenities (i.e. creeks and
canals), integrated with pathways and pedestrian corridors, and located away from site
features that may obscure visibility and attract dangerous or illegal behavior. See also
figures: FC1, FC2.
Open space is integrated with pathways and sidewalks and visible from public areas and
streets.
o Commercial drive aisles must contemplate a pedestrian friendly built environment with a
minimal number of conflict points, and oriented so that aisle ingress and egress is
generally parallel to multiuse pathways, sidewalks, and linear open space. Drive aisles
supporting primary pedestrian connectivity for a site must feel safe, and should include
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
planted and/or hardscaped parkway treatment, or other enhanced separation with both
aesthetic and safety benefits. See also figures: FC1.
Drive aisles within the site have a pedestrian friendly design with walkways alongside the
drives and linear open space. Crosswalks should be delineated for pedestrian safety.
o All mixed-use projects should be accessible to adjacent neighborhoods by both
automotive and alternative-vehicular transportation opportunities. Pedestrian circulation
must be convenient and interconnect different land use types. Vehicle connectivity must
not rely on arterial streets for neighborhood access. See also figures: FA3, FA4, FB3,
FB4.
The proposed mixed-use project is accessible to adjacent neighborhoods by both vehicles
and pedestrians; two (2) bus stops are also located at the northwest and southeast
corners of Pine and Webb. A pedestrian connectivity plan is included in Section VII.O
that shows pedestrian access within the development connecting different land use types.
Internal driveways are proposed for vehicular access from adjacent public streets.
o A mixed-use project should be designed to support alternative transportation such as
public transit stops, park-and-ride lots, other ride sharing services including auto, bike, or
scooter, and/or other innovative or alternative modes of transportation. Alternative
transportation improvements should be integrated as functional, convenient, and
comfortable spaces. Electric charging stations for a variety of transportation modes is
encouraged.
Public transit stops exist at the northwest and southeast corner of Pine and Webb.
Electric charging stations are proposed as amenities for the multi-family development
but are private and not available for public use. There are no park-and-ride lots nearby.
o Non-residential buildings should transition to and compliment adjacent residential
buildings in mass and form, and include safe and meaningful mitigation for operational
impacts such as loading docks, storage, and outdoor equipment. See also figures: FB2,
FB4.
In Block 1, the vertically integrated residential and multi-family buildings are both 5-
stories in height and adjoin 1-story industrial buildings to the south, a 3-story office
building to the west and 2-story office/warehouse to the east.
In Block 2, the 7-story vertically integrated residential building is next to a 1-story
restaurant and 3-story townhomes, which provides a fairly abrupt transition from the
non-residential building to the residential buildings. The townhomes are located across a
parking lot and not directly adjoining the vertically integrated building.
In Block 3, the office building on Lot 1 and the med-tech office building on Lot 2 are both
4-stories in height, which will transition in mass & form to the 6-story multi-family
building between them at the corner of Pine and Webb. There shouldn’t be any negative
operational impacts to adjacent residential uses from these uses.
In Block 4, the 6-story hotel on Lot 2 is next to the 6-story vertically integrated
residential building on Lot 3 which is next to a 1-story restaurant and 3-story
townhomes. The 6-story vertically integrated residential building on Lot 1 is next to a 2-
story restaurant and 3-story townhomes (see exhibit below for the distance of separation
from the adjacent townhomes across E. State St.). The 5-story med-tech offices at the
northwest corner of the development on Lots 29 & 30 are located across a parking lot
from 3-story townhomes. The non-residential uses in this block shouldn’t negatively
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
impact the proposed residential uses. The 6-story vertically integrated buildings provide
a fairly abrupt transition to the 1- and 2-story restaurants and 3-story townhomes but
they are located across a drive aisle and not directly adjoining each other.
o New buildings on pad sites adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods should be
limited to no more than a 1-story disparity in building height (or floor height equivalent).
Natural features, differences in grade, and other context sensitive neighborhood
preservation design features should be considered with transitions.
No new buildings are proposed directly adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods;
East State Ave. provides a separation between the proposed development and the existing
neighborhood to the north.
o Transitions between different residential product types and dissimilar land uses should
include the use of alleys, roadways with landscaped parkways, or highly connected open
space. The use of barriers such as closed vision fencing or walls that limit connectivity
and reduce visibility are typically not appropriate as transitions. See also figures: FB1,
FB2.
Streets with landscape parkways, drive aisles, parking lots and common open space
areas provide a transition between different land use types within the development.
➢ 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). An additional
15% is allowed because public transit is available, as noted below.
A total of 1,617 residential units (713 existing + 904 proposed) consisting of single-family,
multi-family and vertically integrated residential units have been constructed and are
proposed on 77.93 acres, which is 64.4% of the overall development area.
➢ Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public spaces and places should comprise a
minimum of 5% of the development area are required.
Based on the subject area south of State Ave. (36.58 acres), a minimum of 1.83 acres of such
spaces and places should be provided; an public and/or quasi-public open space exhibit is
included in Section VII.NBB that depicts open space for non-residential lots. A 0.95 acre
public plaza is proposed centrally within Block 4, which is the main feature; other areas are
shown on the plan by the proposed uses hotel, med-tech building and east restaurant
consisting of 0.85 acres for a total of 1.8 3.81 acres or 10% of the site. Some of these areas
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
appear to be in the street buffer along Pine Ave. and do not qualify as noted above. A revised
open space exhibit should be submitted that excludes these areas, that demonstrates
compliance with the minimum area, and includes more details.
Based on the area of the entire Pine 43 development (121.69 acres), a minimum of 6.08 acres
should be provided within the overall development. An open space exhibit should be was
submitted for the overall Pine 43 development that demonstrates general compliance with
this development guideline, included below in Section DD. A total of 7.51 acres (or 6.2%) of
the site is proposed to be public or quasi-public open space.
➢ Where the development site has transit available or stops are planned, an additional 15% of
site may be dedicated to residential uses. Alternatively, this bonus may be applied where the
development site is within one-mile of planned transit stops or an identified employment
area, and where last-mile transportation features are incorporated into the site including
thoughtfully located and integrated ride share parking, commensurate with potential trip
capture. Other innovations to reduce traffic and/ or parking impacts and capture local trips
may be considered.
Public transit (i.e. bus stops) exists at the northwest corner of E. Pine Ave. & N. Webb Way
and at the southeast corner of E. Pine Ave. & N. Webb Ave., which allows an additional 15%
of the site to 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.
Staff is generally supportive of the portion of the proposed concept plan north of Pine as it
provides a mix of uses as desired for MU-C designated areas. However, Staff is concerned the
proposed amendment would substantially reduce the amount of land designated for employment-
generating uses, which may in turn limit future opportunities for family-wage jobs within the
area. A total of 713 residential dwelling units were entitled and have been constructed in the
northern portion of Pine 43 north of E. State Ave. An additional 466 (maximum) vertically
integrated residential units are proposed in the development area between State Ave. and Pine
Ave. with an additional 409 vertically integrated residential and multi-family apartment units
proposed south of Pine with the amended master plan.
Staff and ACHD have significant concerns pertaining to the traffic impact the proposed changes
to the concept master plan will have on the surrounding transportation network beyond what was
originally anticipated (see Section III.E for more information).
For these reasons, it’s Staff’s opinion the previously entitled development plan for
commercial uses in the area south of Pine where multi-family and vertically integrated
residential uses are proposed is in the best interest of the City to retain as it provides needed
employment opportunities and services for nearby residents, while also reducing vehicle
trips and supporting trip capture. The Commission did not share this opinion and
recommended approval of these uses.
Additionally, it’s Staff’s opinion the vertically integrated residential use on Lot 1, Block 1 is
not compatible with adjacent industrial uses and operations to the south. Industrial
operations typically produce impacts such as noise, vibration, light pollution, and emissions,
which can negatively affect the health, safety, and overall livability of nearby residential
environments. Therefore, Staff recommends the concept master plan is revised to reflect
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
commercial/office uses in the area south of Pine Ave. The Commission was in support of the
proposed use provided sound mitigation is provided as proposed.
Further, Staff recommends the Commission and City Council consider reducing the
number of vertically integrated residential units proposed north of E. Pine Ave. and
requiring commercial/office uses above the first floor to provide a more commensurate level
of employment and services to support nearby residents and reduce vehicle trips. The
Commission did not recommend reducing the number of units to accommodate more
commercial/office uses.
The following Comprehensive Plan policies support Staff’s recommendation:
• Monitor and adjust the amount and mix of industrial, commercial, and office areas
needed to meet the employment needs of the City. (3.06.01B)
• Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment areas.
(3.06.02C)
• Discourage residential land uses in close proximity to the Wastewater Resource Recovery
Facility, the Intermountain Gas Facility on Can-Ada Road, and other incompatible land
uses. (3.06.02E)
• Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of
land. (3.07.00)
• Proactively address potential conflicts between incompatible uses. (3.07.01).
• Provide facilities and services that maintain a premier level of service commensurate with
growth. (3.01.01)
• Encourage the expansion of medical service-related industries that are needed.
(2.05.02A)
• High intensity residential (higher density or significant percent of an overall mixed-use
area) requires commensurate levels of employment or other non-residential elements
supporting residents and reducing local vehicle trips (see specific allowances of
residential and non-residential within each sub-category).
• Evaluate comprehensive impacts of growth and consider City Master Plans and Strategic
Plans in all land use decisions (e.g., traffic impacts, school enrollment, and parks).
(3.01.01A)
• Encourage and support mixed-use areas that provide the benefits of being able to live,
shop, dine, play, and work in close proximity, thereby reducing vehicle trips, and
enhancing overall livability and sustainability. (3.06.02B)
Staff has included recommended provisions for the new DA below in Section IV.A.2
Preliminary plat (PP):
A preliminary plat is proposed consisting of 41 buildable lots and 3 common lots on 36.58-acres
of land in the R-15 and C-G zoning districts, included below in Section VII.J. The plat is
proposed to develop in eight (8) phases as shown on the phasing plan included below in Section
VII.K. A note is included that states phasing sequence may be adjusted based on market
conditions. Staff recommends future development substantially complies with the phasing
plan as a provision of the DA; any significant changes to the plan will require approval
from the Director.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
The northwest portion of the preliminary plat includes portions of existing County parcels that
will be included in a future property boundary adjustment (PBA) application with adjacent City
zoned parcels once the property is annexed with this application. If a PBA isn’t approved and a
Record of Survey recorded, this would create an illegal division of land if a final plat were
recorded. For this reason, Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat is contingent
upon final approval of a property boundary adjustment (PBA) application for the
realignment of property lines between the HPC Buyer and DRB Investments properties as
shown on the preliminary plat. A final plat application should not be submitted to the
Planning Division until a PBA application is finalized and a Record of Survey is recorded
that matches the configuration of the properties shown on the preliminary plat. In the event
a PBA is not finalized, a new preliminary plat application would be required that excludes
the land anticipated to be included in the PBA.
The property located at the southeast corner of N. Webb Ave. and E. Pine Ave. has received final
plat (FP-2022-0017 Pine 43 Animal Farm) approval and the plat has been signed by the City
Engineer but has not yet been recorded. Because the preliminary plat excludes this area and
would create an illegal division of land if the final plat isn’t recorded, Staff recommends
approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon recordation of the final plat. A final plat
application should not be submitted to the Planning Division for any phase of development
until the final plat is recorded.
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) – Multi-family Developments:
Two (2) requests for conditional use permits are proposed for a multi-family development on Lot
2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 3. The one on Lot 2, Block 1 includes 139 units on 2.87 acres of land
in the C-G district; and the one on Lot 2, Block 3 includes 132 units on 3.40 acres of land in the
C-G district. Between the two developments, a total of 271 apartment units are proposed in the
area currently entitled to develop with commercial uses (proposed to develop with multi-family
uses with the updated master plan).
Alternative compliance is proposed with the conditional use permit to UDC 11-4-3-27B.3, which
requires a minimum of 80 square feet of private, usable open space to be provided for each multi -
family unit, to allow zero (0) for all studio units; and to UDC Table 11-2B-3, which restricts
building height to a maximum of 65 feet in the C-G zoning district to allow a maximum building
height of 76 feet on Lot 2, Block 3. This request is to be considered by the Commission and City
Council as part of the CUP request.
It's Staff’s opinion the existing entitled development plan for commercial uses in the areas
where multi-family is proposed is in the best interest of the City as it provides needed
employment uses and residential services in this area. For this reason, Staff recommends
denial of the proposed CUP’s for an additional 271 apartment units in this area and
recommends the concept master plan is amended to depict non-residential
commercial/office uses in this area consistent with the existing entitled plan for the area.
The Commission recommended approval of the multi-family developments as proposed.
The following Comprehensive Plan policies support denial:
• #3.06.01B – Monitor and adjust the amount and mix of industrial, commercial, and office
areas needed to meet the employment needs of the City.
• #3.06.02C – Encourage the development of supportive commercial near employment
areas.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) – Height Exception:
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is proposed for a height exception to UDC Table 11-2B-3, as
allowed in UDC 11-2B-3A.3e, for the vertically integrated residential building on Lot 2, Block 2
to exceed the maximum allowed height of 65-feet allowed in the C-G district to allow a
maximum height of 87-feet. See Staff’s analysis below in Section III.C.3.
Alternative Compliance (ALT) to UDC Table 11-2B-3:
Alternative compliance is requested from the Director to UDC Table 11-2B-3 to allow an
increase in the maximum building height in the C-G zoning district from 65 feet to 76 feet on
Lots 1-3, Block 4 (hotel & vertically integrated residential buildings). See Staff’s analysis below
in Section III.C.3.
Alternative Compliance (ALT) to UDC 11-4-3-41G:
Alternative compliance is requested from the Director to UDC 11-4-3-41G to allow a decrease of
private, usable open space for studio units in vertically integrated residential from the minimum
50 square feet to zero (0) on Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 2, Block 2; and Lots 1 and 3, Block 4. As noted
above, Staff is not in support of the proposed vertically integrated residential project on Lot 1,
Block 1; therefore, the Director has not approved ALT for that lot. See Staff’s analysis below in
Section III.C.4.
Table 4: Project Overview
Description Details
History H-2017-0058 (DA Inst. #2018-000751); A-2020-0182 [PBA – ROS
#12629 (property at NEC of Webb & Pine)]; FP-2022-0017 [Pine 43
Animal Farm FP (signed by City Engineer but not yet recorded) – property
at the SEC of Pine & Webb]
Phasing Plan 8 phases over an estimated 10 years
Residential Units 904 units consisting of 30 townhomes, 270 multi-family units and 604
vertically integrated residential units
Open Space See exhibit in Section VII.N below
Amenities See analysis below in Section III and exhibit in Section VII.Q
Physical Features There are no waterways, floodplain or topography issues on this site.
Acreage 7.21 acres (AZ); 3.08 acres (RZ); 36.58 acres (PP); 6.28 acres (CUP for
multi-family)
Lots 41 building lots/3 common lots
Density 12.42 units/acre in the overall Pine 43 development
C. Site Development and Use Analysis
Although Staff is recommending denial of the proposed multi-family developments and
vertically integrated project in Blocks 1 and 3, Staff has included analysis of the uses below
in the event the Commission and Council approves the uses shown on the proposed master
plan. The Commission recommended approval of these uses.
Comprehensive Plan Policy #2.02.02E – Encourage the development of high quality, dense
residential and mixed use areas near in and around Downtown, near employment, large shopping
centers, public open spaces and parks, and along major transportation corridors, as shown on the
Future Land Use Map.
1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1):
There are no existing structures on this property. There are existing sidewalks along streets.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2):
Townhouse dwellings – principally permitted use in R-15 district
Multi-family residential – conditional use in C-G district
Vertically integrated residential project – principally permitted use in C-G district
Restaurant – principally permitted use in C-G district
Hotel – principally permitted use in C-G district
Professional service (i.e. office) – principally permitted use in C-G district
Med-tech (i.e. research & development, medical offices) – principally permitted use in C-G
district
3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
See UDC Table 11-2A-7 for the R-15 district
See UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-G district
See UDC Table 11-2C-3 for the I-L district
Alternative Compliance (ALT) to UDC Table 11-2B-3 – Height Exception:
Alternative compliance is requested from the Director to UDC Table 11-2B-3 to allow an
increase of 17% in the maximum building height in the C-G zoning district from 65 feet to 76
feet for four (4) buildings – the vertically integrated (VI) residential buildings on Lots 1 and
3, Block 4, the hotel on Lot 2, Block 4, and the multi-family (MF) building on Lot 2, Block 3
as shown on the exhibit included below in Section VII.T. The additional height is requested
to accommodate commercial uses and residential density to support the commercial areas. A
shadow study was submitted, included below in Section EE, that demonstrates shadows will
not impact the adjacent residential neighborhood on the north side of State except during the
Winter solstice. A comparison is included that demonstrates the difference between the
allowed 65’ height and the proposed 76’ height.
The UDC (11-2B-3A.3d) allows such requests to be approved by the Director that don’t
exceed 20% of the maximum height allowed for the district when the development provides
10% of the building square feet in open space, courtyards, patios, or other usable outdoor
space available for the employees and/or patrons of the structure, excluding required setbacks
and landscape buffers in accord with UDC 11-2B-3A.3d.
The overall common open space exhibit included in Section VII.N includes portions of the
adjacent required street buffers; therefore, Staff is unable to determine if the amount of open
space provided meets the requirement for the Director to grant the height exception. An
updated exhibit should be submitted that only includes usable outdoor open space as noted.
An updated open space exhibit was submitted that depicts usable outdoor space, included
below in Section VII.N.
The VI building on Lot 1, Block 4 is 271,243 sq. ft.; therefore, a minimum of 27,124 sq. ft. of
usable outdoor space is required – a total of 37,466.74 sq. ft. of open space is proposed
consisting of a plaza and rooftop deck, which meets and exceeds the standard (see exhibit in
Section CC below. Note: The requested increase in height amounts to less than 45% of this
building and will accommodate amenities as well as view units. The building’s tallest point is
at the northeast corner and more than half of the height is across from the neighboring
community’s sports court amenity, with height stepping down east to west as shown on the
last exhibit below in Section VII.Y. The building is set back by up to 100 feet from the back of
the homes on the north side of E. State Ave. The building is softened by landscaping,
including two (2) rows of Class II trees, one on each side of State Ave.
The VI building on Lot 3, Block 4 is 153,719 sq. ft.; therefore, a minimum of 15,372 sq. ft. of
usable outdoor space is required – a total of 27,582 sq. ft. is proposed consisting of a rooftop
deck and common area on the north side of the building, which meets and exceeds the
standard.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
The hotel on Lot 2, Block 4 is 125,240 sq. ft.; therefore, a minimum of 12,524 sq. ft. of
usable outdoor space required – a total of 22,420 sq. ft. is proposed consisting of pedestrian
seating, gathering areas and a plaza area on the ground floor and a rooftop deck with a pool,
which meets and exceeds the standard.
The MF building on Lot 2, Block 3 is 155,545 sq. ft.; therefore, a minimum of 15,555 sq. ft.
of usable outdoor space is required to meet the 10% required for a height exception, which
can’t include required setbacks and landscape buffers. An additional 31,000 sq. ft. of outdoor
common open space is required to meet the multi-family standards in UDC 11-4-3-27C.5 for
a minimum total of 46,555 sq. ft.– a total of 32,509.64 46,680 sq. ft. is proposed, which meets
the minimum standards and doesn’t include required setbacks or landscape buffers in UDC
11-4-3-27C.5 but does not meet the minimum standard for a height exception.
Based on the revised open space exhibit and calculations, the Director was able to verify the
required amount of usable open space is provided for the vertically integrated residential and
hotel buildings and the multi-family building in order to grant the alternative compliance
requests on Lot 1, Block 4; Lots 2 and 3, Block 4; and Lot 2, Block 3. Because Staff is
recommending denial of the multi-family development on Lot 2, Block 3 and because the
usable outdoor space for such a request has not been met, the Director has not acted on is
unable to approve the alternative compliance request for that lot.
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Height Exception – Vertically Integrated
Residential Building on Lot 2, Block 2:
A CUP is requested to allow an increase of 34% in the maximum building height in the C-G
district from 65 feet to 87 feet for the vertically integrated residential building on Lot 2,
Block 2, shown in the exhibit below in Section VII.T. The UDC (11-2B-3A.3e) requires
additional height exceeding 20% of the maximum height allowed for the district to be
approved through a CUP.
Building heights are allowed up to a maximum of 95 feet in the H-E (High Density
Employment) district, which is the most intensive of the commercial districts above the C-G
and M-E districts. The Applicant states additional height is needed to accommodate vertical
integration of uses and the appropriate urban density to support mixed use and sustainability
by allowing for urban density that can support the commercial and office uses in the
development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. See Applicant’s narrative for more
information (pp. 14-15).
The building is situated along E. Pine Ave. and N. Webb Way. The vertically integrated
residential building proposed directly across N. Webb Way to the west is similar in height at
76 feet as is the multi-family residential building proposed kitty corner to the site at the
southwest corner of Pine and Webb. The Happy Hippo office building directly across E. Pine
Ave. to the south and the proposed townhomes to the northeast along E. State Ave. in the
same block are located 200+ feet away across the parking lot are all 3-stories in height. The
biggest disparity in height is the proposed restaurant directly to the east within 40 feet of the
proposed structure, which is proposed to be a single story in height.
The Applicant asserts that because the building will be surrounded by either commercial uses
or buildings of similar height, the additional height shouldn’t dwarf any other use. Further,
the Applicant states the request meets the required Findings for such in UDC 11-5B-6E in
that the building meets all other dimensional standards of the district; the additional height
will facilitate the mixed-use development intended in the MU-C FLUM designation and will
promote sustainability by allowing for urban density that can support the commercial and
office uses in the development in accord with the Comprehensive Plan; the proposed design,
construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area; and won’t adversely
affect other property in the vicinity.
Staff is generally in support of the proposed height exception as justified by the
Applicant and is of the opinion it’s appropriate for the proposed development and is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan based on the Findings included below in
Section V. However, Staff recommends the Commission and City Council consider
reducing the number of residential units proposed above the first floor in order to
accommodate more employment and service uses to support residential uses in this area
and to reduce vehicle trips and encourage trip capture as a condition of approval. The
Commission did not recommend any changes to the development plan.
4. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3): (Staff’s analysis in italics)
Staff has included the specific use standards below for all of the proposed uses, as
applicable. However, Staff is only including analysis on consistency with these standards
for the multi-family residential uses proposed with the CUP application and for the
alternative compliance requests to the private usable open space standards for studio
units in vertically integrated residential project. Analysis for the other uses (i.e. hotel,
vertically integrated, restaurant, professional office), which are principal permitted uses
in the district, will take place with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for
those uses.
Vertically integrated residential project – UDC 11-4-3-41:
A. A vertically integrated residential project shall be a structure that contains at least two
(2) stories.
B. A minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor area of a vertically
integrated project shall be residential dwelling units, outdoor patio space on the same
floor as a residential unit may count towards this requirement.
C. A minimum of ten (10) percent of the gross floor area of a vertically integrated
project shall be used for nonresidential uses as specified in subsection E below.
D. The minimum building footprint for a detached vertically integrated residential
project shall be two thousand four hundred (2,400) square feet.
E. The allowed nonresidential uses in a vertically integrated project include: arts,
entertainment or recreation facility; artist studio; civic, social or fraternal
organizations; daycare facility; drinking establishment; education institution;
financial institution; healthcare or social assistance; industry, craftsman; laundromat;
nursing or residential care facility; personal or professional service; public or quasi-
public use; restaurant; retail; or other uses that may be considered through the
conditional use permit process.
F. None of the required parking shall be located in the front of the structure.
G. A minimum of fifty (50) square feet of private, usable open space shall be provided
for each residential dwelling unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches,
patios, decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways
shall not count toward this requirement. The Director may consider an alternative
design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in Section
11-5B-5 of this title. Compliance with this standard is required for all units except
for the studio units for which alternative compliance has been requested and
approved by the Director (see analysis below). The Director has not acted on the
request for Lot 1, Block 1 as Staff is recommending denial of the use on that lot.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
Alternative compliance (ALT) is requested from the Director to UDC 11-4-3-41G to
allow studio units within vertically integrated residential projects to be developed
without private, usable open space.
The Applicant states it’s not feasible to provide private open space for studio units
for the following reasons: 1) it would increase the cost of these units, reducing their
affordability; 2) smaller units have a smaller outside façade on the building and
addition balconies to each unit would significantly clutter the exterior appearance of
the buildings; 3) in order to meet he area requirements for private open space,
balconies would have to be as wide as the entire unit itself – with an adjacent unit’s
balcony abutting the studio’s space, the area wouldn’t be private.
As an alternative means of compliance, the Applicant proposes to provide private
amenity decks, which will be available to all residents in the buildings but will likely
be used the most by residents of studio units since they have the least space to host
groups of visitors. The decks will have seating areas, built-in grills/outdoor kitchens,
planters, firepits, and shade features that will create attractive spaces to host parties
conveniently located for building residents. Amenity decks with pools will also have
welcoming spaces that include swimming pools and sports courts for socializing and
recreation. These rooftop and amenity docks are not open to the public but rather are
private open spaces for residents only.
The request qualifies for alternative compliance as the proposed design includes
innovative design features based on “new urbanism” that promote walkable and
mixed-use neighborhoods in accord with UDC 11-5B-5B.2. All of the vertically
integrated buildings with studio units include “new urbanism” design features like
public plazas and green spaces, landscaped walkway connections between blocks,
vertical and horizontal mixing of office, commercial and residential uses, transit
accessibility, and bike amenities. Overall, the high degree of mixed use in Pine 43
will promote walkability and community connection, reducing reliance on motor
vehicles and creating an urban neighborhood feel.
The table below demonstrates the amount of amenity deck private space provided for
resident use compared to the amount of private open space that would otherwise be
required for the number of studio units in the building – the amount of amenity space
available to the studio unit residents exceeds what they would otherwise have in their
unit.
The Director finds the proposed alternative means for compliance with the private
usable open space standards demonstrates the proposed alternative provides an equal
or superior means of meeting the intent and purpose of the regulation as required and
therefore, approves the request for Lot 1, Block 1; Lots 2, Block 2; and Lots 1 and 3,
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
Block 4 in accord with the Findings included below in Section V provided Council
approves these uses. Because Staff is recommending denial of the use on Lot 1,
Block 1, the Director has not approved ALT for that lot.
Restaurant – UDC 11-4-3-49:
A. Parking
1. At a minimum, one (1) parking space shall be provided for every two hundred fifty
(250) square feet of gross floor area. Compliance with this standard is required.
Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenant space, a detailed parking plan
shall be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies
with the requirements of this title.
Hotel – UDC 11-4-3-23
A. Accessory uses including, but not limited to, restaurants, retail, drinking
establishments, and personal services, may be allowed if such uses are completely
within the hotel or motel structure. A drinking establishment shall require separate or
concurrent approval subject to the regulations of section 11-4-3-10 of this chapter.
Compliance with this standard is required.
B. A conditional use permit shall be required for any hotel or motel use that adjoins a
residential district or an existing residence. The proposed hotel does not adjoin a
residential district or existing residence.
Multi-family Development – UDC 11-4-3-27
(Note: Analysis for both multi-family residential buildings on Lot 2, Block 1 & Lot 2, Block 3
is included below.)
Multi-family developments with multiple properties shall be considered as one (1)
property for the purpose of implementing the standards set forth in this section.
A. Purpose
1. To implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan:
a. Plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample
open space, and generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices.
b. Require the design and construction of pathways connections, easy
pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the
incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities as part of new
multi-family residential and mixed-use developments.
2. To create multi-family housing that is safe and convenient and that enhances the
quality of life of its residents.
a. To create quality buildings and designs for multi-family development that
enhance the visual character of the community.
b. To create building and site design in multi-family development that is
sensitive to and well-integrated with the surrounding neighborhood.
c. To create open space areas that contribute to the aesthetics of the community,
provide an attractive setting for buildings, and provide safe, interesting
outdoor spaces for residents.
B. Site design
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
1. Residential buildings shall provide a minimum setback of ten (10) feet unless a
greater setback is otherwise required by this title and/or Title 10 of this Code.
Building setbacks shall take into account windows, entrances, porches and patios,
and how they impact adjacent properties. The proposed structures comply with
this standard.
2. All on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal facilities,
and transformer and utility vaults shall be located in an area not visible from a
public street, or shall be fully screened from view from a public street. All such
areas should be depicted on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance in accord with this standard.
3. A minimum of eighty (80) square feet of private, usable open space shall be
provided for each unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios,
decks, and/or enclosed yards. Landscaping, entryway and other accessways shall
not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to
such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this
section, the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the
alternative compliance provisions as set forth in Section 11-5B-5 of this title. The
floor plans included in Section VII.W depict 84 sq. ft. balconies for the 1-, 2- and
3-bedroom units; alternative compliance has been requested to allow no such
private open space for the studio units –, which the Director has not acted on this
request because Staff is recommending denial of the proposed use approved (see
analysis below).
4. For the purposes of this section, vehicular circulation areas, parking areas, and
private usable open space shall not be considered common open space. None of
these areas are included in the common open space.
5. No recreational vehicles, snowmobiles, boats or other personal recreation vehicles
shall be stored on the site unless provided for in a separate, designated and
screened area. Comply with this standard.
6. The parking shall meet the requirements set forth in Chapter 3, "Regulations
Applying to All Districts", of this title. The proposed parking complies with these
standards (see Section III.D. 4 below for more information).
7. Developments with twenty (20) units or more shall provide the following:
a. A property management office.
b. A maintenance storage area.
c. A central mailbox location, including provisions for parcel mail, that provide
safe pedestrian and/or vehicular access.
d. A directory and map of the development at an entrance or convenient
location for those entering the development.
These items should be depicted on plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance application if the use is approved.
C. Common open space design requirements
1. The total baseline land area of all qualified common open space shall equal or
exceed ten (10) percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of
five (5) acres or more. When multi-family is approved concurrently with single-
family, the minimum open space requirements in Section 11-3G-3 shall apply to
the gross land area of entire development. The proposed multi-family lots are not
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
contiguous and located in different blocks approximately 700+’ apart. Lot 2,
Block 3 is 3.41 acres and Lot 2, Block 1 is 2.87 acres, which is below 5 acres;
therefore, the baseline standard does not apply.
2. All common open space shall meet the following standards:
a. The development plan shall demonstrate that the open space has been
integrated into the development as a priority and not for the use of land after
all other elements of the development have been designed. Open space areas
that has been given priority in the development design have:
(1) Direct pedestrian access;
(2) High visibility;
(3) Comply with Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTED)
standards; and
(4) Support a range of leisure and play activities and uses. Irregular shaped,
disconnected or isolated open spaces shall not meet this standard.
b. Open space shall be accessible and well connected throughout the
development. This quality can be shown with open spaces that are centrally
located within the development, accessible by pathway and visually
accessible along collector streets or as a terminal view from a street.
c. The open space promotes the health and well-being of its residents. Open
space shall support active and passive uses for recreation, social gathering
and relaxation to serve the development.
3. Alternative compliance is available for the standards listed in subsections (C)1 and
(C)2 above, if a project has a unique targeted demographic; utilizes other place-
making design elements in Old-Town or mixed-use future land use designations
with collectively integrated and shared open space areas.
4. All multi-family projects over twenty (20) units shall provide at least one (1)
common grassy area integrated into the site design allowing for general activities
by all ages. This area may be included in the minimum required open space total.
Projects that provide safe access to adjacent public parks or parks under a
common HOA, without crossing an arterial roadway, are exempt from this
standard.
a. Minimum size of common grassy area shall be at least five thousand (5,000)
square feet in area. This area shall increase proportionately as the number of
units increase and shall be commensurate to the size of the multi-family
development as determined by the decision-making body. Where this area
cannot be increased due to site constraints, it may be included elsewhere in
the development. Both multi-family lots have grassy areas exceeding 5,000
sq. ft. in area in accord with this standard as shown on the exhibit in Section
VII.R.
b. Alternative compliance is available for the standards listed in subsections
(C)1 and (C)2 above, if a project has a unique targeted demographic; utilizes
other place-making design elements in Old-Town or mixed-use future land
use designations with collectively integrated and shared open space areas.
5. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum area of outdoor
common open space shall be provided as follows:
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
a. One hundred fifty (150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred
(500) or less square feet of living area. None of the units are below 500 sq. ft.
Lot 2, Block 1 – 33 units x 150 sq. ft. = 4,950 sq. ft.
Lot 2, Block 3 – 28 units x 150 sq. ft. = 4,200 sq. ft.
b. Two hundred fifty (250) square feet for each unit containing more than five
hundred (500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred (1,200)
square feet of living area. 115 units on Lot 2, Block 1 = 28,750 sq. ft. (or 0.66
acres); and 124 units on Lot 2, Block 3 = 31,000 sq. ft. (or 0.71 acres) of
common open space required.
Lot 2, Block 1 – 82 units x 250 sq. ft. = 20,500 sq. ft.
Lot 2, Block 3 – 96 units x 250 sq. ft. = 24,000 sq. ft.
c. Three hundred fifty (350) square feet for each unit containing more than one
thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. 24 units on Lot 2,
Block 1 = 8,400 sq. ft. (or 0.19 acre); and 8 units on Lot 2, Block 3 = 2,800
sq. ft. (or 0.06 acres) of common open space required.
Lot 2, Block 1 – 24 x 350 sq. ft. = 8,400 sq. ft.
Lot 2, Block 3 – 8 x 350 sq. ft. = 2,800 sq. ft.
A total of 37,150 33,850 sq. ft. (or 0.85 0.78 acres) is required for Lot 2,
Block 1; a total of 40,698.08 75,868 sq. ft. (or 0.93 1.74 acres) is provided,
exceeding the standard by 3,548.08 42,018 sq. ft. (or 0.08 0.96 acres).
A total of 33,800 31,000 sq. ft. (or 0.78 0.71 acres) is required for Lot 2,
Block 3; a total of 16,319.83 32,510 43,579 sq. ft. (or 0.37 0.75 1.00 acres) is
provided consisting of a 16,320 30,020 sq. ft. area including two (2) 5,000
sq. ft. open grassy areas and rooftop decks, 2,631 3,101 sq. ft. in the parking
area, and 13,559 sq. ft. between the building and adjacent street
buffers.adjacent to the parking lot – additional area is included along the
street but Staff is unable to determine what if any of this area qualifies as it
has to meet the minimum 20’ x 20’ dimensions and can’t be located in the
street buffer. If the use is approved, a common open space exhibit should be
submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application that
demonstrates compliance with the minimum standard. While the area in the
parking lot is not ideal, it meets the minimum dimensions to count toward the
open space requirement. The UDC (11-4-3-27C.8) states, “Unless otherwise
approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas
shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial street buffers unless separated
from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least 4 feet in height, with
breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access.” The Applicant
requests approval of this area to count toward the open space standard
through the CUP without a berm/barrier being installed. Note: The open
space provided does not meets the 10% requirement for alternative
compliance to be approved for a height exception for the building.
6. Common open space shall be not less than four hundred (400) square feet in area,
and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty (20) feet. All
common open space areas meet this standard.
7. In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of
the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
dwelling units. Open space for each of the multi-family buildings should be
provided in accord with this standard.
8. Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open
space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial street buffers unless
separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four (4) feet in
height, with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. TA
portion of the common open space area on Lot 2, Block 3 is behind the building
away from the collector and arterial street buffers, the remainder is adjacent to
the street buffers along Pine and Webb Ave.; the common area on Lot 2, Block 1
is adjacent to the arterial street buffer along Pine Ave. on each side of the
building – therefore, a berm or constructed barrier should be provided in accord
with this standard if the use is approved. The Applicant requests a berm or
barrier not be required on either of these lots through the conditional use
permit.
9. Buffer(s): One hundred (100) percent of the landscape buffer along collector
streets and fifty (50) percent of the landscape buffer along arterial streets that meet
the enhanced buffer requirements below may count towards the required baseline
open space. Note: The baseline requirement is not applicable as each of the multi-
family developments is less than 5 acres in size.
a. Enhanced landscaping as set forth in Article 11-3B, Landscaping
Requirements;
b. Multi-use pathways;
c. Enhanced amenities with social interaction characteristics;
d. Enhanced context with the surroundings.
D. Site development amenities
1. All multi-family developments shall provide for quality of life, open space and
recreation amenities to meet the particular needs of the residents as follows:
a. Quality of life.
(1) Clubhouse
(2) Fitness facilities
(3) Enclosed bike storage
(4) Public art such as a statue
(5) Dog park with waste station
(6) Commercial outdoor kitchen
(7) Fitness course
(8) Enclosed storage
b. Open space
(1) Community garden
(2) Ponds or water features
(3) Plaza
(4) Picnic area including tables, benches, landscaping and a structure for
shade.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
c. Recreation
(1) Pool
(2) Walking trails
(3) Children's play structures
(4) Sports courts
d. Multi-modal amenity standards.
(1) Bicycle repair station
(2) Park and ride lot
(3) Sheltered transit stop
(4) Charging stations for electric vehicles
2. The number of amenities shall depend on the size of multi-family development as
follows:
a. For multi-family developments with less than twenty (20) units, two (2)
amenities shall be provided from two (2) separate categories.
b. For multi-family development between twenty (20) and seventy-five (75)
units, three (3) amenities shall be provided, with one (1) from each category.
c. For multi-family development with seventy-five (75) units or more, four (4)
amenities shall be provided, with at least one (1) from each category.
d. For multi-family developments with more than one hundred (100) units, the
decision-making body shall require additional amenities commensurate to the
size of the proposed development.
Based on 139 units on Lot 2, Block 1, a minimum of five (5) amenities are
required with at least one (1) from each category; the decision-making body may
require more. The following amenities are proposed in each of the required
categories: Quality of Life – clubhouse, fitness facility, enclosed bike storage,
enclosed storage and commercial outdoor kitchens with built-in grills; Open
Space – plaza (private roof top amenity deck including tables, benches,
landscaping and shade structures) and a picnic area (including tables, benches,
landscaping and shade structures located on the private roof top amenity deck);
Recreation Activity Areas – swimming pool with changing facilities and restrooms
(located on the private roof top amenity deck and within building) and paved
sports courts, including bocce ball and (2) pickleball courts with appropriate
surfacing; and Multi-modal – enclosed bike storage within the building and
charging stations for electric vehicles within the building. The proposed amenities
far exceed the minimum standards.
Based on 132 units on Lot 2, Block 3, a minimum of five (5) amenities are
required with at least one (1) from each category; the decision-making body may
require more. The following amenities are proposed in each of the required
categories: Quality of Life – clubhouse, fitness facility, enclosed bike storage,
enclosed storage and commercial outdoor kitchens with built-in grills; Open
Space – plaza (private roof top amenity deck including tables, benches,
landscaping and shade structures) and a picnic area (including tables, benches,
landscaping and shade structures located on the private roof top amenity deck);
Recreation Activity Areas – swimming pool with changing facilities and restrooms
(located on the private roof top amenity deck and within building) and paved
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
sports courts, including bocce ball and (2) pickleball courts with appropriate
surfacing; and Multi-modal – enclosed bike storage within the building and
charging stations for electric vehicles within the building. The proposed amenities
far exceed the minimum standards.
3. The decision-making body shall be authorized to consider other improvements in
addition to those provided under this subsection D, provided that these
improvements provide a similar level of amenity.
E. Landscaping requirements
1. Development shall meet the minimum landscaping requirements in accord with
Chapter 3, "Regulations Applying To All Districts", of this Title. Street buffer
landscaping is required with development of the subdivision. The landscape plan
submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should comply
with the parking lot landscape standards in UDC 11-3B-8C.
2. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation. The
foundation landscaping shall meet the following minimum standards:
a. The landscaped area shall be at least three (3) feet wide.
b. For every three (3) linear feet of foundation, an evergreen shrub having a
minimum mature height of twenty-four (24) inches shall be planted.
c. Ground cover plants shall be planted in the remainder of the landscaped area.
The landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application should comply with the standards for parking lot landscaping in UDC
11-3B-8C.
F. Maintenance and ownership responsibilities. All multi-family developments shall
record legally binding documents that state the maintenance and ownership
responsibilities for the management of the development, including, but not limited to,
structures, parking, common areas, and other development features. A recorded copy
of the maintenance agreement should be submitted to the Planning Division prior to
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the building.
G. Police access under exigent circumstances. Multifamily developments with units that
take access via secured common corridors shall install and maintain a keyless entry
system, or suitable alternative, to provide police access to the common corridors under
exigent circumstances. The keyless entry system or alternative shall be subject to
review and approval by the Meridian Police Department. The developer should comply
with this standard.
Alternative compliance (ALT) is requested from the Director to UDC 11-4-3-27B to allow
studio units within multi-family developments to be developed without private, usable open
space.
The Applicant states it’s not feasible to provide private open space for studio units for the
following reasons: 1) it would increase the cost of these units, reducing their affordability; 2)
smaller units have a smaller outside façade on the building and addition balconies to each unit
would significantly clutter the exterior appearance of the buildings; 3) in order to meet he
area requirements for private open space, balconies would have to be as wide as the entire
unit itself – with an adjacent unit’s balcony abutting the studio’s space, the area wouldn’t be
private.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
As an alternative means of compliance, the Applicant proposes to provide private amenity
decks, which will be available to all residents in the buildings but will likely be used the most
by residents of studio units since they have the least space to host groups of visitors. The
decks will have seating areas, built-in grills/outdoor kitchens, planters, firepits, and shade
features that will create attractive spaces to host parties conveniently located for building
residents. Amenity decks with pools will also have welcoming spaces that include swimming
pools and sports courts for socializing and recreation. These rooftop and amenity docks are
not open to the public but rather are private open spaces for residents only.
The request qualifies for alternative compliance as the proposed design includes innovative
design features based on “new urbanism” that promote walkable and mixed-use
neighborhoods in accord with UDC 11-5B-5B.2. All of the vertically integrated and multi-
family buildings with studio units include “new urbanism” design features like public plazas
and green spaces, landscaped walkway connections between blocks, vertical and horizontal
mixing of office, commercial and residential uses, transit accessibility, and bike amenities.
Overall, the high degree of mixed use in Pine 43 will promote walkability and community
connection, reducing reliance on motor vehicles and creating an urban neighborhood feel.
The table below demonstrates the amount of amenity deck private space provided for resident
use compared to the amount of private open space that would otherwise be required for the
number of studio units in the building – the amount of amenity space available to the studio
unit residents exceeds what they would otherwise have in their unit.
The Director finds the proposed alternative means for compliance with the private usable
open space standards demonstrates the proposed alternative provides an equal or superior
means of meeting the intent and purpose of the regulation as required and approves the
requests. However, because Staff is not recommending approval of the proposed multi-family
developments, the Director has not acted on this request.
D. Design Standards Analysis
Comprehensive Plan Policy #2.02.02D – Apply appropriate design and construction standards to
infill development in order to reduce adverse impacts to existing development.
1. Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-19):
The site layout is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19. Staff has
reviewed these standards and finds the proposed concept plan demonstrates general
compliance with the required standards.
All structures in the development are required to comply with the design standards listed in
the Architectural Standards Manual. A Design Review application will be required to be
submitted and approved prior to submitting building permit applications.
2. Qualified Open Space & Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3G):
The minimum qualified open space and site amenity standards in UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-3G-4
do not apply to the townhome portion of the development as it is below 5 acres in size at 3.59
acres.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
The standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27C, D for common open space and site amenities apply
to the multi-family portion of the development.
3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B):
i. Landscape buffers along streets
A 10-foot wide buffer is required along N. Nola Rd., N. Webb Ave. south of Pine and
along N. Machine Ave., local streets; a 20-foot wide street buffer is required along E.
State Ave., a collector street; and a 25-foot wide street buffer is required along N. Locust
Grove Rd. and E. Pine Ave., both arterial streets, with landscaping in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.
The width of the proposed street buffers all meet or exceed the minimum standards.
Landscaping should be depicted on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat
application in accord with the required standards. Where the buffer is encumbered
by easements or other restrictions, the buffer area shall include a minimum five-foot
wide area outside the easement or restricted area for planting shrubs and trees, per
UDC 11-3B-7C.1b. All street landscape buffers should be depicted on the final plat
in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer easement, maintained by the
property owner, homeowner's association or business owners' association per UDC
11-3B-7C.2a.
ii. Parking lot landscaping
Parking lot landscaping is required to be provided within the development in accord with
the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C and should be depicted on the landscape plan
submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application for development
of each lot. Compliance with these standards will be reviewed with individual CZC
applications.
iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses
A 25-foot-wide landscape buffer is required on C-G and I-L zoned properties adjacent to
residential uses per UDC Tables 11-2B-3 and 11-2C-3. Landscaping within these buffers
is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-9C. Compliance with these
standards will be reviewed with individual CZC applications.
If a reduction in the width of such buffer is needed, a request should be submitted
prior to the City Council hearing for consideration by City Council at a public
hearing with notice to surrounding property owners per UDC 11-3B-9C.2. A
reduction to the buffer width shall not affect building setbacks; all structures shall be set
back from the property line a minimum of the buffer width required in the applicable
zoning district.
Although a buffer is not required on C-G zoned property adjacent to I-L zoned property,
the Applicant proposes a 10-foot wide buffer along the southern boundary of Lot 1,
Block 1 to buffer the proposed residential uses from the existing industrial uses to the
south. The buffer is proposed to be planted with columnar evergreen trees with a 30’
height and 10’ width at maturity (see exhibit in Section VII.L) and an 8’ tall masonry
wall is proposed on the shared property line as an added buffer.
iv. 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 per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
10C.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
There are many existing trees on the site, depicted on Sheet PP-02 of the plat and on
Sheet 14 of the landscape plan, that are proposed to be removed; a mitigation plan is
included on the landscape plan that notes the following:
Mitigation information should be included on the landscape plan submitted with the
final plat application.
v. Storm integration
Per UDC 11-3B-11, the applicant shall meet the intent to improve water quality and
provide a natural, effective form of flood and water pollution control through the
integration of vegetated, well designed stormwater filtration swales and other green
stormwater facilities into required landscape areas, where topography and hydrologic
features allow if part of the development.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
vi. Pathway landscaping
Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C
and will be reviewed for consistency with the standards with future development
applications (i.e. final plat and/or Certificate of Zoning Compliance).
4. Parking (UDC 11-3C):
Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards set forth in UDC
Table 11-3C-6 for residential uses and 11-3C-6B for non-residential uses.
Bicycle parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-
6G and be designed and located in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. A
minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space is required for every 25 proposed vehicle parking
spaces or portion thereof for all the proposed uses, except for the townhome dwelling units.
i. Residential parking analysis
Off-street parking is required to be provided for each townhome, multi-family apartment
and vertically integrated residential unit based on the total number of bedrooms per unit
as set forth in UDC Table 11-3C-6.
Townhomes:
• The number of bedrooms per unit are not identified in the plans. Compliance
with the parking standards for these units will be reviewed with the building
permit application.
Multi-family apartments:
• Lot 2, Block 1 – Based on (33) studio units, (34) 1-bedroom units, (48) 2-bedroom
units and (24) 3-bedroom units, a minimum of 266 spaces are required, including
guest parking, with 106 of those being covered; a total of 266 spaces are proposed
with 240 of those being covered podium/garage spaces in accord with the required
standard.
A total of 26 surface parking spaces and 45 podium (covered) spaces are provided
on the site; another 195 spaces are proposed to be utilized through a cross-parking
easement in the adjacent parking garage for the vertically integrated building on
Lot 1, Block 1, which is between 86 and 130 feet from the multi-family building.
This meets the shared use standards listed in UDC 11-3C-7 for parking standard
alternatives as there is convenient pedestrian connections between properties and
the properties/uses are within 1,000’ of each other. A recorded shared use
agreement is required to be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning
Compliance application for the shared vehicle and bicycle parking per the
standards listed in UDC 11-3C-7B.
Based on the number of vehicle spaces provided (i.e. 266), a minimum of 11
bicycle parking spaces are required. A total of three (3) bicycle parking spaces are
proposed on the site and additional parking will be provided through the cross-
parking easement on Lot 1, Block 1, which exceeds the minimum standard.
• Lot 2, Block 3 – Based on (28) studio units, (40) 1-bedroom units, (56) 2-bedroom
units, and (8) 3-bedroom units, a minimum of 237 spaces are required, including
guest parking, with 104 of those being covered; a total of 247 spaces are provided
with 104 of those being covered in a 1-story podium, which exceeds the minimum
standard by 10 spaces.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
Based on the number of vehicle spaces provided (i.e. 247), a minimum of 10
bicycle parking spaces are required; a total of 84 spaces are proposed (72 internal
and 12 external), which exceeds the minimum standard.
Vertically integrated:
• Parking provided with the vertically integrated residential development will be
reviewed for compliance with the parking standards at the time of Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application.
A 2-story parking podium is proposed.
ii. Nonresidential parking analysis
Non-residential uses in commercial districts are required to provide one (1) space for
every 500 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Parking will be reviewed for compliance with these
standards at the time of Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
The hotel, east vertically integrated residential and both restaurant buildings in Block 4
all site over underground parking garages.
5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan, Architectural Standards Manual):
Photos of the existing building on the HPC Buyer property and a conceptual perspective
drawing and elevations have been submitted for the future expansion, included below in
Section VII.I. Upgrades are planned to the existing building with the expansion to tie in with
the new portion(s). Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the multi-family portions of the
development, included below in Section VII.S, and the 3-story townhomes, included below in
Section VII.V. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the
Architectural Standards Manual.
Building perspectives for the overall development were submitted, included below in Section
VII.U. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
All fencing constructed on the site must comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7, as
applicable.
A revised fencing exhibit was submitted, included below in Section VII.M, that depicts
existing and proposed fencing; no new fencing is proposed. A 4-foot-tall chain link fence
exists at the southwest corner of the development around the existing school site and a 6-foot-
tall chainlink fence with barbed wire exists along the southern boundary of the site. A
vegetative screen or buffer is depicted at the southwest corners of the development area
adjacent to the industrial properties on the north and south sides of W. Pine Ave. and an 8-
foot tall masonry wall is proposed along the south side of Lot 1, Block 1 adjacent to existing
industrial uses.
7. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17):
Landscaped parkways are proposed along adjacent streets throughout the development and
must comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E. If 6-foot-wide parkways are
proposed, root barriers and Class II trees are required.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
E. Transportation Analysis
Comprehensive Plan Policy #3.01.01A – Evaluate comprehensive impacts of growth and consider
City Master Plans and Strategic Plans in all land use decisions (e.g., traffic impacts, school
enrollment, and parks).
All streets have been constructed except for the extension of N. Machine Ave. along the eastern
boundary of Block 1, which is required to be extended per the conditions in the ACHD report.
Additional right-of-way is required to be dedicated for improvements along the frontage of the
property adjacent to Nola Rd. as noted in the ACHD report.
ACHD’s planned improvements in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/Five Year Plan (FYP)
are as follows:
Because the original conceptual plan envisioned a greater proportion of regional trip capture (i.e.
more jobs and less residential generation), Staff was concerned the proposed shift in land use may
place additional demand on the surrounding transportation network beyond what was originally
anticipated. Therefore, an update to the previous TIS was requested.
In response, the traffic engineer submitted a technical memorandum to ACHD with additional
and updated analysis for the land use changes proposed with this application as requested by the
Planning Division. A summary comparison of net new trips between the 2017 TIS and the
currently proposed update is included; internal capture of trips between the proposed residential,
office and retail uses as well as pass-by trips for retail uses are factored in. Overall, the proposed
land uses, as the applicant calculated, are estimated to generate 33 additional net new vehicles
during the AM peak hours and 49 additional net new vehicles in the PM peak hours when
compared to the previous study. This appears to be a minor difference in overall traffic when
compared to the current peak hour volumes on Pine Ave. (1,591 PM peak hour 2-way volume);
and on Locust Grove Rd. (1,735 PM peak 2-way volume). This is within the current daily
fluctuations in traffic on the adjacent roadway. Additionally, the increase in traffic was not shown
to change or impact any of the previously approved conditions of approval for the development as
it relates to the transportation system. The study notes the mixture of land uses presented in the
proposed site plan offers a substantial opportunity for reduction in overall daily trips associated
with the development due to the internal capture of these trips (primarily commuting trips and
trips for services such as meals and neighborhood retail) within the development itself.
However, both Staff and ACHD have expressed concerns with the calculations and cannot
confidently agree with the method or results. Staff expressed concerns that the trip capture
rates used were high, and unlikely to be reflective of peak rush hour impacts where the
types of jobs and the type of employment in the area are not necessarily correlated.
Additionally that many of the daily trip attractors will still require vehicle trips, such as
grocery, schools, and as previously noted, jobs. See also ACHD comments below.
ACHD had the following comments on the technical memorandum:
• The memo utilized a pass-by capture rate of 47% in the AM, 41.5% in the PM, and
41.5% overall for Land Use 821. These rates are generally very high. It is typical to
utilize an AM pass-by trip capture of 0% for Land Use 821 since many stores are
not open during morning rush hour.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
• Based on proposed trip generation, there is no anchor supermarket for the retail
portion of the development. Supermarkets are usually the primary driver of pass-
by trips for a retail plaza, so the pass-by capture percent should be further reduced
accordingly.
• Internal trip capture calculations assume the entire development will function as
one site. This is not accurate, as many “internal” trips require vehicles to utilize
Pine Avenue or Webb Avenue and will impact operations of the Pine Avenue/Web
Avenue roundabout. The overall internal trip capture of 2,533 also utilizes a higher
internal trip capture rate than either the AM or PM peak hours, with no supporting
calculations.
Note: These comments are only a general overview and don’t constitute a full review by
ACHD.
The traffic engineer has responded to ACHD’s comments and plans to amend the memo to
include additional information. A memo was submitted from the traffic engineer, dated October
14, 2025, that includes additional and updated analysis for the proposed development. A
comparison of trip generation between the previously approved land uses south of State Ave.
from the approved 2017 TIS and the currently proposed land use changes are included in the
memo and shown below.
1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4):
Access is proposed via adjacent public streets [i.e. E. Pine Ave. (minor arterial street); E.
State Ave. (residential collector street west of Webb and local street east of Webb); N. Webb
Way (residential collector street); and N. Webb Ave., N. Nola Rd. and N. Machine Ave.
(local streets)] and internal driveways as shown on the concept plan and preliminary plat.
Where access to a local street is not available for non-residential properties, cross-
access/ingress-egress easements should be granted to adjoining properties either by
recorded easement or as a note on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2. Cross-
access/ingress-egress easements and driveways should be granted/constructed between
all adjoining lots in the subdivision and to the following abutting parcels: Parcel
#S1108244650 to the east of Block 2 and Parcel #S1108233810 (HPC Buyer property) to
the west of Block 4.
Access to the townhomes that front on E. State Ave. is proposed from an internal un-named
driveway.
This requirement is in accord with Comprehensive Plan policy #6.01.02B, which states,
Reduce the number of existing access points onto arterial streets by using methods such as
cross-access agreements, access management, and frontage/backage roads, and promoting
local and collector street connectivity.
City of Meridian | Department Report III. Staff Analysis
2. Multiuse Pathways (UDC 11-3A-5):
A 10-foot-wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed along the east side of N. Webb Way
in accord with the Pathways Master Plan. If located outside of the adjacent right-of-way, a
public pedestrian easement will need to be dedicated as required by the Park’s Dept.
The Park’s Dept. requests a public access easement is dedicated for a multi-use pathway (10-
foot-wide detached sidewalk) along the west side of N. Machine Ave. if located outside of the
adjacent ACHD right-of-way (an attached sidewalk may be considered as Machine Ave. isn’t
a through street); revise the plans accordingly.
3. Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-8):
A pedestrian connectivity plan showing pathways, sidewalks, crosswalks and bike lanes was
submitted with this application, included below in Section VII.O. As noted above, a 10-foot-
wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed along the east side of N. Webb Way, north of
E. Pine Ave. and required along the west side of N. Machine Ave. in accord with the
Pathways Master Plan (see Park’s Dept. comments below in Section IV.E.). The pedestrian
plan should be revised prior to the City Council hearing to reflect “N. Webb Ave.” south of
E. Pine Ave.; the Legend should reflect that the 10’ wide pathway is a detached pathway;
include the pathway along the west side of N. Machine Ave. as required by the Park’s Dept.;
and depict the existing detached sidewalk around the driveway/cul-de-sac off of E. Pine
adjacent to Block 1. The pedestrian plan has been revised as requested.
4. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17):
All sidewalks shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. A combination of
detached and attached sidewalks are proposed along streets as shown on the pedestrian plan
and other plans. Detached sidewalks are depicted along all collector and arterial streets as
required; attached sidewalks are proposed along the southern portion of N. Webb Ave., a
local street.
5. Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4):
No private streets are proposed. Prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance
application(s) for structures that don’t front on a public street, the Applicant should work with
the City’s addressing technician to determine if private streets are needed for addressing for
emergency way-finding purposes. Private streets, if required, are required to comply with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4.
6. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6):
Compliance with the subdivision design and improvements standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3
is required. The proposed plat appears to be in compliance with these standards.
F. Services Analysis
Comprehensive Plan policy 3.03.03G requires urban infrastructure be provided for all new
developments, including curb and gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities.
1. Waterways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-6):
The Snider Lateral is an open waterway that runs along the southern boundary of Blocks 1
and 3 at the south perimeter boundary of the subdivision. This waterway should be piped in
accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6.
Other smaller delivery ditches also cross the site that may be removed as proposed if they
don’t provide irrigation water to downstream users.
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
2. Pressurized Irrigation (UDC 11-3A-15):
Underground, pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot in the
development as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15.
3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18):
An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the city's
adopted standards, specifications and ordinances per UDC 11-3A-18. Design and
construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the city.
A Geotechnical Recommendation Report was submitted for this development, included in the
project file, which states the site is acceptable for the proposed development and includes
recommendations for design and construction of future phases of this project.
4. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21):
All utilities and street lights should be in accord with the City’s adopted standards,
specifications and ordinances.
CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Meridian Planning Division
Conditions of approval are not included for the multi-family developments and vertically
integrated residential project in Blocks 1 and 3 south of E. Pine Ave. because Staff is
recommending denial of those uses.
If the Commission and/or Council determines any or a portion of these uses is appropriate,
conditions and updated plans should be included as applicable, prior to approval. Because the
Commission was in support of the proposed multi-family developments and vertically integrated
residential project in Blocks 1 and 3, south of E. Pine Ave., Staff has included conditions of
approval for the applications associated with these requests.
1. Annexation & Zoning – HPC Buyer Property
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.
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 date of City Council approval of the Findings
of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision & Order for the Annexation request. The DA shall,
at minimum, incorporate the following provisions:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual
development plan, phasing plan and building elevations and perspectives included in
Section VII.I and the provisions contained herein.
b. Future development of the property shall comply with the dimensional standards for the
I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district listed in UDC Table 11-2C-3 and the development
standards in the Unified Development Code.
c. A property boundary adjustment application shall be submitted to the Planning Division
once the subject property is annexed that depicts property lines that follow the zoning
boundaries approved with the annexation.
d. The access points to adjacent streets depicted on the conceptual development plan shall
be evaluated with future development applications and are not approved with the concept
plan.
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
e. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance application shall be submitted prior to submittal of a
building permit application(s) for the expansion of the existing use that complies with all
UDC standards and the provisions listed herein.
f. A Design Review application shall be submitted concurrent with the Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application for the addition(s) to the existing building that
demonstrates compliance with the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards
Manual.
2. Development Agreement Modification – Pine 43 Mixed-Use
A property boundary adjustment application shall be submitted to the Planning
Division and finalized prior to City Council approval of the amended DA to transfer
ownership of the property and to create the parcel subject to the DA.
Staff recommends changes to the conceptual master plan prior to the City Council
hearing as follows:
• Include non-residential uses in place of the multi-family residential developments
and vertically integrated residential project in Blocks 1 and 3 on the south side of
E. Pine Ave. Neighborhood and community services should be considered as options
for alternate uses in accord with the development guidelines in the Comprehensive
Plan for functional integration of uses. Note: The Commission did not recommend
approval of these changes.
An amended Development Agreement (DA) shall be required as a provision of the MDA and
RZ applications. Prior to approval of the rezone ordinance, the amended DA shall be signed
by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six (6) months of City
Council’s approval of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the modification and
rezone.
The amended DA shall only apply to the portion of the development that lies south of E. State
Ave. included in the boundary of the updated conceptual development plan included in
Section VII.E. The portion of the development that lies north of E. State Ave. shall comply
with the provisions in the original DA (Pine 43 – Instrument #2018-000751).
The owner/developer shall comply with the following provisions associated with the
amended development agreement:
a. Future development shall substantially comply with the updated conceptual master plan,
preliminary plat, landscape plan, phasing plan, and conceptual building elevations and
perspectives and other applicable plans included in Section VII. Any significant changes
to the phasing plan shall be approved by the Director.
b. All future structures shall be designed in accord with the standards listed in the
Architectural Standards Manual. A Design Review application shall be submitted to the
Planning Division and approved prior to submittal of building permit application(s) that
demonstrates compliance with these standards.
c. The Director approved an Alternative Compliance request to UDC 11-4-3-41G, which
requires a minimum of 50 square feet of private, usable open space per unit in vertically
integrated residential buildings on Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 2, Block 2; and Lots 1 and 3,
Block 4. The approval allows studio units without such space, contingent upon the
provision of private amenity decks as shown in the exhibit in Section VII.R, as an
alternative means of compliance.
d. The public and quasi-public areas in the development shall be designed with community
supportive purpose, incorporate permanent design elements with features to promote
frequent use, and support amenities that foster a wide variety of interests ranging from
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
relaxation to play. These areas must be strategically integrated into the overall
development, interconnected with meaningful points of interest, prioritize pedestrian
infrastructure, be highly visible and accessible, and designed to enhance both the adjacent
uses and larger mixed-use area in accord with the holistic design principles in the
Comprehensive Plan (see Figures FB5, FC6 and FC7 in the Plan). The plans submitted
with future development applications shall demonstrate compliance with this
requirement.
e. Supportive and proportional outdoor public and/or quasi-public spaces and places
including, but not limited to, parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas, linear open space,
and schools are expected to be provided within the development in accord with the
principles for integration of uses in the Comprehensive Plan (see figures FB4, FC5, FC7
in the Plan). 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. The plans
submitted with future development applications shall demonstrate compliance with this
requirement.
f. The developer shall provide enhanced construction materials (i.e. high sound
transmission classification rated windows and walls) for sound mitigation as proposed for
the south side of the vertically integrated residential structure on Lot 1, Block 1 adjacent
to existing industrial uses to the south.
g. The Director approved an Alternative Compliance request to UDC Table 11-2B-3 to
increase the maximum building height in the C-G zoning district by 17%, from 65 feet to
76 feet, for the hotel on Lot 2, Block 4; the multi-family building on Lot 2, Block 3; and
the two vertically integrated residential buildings on Lots 1 and 3, Block 4, as shown in
the exhibit in Section VII.T. This approval is contingent on providing 10% of the
building square footage as open space, courtyards, patios, or other usable outdoor areas
for employees and/or patrons, exclusive of required setbacks and landscape buffers, in
accordance with UDC 11-2B-3A.3d, as shown in the open space exhibit in Section VII.N.
3. Preliminary Plat
a. The final plat(s) shall include the following revisions:
i. If 6-foot wide parkways are proposed along streets, root barriers shall be depicted on
the construction drawings that comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E.
ii. Depict a 10-foot-wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway on the construction
drawings along the west side of N. Machine Ave. as required by the Park’s Dept. (an
attached sidewalk may be considered as Machine Ave. isn’t a through street – work
with the Park’s Dept. on this). If located outside of the adjacent ACHD right-of-way,
a public pedestrian easement is required per the Park’s Dept. comments.
iii. Depict cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all adjoining lots in the
subdivision and to the following abutting parcels: Parcel #S1108244650 to the east of
Block 2 and Parcel #S1108233810 (HPC Buyer property) to the west of Block 4
either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat in accord with UDC 11-3A-
3A.2.
iv. All street landscape buffers shall be depicted on the plat in a common lot or on a
permanent dedicated buffer easement, maintained by the property owner,
homeowner’s association or business owners’ association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2.
Where street buffers are encumbered by easements or other restrictions, the buffer
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
area shall include a minimum 5-foot-wide area outside the easement or restricted area
for planting shrubs and trees per UDC 11-3B-7C.1b. This applies to Lot 3, Block 3.
v. Depict the irrigation easement for the Snider Lateral that runs along the southern
boundaries of Blocks 1 and 3.
b. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s) shall include the following
revisions:
i. If 6-foot-wide parkways are proposed along streets, root barriers and Class II trees
are required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17E.
ii. Depict a 10-foot-wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway along the west side of N.
Machine Ave. as required by the Park’s Dept. (an attached sidewalk may be
considered as Machine Ave. isn’t a through street – work with the Park’s Dept. on
this).
iii. Depict landscaping all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
12C.
iv. Include mitigation information on the plan for existing trees being removed from the
site that require mitigation per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-10C as noted on
the Sheet 14 of the landscape plan submitted with the preliminary plat.
v. Depict street buffer landscaping in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
7C. Where street buffers are encumbered by easements or other restrictions, the
buffer area shall include a minimum 5-foot-wide area outside the easement or
restricted area for planting shrubs and trees per UDC 11-3B-7C.1b.
c. All multi-use pathways/sidewalks located outside of the adjacent ACHD right-of-way
will require a separate public pedestrian easement as required by the Park’s Dept.
d. The Snider Lateral that runs along the southern boundary of Blocks 1 and 3 shall be piped
in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6; the construction drawings shall
reflect this requirement.
e. Extend N. Machine Ave. along the eastern boundary of Block 1 as proposed and required
by ACHD.
f. Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon recordation of the final plat for Pine
43 Animal Farm (FP-2022-0017) for the property located at the southeast corner of E.
Pine Ave. and N. Webb Ave. A final plat application shall not be submitted to the
Planning Division for any phase of development until the final plat is recorded.
g. Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon final approval of a property boundary
adjustment (PBA) application for the realignment of property lines between the HPC
Buyer and DRB Investments properties as shown on the preliminary plat. A final plat
application shall not be submitted to the Planning Division for any phase of development
until a PBA is finalized and a Record of Survey recorded that matches the configuration
of the properties shown on the preliminary plat.
h. Prior to submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application(s) for structures that
don’t front on a public street, the Applicant should work with the City’s addressing
technician to determine if private streets are needed for addressing for emergency way-
finding purposes. Private streets, if required, are required to comply with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3F-4.
i. Staff’s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from
compliance.
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
j. 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.
4. Conditional Use Permit – Height Exception (Vertically Integrated Residential Building
on Lot 2, Block 2)
a. The vertically integrated residential building on Lot 2, Block 2 is permitted to exceed the
65-foot maximum building height allowed in the C-G zoning district, with an approved
height of up to 87 feet, as shown in the exhibit in Section VII.T.
b. A conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2)
years unless otherwise approved by the city per UDC 11-5B-6F. 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.
For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the
city engineer within this two-year period. Upon written request and filing by the applicant
prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsection (F)(1) of this section, the
director may authorize a single extension of time to commence the use not to exceed one
(1) two-year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and
approved by the commission may be granted. With all extensions, the director or
commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of this
chapter.
5. Conditional Use Permit – Multi-family Development (Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 3)
a. Compliance with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-27 for Multi-family
Developments is required except for the standard requiring 80 square feet of private,
usable open space per unit. An alternative compliance request to UDC 11-4-3-27B.3 was
approved by the Director to allow no private open space for studio units, contingent upon
the provision of private amenity decks as shown in the exhibits in Section VII.R.
b. Compliance with the dimensional standards for the C-G zoning district in UDC Table 11-
2B-3 is required, except for the 65-foot maximum building height for the multi-family
building on Lot 2, Block 3. An Alternative Compliance request was approved by the
Director to permit a maximum height of 76 feet, contingent upon providing 10% of the
building square footage as open space, courtyards, patios, or other usable outdoor space
for the employees and/or patrons of the structure, exclusive of required setbacks and
landscape buffers, as shown in the open space exhibit in Section VII.N.
c. A revised site/landscape plan, as applicable, shall be submitted with the Certificate of
Zoning Compliance application(s) that includes the following:
i. Depict landscaping along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C;
include a calculations table that demonstrates compliance.
ii. Depict parking lot landscaping in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8C.
iii. Depict all on-site service areas, outdoor storage areas, waste storage, disposal
facilities, and transformer and utility vaults in an area not visible from a public street,
or fully screened from view from a public street in accord with UDC 11-4-3-27B.2.
iv. Depict the location of the property management office, maintenance storage area,
central mailbox location (including provisions for parcel mail that provide safe
pedestrian and/or vehicle access), and a directory and map of the development at an
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
entrance or convenient location for those entering the development in accord with
UDC 11-4-3-27B.7.
v. All street facing elevations shall have landscaping along their foundation that
complies with the minimum standards in UDC 11-4-3-27E.
Note: The common open space areas adjacent to the arterial street (i.e. Pine Ave.) buffer
are allowed to count toward the open space requirements as part of the conditional use
permit without being separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier as
allowed by UDC 11-4-3-27C.8.
d. A recorded copy of a shared use parking agreement shall be submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the multi-family structure on Lot 2,
Block 1 per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-7B to allow a portion of the required off-
street parking spaces to be provided in the parking garage for the vertically integrated
project on Lot 1, Block 1.
e. Off-street parking shall comply with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 and the
site plan submitted with this application, included in Section VII.Q.
f. All multi-family developments shall record legally binding documents that state the
maintenance and ownership responsibilities for the management of the development,
including, but not limited to, structures, parking, common areas, and other development
features as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-27F. A recorded copy of this agreement shall be
submitted prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the building(s).
g. Multifamily developments with units that take access via secured common corridors shall
install and maintain a keyless entry system, or suitable alternative, to provide police
access to the common corridors under exigent circumstances as set forth in UDC 11-4-3-
27G. The keyless entry system or alternative shall be subject to review and approval by
the Meridian Police Department.
h. A conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2)
years unless otherwise approved by the city per UDC 11-5B-6F. 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.
For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the
city engineer within this two-year period. Upon written request and filing by the applicant
prior to the termination of the period in accord with subsection (F)(1) of this section, the
director may authorize a single extension of time to commence the use not to exceed one
(1) two-year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and
approved by the commission may be granted. With all extensions, the director or
commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of this
chapter.
B. Meridian Public Works
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=397532&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
C. Meridian Fire Department
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=410927&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
City of Meridian | Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions
D. Meridian Police Department
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=397606&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
E. Meridian Park’s Department
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=397615&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
F. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=399592&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=406026&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
G. Irrigation Districts
No comments were submitted.
H. Central District Health Department
No comments were submitted.
I. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=398020&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=405980&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
J. West Ada School District (WASD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=379821&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit
y
K. Kuna School District
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=397862&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
L. Ada County Highway District (ACHD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=397539&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
M. Idaho Transportation Department (ITD)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=401663&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
ity
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
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 the proposed map amendment with I-L, C-G and R-15 zoning is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as noted above in Section III.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the
districts and the purpose statements of residential, commercial and industrial districts.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by
any political subdivision providing public services within the city including, but not limited
to, school districts; and
The Commission finds the map amendment shouldn’t result in an adverse impact upon the
delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City.
5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City as it reduces
County enclaves and promotes development in accord with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. 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 R-15 district is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan as noted in Section III.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the
district and the purpose statements of the residential district.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare.
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
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 map amendment shouldn’t result in an adverse impact upon the
delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City.
5. The annexation (as applicable) is in the best interest of city.
This finding is not applicable as the request is for a rezone, not annexation.
C. Alternative Compliance (UDC 11-5B-5E) – 11-4-3-41(G) Vertically Integrated Residential
Private Open Space for Studio Units on Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 2, Block 2; and Lots 1 and 3,
Block 4
Note: Staff is recommending denial of the proposed vertically integrated residential project on
Lot 1, Block 1; therefore, the following Findings analysis is not applicable to that lot.
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
The Director finds it is feasible for the Applicant to comply with the requirement but it would
increase the cost of the units, reducing their affordability; and in order to meet the area
requirements for private open space, balconies would have to be as wide as the unit itself,
which would abut adjacent studios’ space and wouldn’t be private, as noted by the Applicant.
2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the
requirements; and
The Director finds the provision of private amenity decks as an alternate means of
compliance with seating areas, built-in grills/outdoor kitchens, planters, firepits, and shade
features will create attractive spaces to host gatherings for studio residents and is an equal
or superior means for meeting the requirement.
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 materially detrimental to the public
welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties.
D. Alternative Compliance (UDC 11-5B-5E) – 11-4-3-27(B) Multi-family Private Open Space
for Studio Units on Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 3
Because Staff is recommending denial of the proposed multi-family developments, Findings
analysis is not included for the associated alternative compliance requests.
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
The Director finds it is feasible for the Applicant to comply with the requirement but it would
increase the cost of the units, reducing their affordability; and in order to meet the area
requirements for private open space, balconies would have to be as wide as the unit itself,
which would abut adjacent studios’ space and wouldn’t be private, as noted by the Applicant.
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the
requirements; and
The Director finds the provision of private amenity decks as an alternate means of
compliance with seating areas, built-in grills/outdoor kitchens, planters, firepits, and shade
features will create attractive spaces to host gatherings for studio residents and is an equal
or superior means for meeting the requirement.
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 materially detrimental to the public
welfare or impair the intended uses and character of surrounding properties.
E. Alternative Compliance (UDC 11-5B-5E) – 11-2B-3 Height Limit in C-G District for Multi-
family Building on Lot 2, Block 3, Hotel on Lot 2, Block 4, and Vertically Integrated
Residential Buildings on Lots 1 and 3, Block 4
An updated common open space exhibit needs to be submitted before Staff can determine if the
amount of open space provided meets the requirement for the Director to grant the height
exception. An updated common open space exhibit was submitted that demonstrates compliance
with the 10% common open space requirement for alternative compliance to be considered for
the proposed structures.
Because Staff is recommending denial of the multi-family development on Lot 2, Block 3, the
Director will not act on the alternative compliance request for that lot. If Council approves the
proposed multi-family development, a minimum of 10% of the building square footage must be
provided in open space, courtyards, patios or other usable outdoor space as noted in UDC 11-2B-
3A.3d in order for the Director to consider the alternative compliance request. As-is the proposed
open space does not meet the minimum requirement of usable outdoor space for alternative
compliance to be granted.
1. Strict adherence or application of the requirements are not feasible; or
The Director finds it is feasible for the Applicant to comply with the requirement.
2. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the
requirements; and
The Director finds the provision of 10+% usable outdoor space for the multi-family
residential, hotel and vertically integrated residential buildings where a height exception is
requested, provides an equal means for meeting the requirement as allowed by UDC 11-2B-
3A.3d.
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 is considering the request and has not yet decided on the matter finds the
alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the
intended uses and character of surrounding properties.
F. Conditional Use (UDC 11-5B-6E) – Multi-family Development on Lot 2, Block 1
Because Staff is recommending denial of the proposed change to the conceptual master plan that
includes the multi-family development, Findings analysis is not included for the associated
conditional use permit request.
The City Council shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional
and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all
dimensional standards of the C-G district.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in
accord with the requirements of this title.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will be harmonious with the
Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of the UDC.
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses
in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area.
The Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be
compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended
character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential
character of the same area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will not adversely affect other
properties in the vicinity if it complies with the imposed conditions of approval.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds the proposed use will be adequately served by the essential public
facilities and services listed.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The Commission finds the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will not involve activities or
processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any
persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or
historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds no natural, scenic or historic features of major importance exist on the
property.
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
G. Conditional Use (UDC 11-5B-6E) – Multi-family Development on Lot 2, Block 3
Because Staff is recommending denial of the proposed change to the conceptual master plan that
includes the multi-family development, Findings analysis is not included for the associated
conditional use permit request.
The City Council shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional
and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all
dimensional standards of the C-G district; however, the Applicant requests alternative
compliance to increase the building height from the maximum allowed 65 feet to 76 feet,
which has been approved by the Director.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in
accord with the requirements of this title.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will be harmonious with the
Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of the UDC.
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses
in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area.
The Commission finds the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be
compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended
character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential
character of the same area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will not adversely affect other
properties in the vicinity if it complies with the imposed conditions of approval.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds the proposed use will be adequately served by the essential public
facilities and services listed.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The Commission finds the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public
facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission finds the proposed multi-family development will not involve activities or
processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any
persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
City of Meridian | Department Report V. Findings
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or
historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds no natural, scenic or historic features of major importance exist on the
property.
H. Conditional Use (UDC 11-5B-6E) – Height Exception for Vertically Integrated Building on
Lot 2, Block 2
The City Council shall base its determination on the conditional use permit request upon the
following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional
and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The Commission finds the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all
the dimensional and development regulations in the C-G district. However, the Applicant is
requesting conditional use approval of an extended building height from the maximum
allowed in the district of 65 feet to 87 feet.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in
accord with the requirements of this title.
The Commission finds the proposed additional height will facilitate the mixed-use
development intended in the MU-C FLUM designation and in the C-G district. The added
height will also promote sustainability by allowing for urban density that can support the
commercial and office uses within the development.
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses
in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area.
The Commission finds the height and design of the building should be generally compatible
with other uses in the neighborhood and with the intended character of the general vicinity in
that a mix of uses are planned for this area with similar heights. Further, the height of the
building should not change the essential character of this area since it is aligned with the
comprehensive plan’s vision for urban density and mixed use in this area and on this site.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not
adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds the additional height of this building should not adversely affect other
properties in the vicinity as the building is similar in height to other buildings within the
development and is sufficiently set back from the proposed townhome uses.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds the proposed building with extended height will be served adequately
by the essential public facilities and services listed.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The Commission finds the proposed extended building height will not create excessive
additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic
welfare of the community.
City of Meridian | Department Report VI. Action
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission finds neither the additional height nor the use will involve activities or
processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any
persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or
historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds no natural, scenic or historic features of major importance exist on the
property.
I. 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 sewer and water are available at the site and will be adequate
to accommodate the proposed development. The Fire Dept. can provide service to this
development but it will be inadequate due to staffing and equipment.
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.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission finds there are no natural, scenic or historic features on the site.
ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed development plan per the provisions listed above in
Section IV with the exception of the two (2) multi-family residential developments and the
vertically integrated residential project located south of E. Pine Ave. in Blocks 1 and 3. Staff does
not support residential uses in this area, as the previously entitled commercial plan is considered
more beneficial to the City by providing needed employment opportunities and services for
City of Meridian | Department Report VI. Action
nearby residents, while also reducing vehicle trips and supporting trip capture. In addition, Staff
does not support the vertically integrated residential use on Lot 1, Block 1 as it is not compatible
with adjacent industrial uses and operations.
Staff recommends the Commission and City Council consider reducing the number of vertically
integrated residential units proposed north of E. Pine Ave. and requiring commercial/office uses
above the first floor to provide a more commensurate level of employment and services to
support nearby residents and reduce vehicle trips.
B. Commission:
The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on August 21, 2025. At the public
hearing, the Commission moved to continue the subject applications to September 18, 2025 in
order to address the following issues:
• The Applicant should provide analysis on the feasibility of setbacks for Lot 1, Block 4, north
to south away from State Ave.
• To obtain input from the Fire Dept. regarding staffing and equipment and whether they are
able to provide adequate service to address the safety needs of this site.
• Specific sound and environmental mitigation plans for the southern border of Lot 1, Block 1.
• Submit a revised overall open space exhibit as requested in the staff report.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing:
a. In favor: Deborah Nelson, Givens Pursley, representing the Applicant; Tammy deWeerd;
Ian Tompkins; Danielle Strollo, Givens Pursley; Dugan Henderson-Begg, Harvey
Performance Company (HPC)
b. In opposition:
c. Commenting: Garrett Schultz; Brian Farnsworth;
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application: Steven Taulbee, Fire Dept.
2. Key issue(s) of public testimony:
a. In favor of the proposed mix of uses but against the scale of the development as it’s way
out of proportion for this location and with the residential homes to the north; against the
proposed height of structures in the development and the transition to existing single-
family residential homes to the north, desire for a shadow study to be conducted to
determine the impact of the height of the proposed structures on adjacent single-family
homes. Concern pertaining to the amount of additional traffic the development will create
and the light and noise pollution impacts on the residents to the north.
b. Opinion the proposed mixed-use development provides benefits of walkability, viability
and long-term economic strength and contributes toward a diverse housing stock,
employment, supported uses of pedestrian infrastructure and high quality public spaces,
which align with Comprehensive Planning goals.
c. In favor of the proposed development, including building heights.
d. Question pertaining to if the proposed development would be part of the existing HOA –
the answer was no.
e. HPC is in support of the housing and hotel uses proposed that will help their employment
base as well as nearby commercial opportunities the development will provide.
3. Key issue(s) of discussion by Commission:
a. Proposed building heights and transitions to existing single-family residential homes to
the north and proposed townhome units within the development along State Ave.
b. Opinion the proposed development fits well in this area & will provide nice amenities.
c. Contemplated type of commercial uses in the vertically integrated residential building
specifically in Block 1.
City of Meridian | Department Report VI. Action
d. Transition to the south between residential and industrial uses and specific mitigation
plans in place for noise.
e. Transition in height from the residential homes to the north across State Ave. to the
proposed development to the south, specifically the vertically integrated residential
building on Lot 1, Block 4, to provider greater privacy to the residential lots to the north.
f. Not comfortable with the Fire Dept.’s response that they can’t adequately provide service
for the proposed development although the structures will be sprinklered.
g. Not in support of removing the condition that requires the Animal Farm plat to be
recorded prior to submittal of a final plat application for this development.
h. Although residential uses are proposed to increase in this area, so are commercial uses.
4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation:
a. In favor of residential uses south of Pine and requirement for shadow study to be
submitted prior to the Council hearing (see exhibits in Section EE below). Approval
includes requirement of enhanced construction materials for sound mitigation as offered
by the Applicant for the VI building on Lot 1, Block 1 (SEC), include conditions of
approval of CUP; and meet open space standards for MFR building at SWC of Pine and
Webb on Lot 2, Block 3 for an increase in building height.
5. Outstanding (s) for City Council:
a. None
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-2019-0004 H-2019-0112 H-2019-0149 H-2019-0142 H-
2019-0115 H-2020-0015 H-2020-0054 H-2020-0076 H-2020-0126 H-2021-0012 H-2021-
0017 H-2021-0043 H-2021-0049 H-2021-0069 H-2021-0077 H-2021-0097 H-2022-0040 H-
2022-0069 H-2022-0013 H-2023-0022 H-2023-0032 H-2023-0044 H-2023-0048 H-2017-
0011 H-2023-0073 H-2024-0008 H-2024-0038
Recent Area Conditional Use Permits: H-2020-0029 H-2021-0082 H-2017-0058 H-2022-
0013
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
B. Service Accessibility Report
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
C. Legal Description & Exhibit Map of Property Subject to Amended Development Agreement
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
D. Existing Conceptual Development Plan Included in Development Agreement (Inst. #2018-
000751) Proposed to be Modified
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
E. Proposed Conceptual Master Plan to be Included in Amended Development Agreement -
REVISED
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
F. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map (HPC Buyer Property)
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
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
G. Rezone 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
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
H. Proposed Zoning Exhibit
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
I. Conceptual Development Plan & Existing and Future Building Elevations – HPC Buyer
Property
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
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
J. Preliminary Plat (date: 8/19/2025)
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
K. Phasing Plan
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
L. Landscape Plan
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
M. Fencing Plan- REVISED
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
N. Overall Open Space Exhibit & Calculations – REVISED
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
O. Pedestrian Connectivity Plan - REVISED
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
P. Bicycle Parking Exhibit
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
Q. Site Plan – Multi-Family Development
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
R. Qualified Open Space & Site Amenity Exhibit – Multi-Family Development- REVISED
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
S. Conceptual Building Elevations – Multi-Family Development
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
T. Site Plan and Conceptual Building Elevations for Height Exceptions
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
U. Conceptual Building Perspectives and Renderings for Overall Development
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
Hotel
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
V. Conceptual Building Elevation for Townhomes
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
W. Floor Plans – Townhome and Multi-family Residential
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
X. Use Comparison/History Table
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
Y. Setback Exhibits - Updated
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
Z. Building Height/Stories, Roof Top Amenities and Podium Parking Table
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
AA. Legal Description & Exhibit Map for Property Subject to HPC Buyer Development
Agreement
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
BB. Public/Quasi-Public Exhibit & Renderings
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
CC. Site Plan for Lot 1, Block 4 – Vertically Integrated Residential
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
DD. Overall Public/Quasi-Public Open Space for Pine 43 Development
City of Meridian | Department Report VII. Exhibits
EE. Shadow Study
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
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.