HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-03-19
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, March 19, 2026 at 6:00 PM
MINUTES
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Commissioner Jessica Perreault
Commissioner Matthew Stoll
Commissioner Dom Gelsomino
Commissioner Jared Smith
Chairperson Maria Lorcher
ABSENT
Commissioner Brian Garrett
Commissioner Matthew Sandoval
ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted
CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved
Motion to approve made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner Gelsomino.
Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino,
Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher
1. Approve Minutes of the March 5, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\]
ACTION ITEMS
2. Public Hearing continued from February 19, 2026 for Syringa Crossing Mixed Use
Development (H-2025-0007) by Hawkins Companies, generally located at the
northwest and southwest corners of S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 and Amity Rd.
Continued to April 2, 2026
Applicant Requests Continuance
A. Request: Annexation of 62.43 acres of land with R-15 (9.76 acres), R-40 (18.01
acres) C-N (2.07 acres), C-C (9.12 acres) and C-G (23.47 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 8 building lots on 24.46 acres of land in the
proposed R-40 and C-C zoning districts.
C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development consisting of 322
residential apartment units on 16.35 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
Motion to continue to April 2, 2026 made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by Commissioner
Stoll.
Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino,
Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher
3. Public Hearing for North Meridian Fields (H-2026-0003) by Emily Mueller,
generally located at the southwest corner of SH-16 and Chinden Blvd.
Recommend Approval to City Council
A. Request: Annexation of 71.445 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N zoning districts.
Motion to recommend approval to City Council made by Commissioner Smith, Seconded by
Commissioner Gelsomino.
Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino,
Commissioner Smith, Chairperson Lorcher
ADJOURNMENT 6:54 P.M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To view upcoming Public Hearing Notices, visit https://apps.meridiancity.org/phnotices
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting March 19, 2026.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of March 19, 2026, was
called to order at 6:04 p.m. by Chairman Maria Lorcher.
Members Present: Commissioner Maria Lorcher, Commissioner Jared Smith,
Commissioner Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Dom Gelsomino and Commissioner
Matthew Stoll.
Members Absent: Commissioner Brian Garrett and Commissioner Matthew Sandoval.
Others Present: Tina Lomeli, Kurt Starman, Bill Parsons, Nick Napoli and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Brian Garrett X Jessica Perrault
Matthew Sandoval X Matthew Stoll
_X Dom Gelsomino X Jared Smith
X Maria Lorcher - Chairman
Lorcher: Okay. Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission for
March 19th, 2026. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The
Commissioners who are present for this meeting -- evening's meeting are at City Hall.
We also have staff from the City Attorney's and the City Clerk's Office, as well as the
City Planning Department. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that
you are here. You may observe the meeting, however, your ability to be seen on
screen and talk will be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting you
will be unmuted and, then, be able to comment. Please note we cannot take questions
until the public testimony portion. If you have a process question during the meeting,
please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will respond as quickly as possible.
If you simply want to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch the streaming on
the city's YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org/live. With that let us
begin with roll call. Madam Clerk.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Lorcher: The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. There are no
changes to tonight's agenda. Could I get a motion to adopt tonight's agenda, please.
Smith: So moved.
Stoll: Second.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adopt tonight's agenda. All those in favor
say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 2 of 17
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of the March 5, 2026 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
Lorcher: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda, which are to include -- to
approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning meeting from March 5th. Could I get a
motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented.
Smith: So moved.
Gelsomino: Seconded.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in
favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
Lorcher: At this time I would briefly like to explain the public hearing process. We will
open each item individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings
on how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and our Unified Development
Code. After staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward and
present their case and respond to staff's comments. They will have 15 minutes to do
so. After the applicant has finished we will open the floor to public testimony. Each
person will be called only once during public testimony. The clerk will call the names
individually of those who have signed up on our website in advance. You may come to
the microphones in Chambers or you will be unmuted on Zoom. Please state your
name and address for the record and you will have three minutes to address the
Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation for the meeting it
will be displayed on the screen and our clerk will help you run your presentation. If you
establish that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where others
from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf you will have up to ten minutes.
After all those who have signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any others
that may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on a topic you may come forward in
Chambers or if on Zoom press the raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you are
listening on a telephone, please, press star nine and wait for your name to be called. If
you are listening on multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please, be sure
to mute those extra devices, so we don't experience feedback and we can hear you
clearly. When you are finished if the Commission does not have questions for you you
will return to your seat in Chamber or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability
to speak. Please remember we will not call on you a second time. After all testimony
has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and
F
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 3 of 17
respond. When the applicant has finished responding to questions and concerns we
will close the public hearing and Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss
and, hopefully make final decisions or recommendations to city council as needed.
ACTION ITEMS
2. Public Hearing continued from February 19, 2026 for Syringa
Crossing Mixed Use Development (H-2025-0007) by Hawkins
Companies, generally located at the northwest and southwest
corners of S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 and Amity Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 62.43 acres of land with R-15 (9.76 acres),
R-40 (18.01 acres) C-N (2.07 acres), C-C (9.12 acres) and C-G
(23.47 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 8 building lots on 24.46
acres of land in the proposed R-40 and C-C zoning districts.
C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 322 residential apartment units on 16.35 acres of land
in the R-40 zoning district.
Lorcher: So, with that in mind let's open Item No. 2, H-2025-0007. Syringa Crossing
Mixed Used Development has requested a continuance. Madam Clerk, do we have a
date in mind for their continuance?
Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes. We have April 2nd.
Lorcher: Can I get a motion to accept the continuance for Syringa Crossing?
Smith: So moved.
Gelsomino: Second.
Stoll: Seconded.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to continue Syringa Crossing Mixed-Use
Development to April 2nd. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
3. Public Hearing for North Meridian Fields (H-2026-0003) by Emily
Mueller, generally located at the southwest corner of SH-16 and
Chinden Blvd.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 4 of 17
A. Request: Annexation of 71.445 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N
zoning districts.
Lorcher: The next item on the agenda is H-2026-0003 for North Meridian Fields at the
southwest corner of Highway 16 and Chinden for annexation and we will begin with the
staff report.
Napoli: Good evening, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. Next item on the
agenda is the annexation for the North Meridian Fields. The applicant requests
annexation of 71.4 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N zoning districts. The R-8 zoning
district would consist of 47.8 acres and the C-N zoning district would consist of 23.6
acres. The site is generally located at the southwest corner of State Highway 16 and
Chinden Boulevard and as shown on the screen the existing zoning is RUT in Ada
county and the FLUM designation is mixed-use interchange and medium density
residential. So, the Community Development and Public Works directors made a
determination for the subject development allowing for the annexation to move forward
without sewer services being readily available. Currently the city is installing a sewer
trunk line in McMillan Road that will ultimately serve this property once it's brought up
Star Road and, then, to the east. So, the applicant has some -- oh. The subject
property falls within the Fields Sub Area Plan at the northwest corner of the city's area
of impact boundary. In accord with the Fields Sub Area Plan the general design identity
of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is a modern rural, which applies to
housing, amenities, streetscape open space and commercial developments. A high
quality design is expected in this area. So, the applicant has submitted a conceptual
plan proposing single family detached residence on the southern two-thirds of the site
and a commercial development on the north -- the northern third. At this time detailed
development plans have not been provided. However, the applicant did provide a road
layout and open space layout for the larger residential portion of the development. This
provides some high level information into the integration of the residential and
commercial uses, as well as Cole Valley Christian School, which will be directly to the
south, which is already annexed into the city, but is awaiting to develop. In the
applicant's narrative they propose to exclude the following uses, including fuel -- fuel
sales facilities, convenience stores, storage facilities and vehicle washing facilities. As
the mixed-use interchange is intended for low traffic generating uses, staff recommends
further restricting the permitted uses by prohibiting drive-through establishments,
vertically integrated residential uses and retail stores exceeding 10,000 square feet.
The primary reason behind this is to not allow big -- big box retailers and drive-throughs
as they will generate significantly more traffic than the mixed-use interchange
designation is intended for. The applicant has depicted the primary access points for
the development coming off the future extension of North Owyhee Storm Avenue, a
collector roadway, which is currently almost stubbed to this property line. There is a
little bit of a road trust that was put up to get it fully to the property line, but it will be
extended in the future and will connect to the south and this extension will lead to a
future signaling with -- at Chinden Boulevard. In addition, the applicant is proposing to
construct two east-west collectors that would connect North Ersatz Road -- or North
Ersatz Place with Owyhee Storm Avenue in the future and that would be collector one
F
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 5 of 17
and collector two would be down here. So, many of the details that would typically be
required with an annexation have not been provided, which is why staff is requiring a
development agreement modification prior to any future applications or development
being submitted. The future DA mod would be required to provide details from the Field
Sub Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan and UDC, as well as updating the overall concept
plan, so we can see how the mixed-use area really integrates with one another with the
residential and the future commercial. So, staff has had conversations with the
applicant about this and they will be proposing some changes to the development
agreement provisions for you guys tonight with their presentation. There is a few things
that they are not in agreement with staff on, so we will discuss that after their
presentation. So, staff is recommending approval with a development agreement and
we have not received any written testimony at this time and I will stand for any
questions and I did want to say they are building -- they did submit conceptual building
elevations for you guys to look at. It's more conceptual at this point, than, provide super
in-depth information, but that would be something that we would hope to get with future
development agreement modification as well and here are the DA provisions that are in
the staff report. And now I will stand for questions.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Since this will be a DA mod it typically doesn't come before Planning and
Zoning? It will go straight to Council or --
Napoli: Madam Chair, Commissioner -- yeah. Commissioner Perreault. Yes, the future
development agreement modification would go straight to City Council. So, it wouldn't
be -- right now they are just requesting annexation. So, they are getting their DA, but in
the -- in the DA that we created it does require them to come back with a DA mod,
which would only be required to go in front of City Council. However, they are going to
have to plat the property as well and the preliminary plat will be seen by Commission as
well. So, those could be potentially done concurrently and that would be I think the
preference from staff. Correct.
Lorcher: Would the applicant like to come forward? Thank you.
Mueller: All right. Good evening, Madam Chair and Commissioners. My name is Emily
Mueller. 839 South Bridgeway Place in Eagle. I represent the applicant team, 5B
Holdings, who is the owner of the property and Idaho Holdings with -- who submitted the
application. We want to first thank staff for their review of this working with us. As Nick
alluded, we have been in conversations and will continue to be in conversations up until
the City Council hearing to discuss some of the finer points of those staff conditions that
I will address, but do want to thank them for their discussion with us and continue
discussion. So, as staff said this property is 70 acres southwest of the future Highway
16 intersection with Chinden-20/26. It is north of the Cole Valley future school site. We
have been in discussions with them about their timing and like them we will be
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 6 of 17
dependent on a new sewer line that is being constructed. The sewer lift station is
further west on McMillan and Can-Ada and the city's project is bringing the sewer -- the
main line and the first line to Star Road and, then, at that point sewer will really be
available for a developer to come and get it and there is a couple different ways this
property could sewer. One is to go up through Star Road and over. I think that's in the
city's master plan or we could work with the school to -- to sewer that way as well. So,
water is available to the east. So, as -- as sewer isn't available at the current moment
we would wait to develop until -- I believe that sewer should be in Star and McMillan -- I
think is scheduled for the end of 2026. So, they are working fast and we have been
keeping track of -- of that construction update. The city of Star is to the north of this
project. The city of Star also has designated their property to the north of this for largely
commercial use and, then, some higher density residential up here. So, that -- it's
consistent with, you know, Star's boundaries to the north and -- and, then, the only other
development -- pertinent development in the area is this -- I believe it's about ten acres
-- is a storage facility that was developed in the county and so that is in the county and
when that developed they constructed their portion of the Owyhee Storm Boulevard,
which will, per its name, go down towards Owyhee High School and will border this site
to the west. So, as part of staff's conditions we would build our share of that collector
road, plus 12, to make it a functional street -- streetway. And to that point with traffic we
would be submitting a traffic impact study once we come forward with -- with future
applications. So, the applications tonight are just for annexation and zoning and initial
zoning with a development agreement and future applications would be for a preliminary
plat, any CUPs that we think are appropriate, a development agreement modification to
the extent that it's required. This property is included in the City of Meridian Fields
Specific Area Plan that was adopted I believe in 2021. So, the city did recently look at
this. It is four square miles of really kind of this last area of Meridian. That sewer lift
station is going to bring this online and this is just really a great area of Meridian that we
are excited to be a part of. That specific area plan and the future land use map
designate for mixed-use interchange and medium density residential. The annexation is
appropriate here, because all owners have consented to the annexation and the
property is contiguous to city limits within the city area of impact and services will be
provided in a reasonable amount of time. As staff presented, the zoning that we are
requesting is commercial zoning along Chinden. Twenty-three acres of neighborhood
business and commercial use and, then, 47 acres of medium density residential. Both
of those are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the future land use map
Fields Specific Area Plan. The commercial is approximately situated near -- you know,
off of Highway 20/26 near Highway 16 and the future collector roadway. There will be a
plan for a stoplight at Owyhee Storm Boulevard and Chinden and so, again, in -- in
conjunction with Star's development to the north, which is commercial, fits well within --
we are not in a vacuum here, so -- and, then, the residential is also an appropriate zone
and helps meet some of the Comprehensive Plan guides of developing housing near
schools, near commercial use and, yeah, providing some of those housing needs. As
staff said, we have provided some design guidelines that we believe meet the Fields
Specific Area Plan to provide somewhat of a rural architectural theme, more modern
farmhouse styles, with, yeah, those clean architectural lines, shed roofs, gable roofs
and the materials that we feel are consistent with that design architectural standard.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 7 of 17
Additionally we have provided the pathways that -- that match the Comprehensive Plan
and the Fields Specific Area Plan for connectivity amongst the commercial-residential
uses and, then, down to the school. In the staff report staff also noted that, yeah, there
needs to be -- with future preliminary plats, connectivity and emphasis on those
pedestrian pathways, which we a hundred percent agree with. As staff noted we are in
agreement with the majority of their conditions of approval, but would ask to change
three of them. The first is to A-C. As staff noted we looked at the Institute of Traffic
Engineers -- the ITE Traffic Manual and looked at what are those most intensive traffic
uses that staff and the Comprehensive Plan want to avoid in this area and those that we
saw were gas stations, convenience stores and car washes and some of those other
traffic generating uses. Drive-through establishments are a conditional use, so if we
ever wanted to propose a drive-through we would need to come with a conditional use
permit and meet the standards of a conditional use permit application. Mark Bottles and
myself agree that drive -- not all drive-through uses are the same. There are some
drive-through uses that are traditionally very high traffic and, then, there are some that
are not and post-COVID the market has really demanded that of even non-traditionally
thought of drive-through uses. So, you know, your Chipotle or your Costa Vida, things
like -- of that nature. So, we want to -- we -- we request that drive-through
establishments not be categorically excluded at this time and would appreciate the
opportunity to -- in the future, if we feel there is a use and a specific user and concept
plan that match that, could bring that forward with a conditional use permit in the future.
Similar reasoning also applies to this second change that we are requesting, which is to
strike the requirement that retail commercial uses be restricted to building sizes of ten
thousand square feet. There is a broad array of retail uses, broad array of traffic
generation and so -- and -- and really looking at the traffic generation model, smaller
footprints, smaller buildings, smaller retail uses actually generate more traffic in the
aggregate than a single -- a single larger establishment. So, again, we just disagree I
guess with the analysis that this is categorically going to bring more traffic. Really, any
kind of strip retail or smaller retail here per the traffic manual generates almost twice the
traffic per square foot as a larger commercial development. So, in that regard we -- we
hear the staff, we have read, you know, the comp plan and -- and we just disagree with
the ultimate analysis with that. And, then, finally -- and this is a point that we have
talked with staff at length about -- is we would recommend and -- and we would like to
say that we don't need a development agreement modification moving forward. We
have provided conceptual building renderings, materials and on top of that staff has also
provided additional details about what needs to be incorporated into future preliminary
plats -- pathway considerations, those sorts of things that we would like that to just be
given the direction to us now, whatever we have proposed that doesn't match what they
are looking for. Development agreement modifications are not entitled rights and so we
don't want to be in a situation that we don't have direction at the point of annexation.
So, we would prefer to have that direction now and -- and accordingly we would like to
come back with preliminary plats and with any direction that staff has at this point, but
not be required to go through a more subjective development agreement modification
process. That -- that -- yeah -- would be more subjective in the future. So, we believe
that what we have submitted complies with the Comprehensive Plan and would just ask
10
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 8 of 17
staff for more direction, rather than waiting for that direction down the road. So, with
that I will stand for any questions and we appreciate your time.
Lorcher: I have a question for staff. Bill, we had talked about identifying drive-throughs
in small, medium and large for a simplistic way of putting it, where are we in that
process?
Parsons: Yeah. Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, those rules are in effect
now. So, we do have our Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 drive-throughs and, then, on Tuesday
night the ordinance was approved to establish the new process, which requires Tier 2 to
come to you and Tier 3 to go to City Council -- or to -- they go to you as a
recommending body, but, then, they go on the City Council for approval, so -- and, then,
again, Tier 1 would only require conditional use permit if it was next to a residential use.
So, it could be a permitted use in -- in a C-N zone. If it -- and, again, those were banks,
pharmacies, kind of those low generating traffic uses that Emily was speaking to and
where she said she -- they agree that not all drive-throughs are the same and we
thought the same thing, that's why we changed our code.
Lorcher: So, Emily, you are aware of those changes; correct?
Mueller: Madam Chair, no, I'm not. I'm sorry, that was adopted on --
Lorcher: It's been in discussion for a while, but you are saying City Council actually
adopted it just this past Tuesday?
Parsons: Madam Chair, maybe some clarification. So, the Tier 1, Tier 2 -- Tier 2, Tier 3
changes were approved in October.
Lorcher: Okay.
Parsons: Just aren't currently reflected in the code and, then, the process changes, the
-- the -- the process that was chosen to how they would be heard, whether they were
administrative or conditional use by P&Z or Council, that was approved on Tuesday
night. So, basically, yes, the new -- the -- the new definitions for drive-throughs, the
new processes for drive-throughs have been adopted and are in effect.
Lorcher: Okay. So --
Parsons: So, this project -- yeah.
Lorcher: -- since October drycleaners and banks are considered Tier 1, a coffee shop
and small -- smaller brand drive-throughs would be Tier 2 and, then, like your In-N-Outs
and Raising Cane's would be like Tier 3 and what that means for you is that if you have
a client who wants those things, it used to all come through Planning and Zoning and
Tier 1 gets director approval, Tier 2 and Tier 3 come through Planning and Zoning, but
the ultimate decision for like the big drive-throughs, the really high end brands -- high
F-11
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 9 of 17
volume brands would just go to Council; right? So, I guess the reason I'm -- I'm saying
that is that for the drive-through establishments, for your condition of approval for C, we
would -- we would just have to kind of see what they are. We will see what the -- the
Commissioners say about that, but before we go into public testimony does anybody
have any questions for the applicant at this time?
Smith: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: I -- I have kind of a follow-on question of that for -- for staff specifically regarding,
you know, the -- the tier that is most concerned -- because on the one hand, obviously, I
don't think it would make sense to have it now here and so everything -- would it make
sense to restrict to a certain level, but would you be concerned with, for example, Tier 1
not having C -- like Commission level CUP approval and only going to director absent
some sort of requirement for a DA mod?
Napoli: Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith, that's a good question. No. And because
this is pretty fresh, if I would to go back and write it I would probably allow for Tier 1's --
Smith: Okay.
Napoli: -- because -- I can read it to you. Drive-through -- so Tier 1 would be a drive-
through associated with a financial institution, automated teller machine, so an ATM,
pharmacy, laundry, dry cleaning, restaurants limited to online or mobile ordering only.
So, like a pick-up window that's online ordering or other comparable uses as determined
by the director. Typically those would be a lot lower traffic generating than Tier 2 or Tier
3, which would be pretty much any restaurant that actually has an ordering and a pick-
up window. So, I think that that would be something staff would be comfortable with
would be allowing for Tier 1's, but limiting Tier 2's and Tier 3's.
Lorcher: And just to follow up again, Nick. So, mixed-use interchange, because of
Highway 16's impact at that -- at that -- really at the junction of where your property
stands, is Tier 2 even allowed in a mixed-use interchange?
Napoli: Madam Chair. So, mixed-use interchange is a -- is a FLUM, so future land use
map designation --
Lorcher: Right.
Napoli: -- but it's not a zoning. So, the zoning is what would be tied to what allows
drive-through establishments. So, no, I mean in -- in talking with the team and in my
analysis, you know, mixed-use interchange is meant for really low traffic generating
uses, really not even retail uses, it's more for employment where you actually have trip
capture, where people, you know, go stay for the day and, then, they will leave and,
then, the -- really the intent behind that is to limit State Highway 16 and Chinden, as we
12
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 10 of 17
all know, once it actually is in operation that's going to be a very busy interchange and
intersection and trying to push those -- the traffic away from those areas with more of
the regional retail users, which we do have plans for in the Fields District is really the
intent behind that. So, we don't get big regional draw commercial users that's going to
generate, you know, thousands of trips a day where like some big boxes do. So, that's
really the intent in the mixed-use interchange is to find uses that are neighborhood
serving, because it does allow for some low -- you know, some low density residential or
medium to low density residential. But finding the balance between what kind of trip
generation and with what we have right now and I don't -- and I know the applicant -- I
have talked with the applicant, they don't necessarily have an exact plan for the
commercial at this time and that's why they don't have, you know, building shown or
drive aisles. So, without having that information it's really hard for me to say, yeah, this
looks like it would be something that would be acceptable, because I have -- I don't
have any square footages or types of uses to gauge a, you know, traffic generation off
of. I can't have that conversation with ACHD, because they don't even know what the
uses are going to be and what the square footages are. So, that's kind of the -- the
difficulty or the challenge with this.
Lorcher: Got you.
Stoll: Madam --
Perreault: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Stoll first, please.
Stoll: So, Nick, following up on your point that you don't have the information, is that
why you are requiring a development agreement modification that you need additional
information?
Napoli: Madam Chair, Commissioner Stoll, that is correct. That's really one of the
primary drivers is, you know -- especially in I would say with the Commission and with
Council they definitely -- more details up front is definitely preferred. So, we can -- and
from staff's perspective as well. So, then, we can ensure something is consistent with
what was seen. So, we can ensure that the concept plan and what is actually being
built is the same or generally can -- or substantially consistent as determined by the
director. So, you know, obviously sometimes square footages will change, you know,
you will go up 2,000 or go down 2,000 square feet on a commercial building, that we
would consider that substantially consistent. We would look at the larger area and find
that, but that was correct, you -- you are spot on. Getting that information is why we
want the development agreement modification, as well as seeing the integration with the
residential uses to the south, because with Cole Valley Christian School to the south,
you know, it's K through 12, if I'm not mistaken. You know, there is going to be high
school age students that are going to want to go on their lunches or after school go
maybe get something to drink, something to eat and it's pretty common. We see that in
F13]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 11 of 17
the city throughout. So, seeing how that integration and all that works is a primary
driver behind that development agreement modification. That's correct.
Stoll: Thank you.
Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good evening. So, can you share with us what
the purpose would be to annex now, but not have the details in -- in your concept plan
and, obviously, you will start paying city taxes and whatnot, but -- but you are quite a
ways out from actually having a full plan developed?
Mueller: Madam Chair, Commissioner Perreault, yes, we -- really this is an appropriate
-- this is an appropriate time to annex. There are -- the city services will be there soon.
The school is, you know, going to get going and we -- you know, at this time we think
that -- I guess what I -- how I would answer that is we agree with the Comprehensive
Plan. We are not asking for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and we agree
with, you know, all the guidelines pretty much that they are giving in terms of integration,
in terms of how it fronts that, but the uses -- yet we -- we don't have an exact user yet,
but I think that we really can -- you know, once rooftops get there I think we need to see
rooftops and see plans come in place until those commercial users -- even office
development, all those kinds of things will come in. So, I think really from a developer's
perspective having a plan in place really is a catalyst, then, to get those users in and --
and -- and -- and -- which is why we will agree to different design guidelines and those
sorts of things right now.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: So, I remember when The Fields Area Plan was being developed and put
together and the intention of it was for it to look different than other parts of Meridian,
have a different feel, a little bit more of a neighborhood feel rather than a -- kind of a
bigger commercial feel and also to have a real variety of housing types and -- and just
having the R-8 I don't -- I don't think that really meets sort of the intention. So, I'm
curious if the developer has considered or looked at options of giving more variety of
housing.
Mueller: Madam Chair, Commissioner, thank you. The R-8 does allow for, obviously, a
range of single family product types. So, I believe the single family lot minimum is 40
feet of street frontage and the developers -- the different -- so, we won't develop it
ourselves. We work with a number of different local and national home builders, really a
wide range, and it -- it really becomes market driven in terms of what product type they
want to develop. You know, not a lot of home builders are wanting to do townhomes
right now, because, really, the -- the cost to build townhomes is really the same as a
single family home, but the value in a single family home detached is there much longer
14
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 12 of 17
and is much greater for those homeowners and, you know, sometimes you might think
that more single family developers want to do just -- you know, would do the minimum --
would do 40 feet, but a lot of developers right now are wanting to do at least 60 feet
wide lots, but that's really what this market is and -- and so it just gives some flexibility. I
think there is flexibility within the R-8 zone, while also staying within the Comprehensive
Plan and, yeah, we -- you know, it's a big -- it's a big area. There is -- it's four square
miles. There is a lot of other areas designated for medium high density, designated for
apartments all throughout it. So, this really is that single family and the R-8 zone is kind
of the perfect zone to allow for that flexibility in this specific type of product, which would
be a detached single family house.
Smith: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Yeah. I would appreciate some -- some clarity. I think you said something
earlier -- specifically looking at like -- looking at A-F -- kind of this last section that is kind
of intentional with kind of the conversation that I think we are having, which is on one
hand you are asking kind of for some more guidance from staff and -- and more
direction, rather than waiting until down the line. On the other hand, it seems like the
staff's kind of trying to give you that by saying, hey, here are some areas that we would
restrict, you know, we would want to see restricted. Here are some areas that we think
don't make sense here. Here is some guidance of, you know, as you are looking for
different customers. Help -- help me understand how we square that circle. Like on
one hand you are kind of asking for some more guidance is -- yeah, I guess I'm just --
I'm -- I'm struggling to understand what about the -- the guidance itself, is -- is it that it's
too restrictive? Is it that it's -- maybe not the guidance you are hoping for -- if you could
help me.
Mueller: Thank you, Madam Chair and Commissioner Smith. Yes, so with regard to
those uses, like the actual uses, that is guidance from staff that we expressly disagree
with, those two uses and -- and the -- the CUP with the drive-through -- like, so that's a
use; right? And so, for example, we -- yeah, we think that there should be some drive-
through uses allowed here. So, to that extent we -- we disagree with that guidance.
The staff report -- I think with regard to the design standards -- and, I'm sorry, the staff
report -- this doesn't have pages on it, but it's C, design standard analysis, C-A -- I think
-- and that's in bold. To my understanding and -- and staff can -- I don't want to speak
for them, but in some of our conversations this is some of the design guidelines and --
like when, you know, staff said, hey, well, with your commercial we don't have your
layout, so we don't know if you are going to include a plaza area between the
commercial and the residential. So, that's the first bullet point. So, we need a DA mod
so that we can make sure you include a plaza area. My suggestion is how about we put
that in the development agreement now that says in your commercial you will include a
plaza area between the commercial and residential. That's an example.
15
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 13 of 17
Lorcher: Any other questions for the applicant before we take public testimony? Okay.
I think we are good. Thank you.
Mueller: Thank you.
Lorcher: Madam Clerk, do we have anybody in advance to sign up to testify?
Lomeli: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have Darcy Hart.
Lorcher: Hi. If you can state your name and address for the record that would be great.
Hart: Sure can. Good evening. For the record, Darcy Hart. P.O. Box 1304, Eagle. My
partners and I own the parcel to the north at 7015 Chinden. We have the storage
facility.
Lorcher: Oh. Okay. Yeah.
Hart: We were so excited to see this meeting invitation for the neighborhood meeting.
Lorcher: Uh-huh.
Hart: However, it was a little underwhelming to say the least. The one page letter
contained no project description or site plan. We also noted that there was no
preliminary plat or landscaping -- nothing to describe the project itself and we now
understand why that is. There has been no traffic impact study, no actual preliminary
plat submitted, nothing substantial for review. We also noted that 48 acres with an R-8
zoning allows for 384 single family residences. Now, that's not much of a small ask in
my opinion. Without a traffic impact study how can they ask for modifications to any
conditions? While my team and I are very excited to see the growth in the area, we
benefit from it as well. Two things can be true at the same time. Rezone and
annexation should be the result of a materially complete heard and approved
application by all agencies involved. If the applicant disagrees with the analysis they
need to provide their own for review. This evening the applicant is requesting your
approval for the maximum allowable residential density, while giving nothing of
substance for any of you to review. They seek the valuation of an R-8 rezone on this
parcel with the possibility of nearly 400 single family homes, with no preliminary plat. I
must point out also the applicant is listed as a stakeholder for the remitting -- the
Meridian Fields Sub Area Plan and sat in years ago to assist and give input while this
area was designed. I think we could do better. While there is a determination by the
Meridian Public Works the parcel can be annexed today, the trunk line sewer
connection is roughly a year or more away. This gives the applicant plenty of time to
prepare a preliminary plat, a landscaping plan and conduct a traffic impact study for
review. Further, when you look at the exhibit in the packet, Exhibit D, showing the
concept plan, it depicts a proposed road design and amenity and a park, but without a
preliminary plat for ACHD to review it's I guess at its very best. My partners and I are
humbly requesting the application be held pending the completion of the required items,
16
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 14 of 17
as they are attempting to forego them tonight. Once those requirements are met this
application can be heard as process dictates. Thank you for your time.
Lorcher: Thank you. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody else to testify?
Lomeli: Madam Chair, no one else has signed up and nobody is in attendance online.
Lorcher: Is there anybody else in Chambers that would like to speak? You guys good?
Would the applicant like to come forward and address Ms. Hart's concerns.
Mueller: Thank you, Madam Chair and thank you, Commissioners. I understand -- I
just wanted to address the density. I'm not exactly sure where Ms. Hart is getting 400
units. Maybe she is concerned -- maybe she is confusing R-8 with saying that that
allows eight dwelling units to the acre. That's not how the City of Meridian code works.
It's not like R-8 means eight dwelling units to the acre. It's a dimensional standard. So,
I -- I can just say that to the extent that that's -- I don't know if she did a site layout to
see with all the dimensional standards how that would work, but that would be eight
dwelling units to the acre, which I don't know how you would make that work with single
family homes. So, that was really the only thing. Again, we will do a traffic impact study
and that will be part of a preliminary plat application and any commercial uses. So,
definitely we will be doing that and we will be abiding by any kind of ACHD or ITD
requirements at the time. Thank you.
Lorcher: Thanks. May I get a motion to close the public hearing?
Smith: So moved.
Stoll: Second.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for North Meridian
Fields. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Lorcher: I think with the -- we are all getting used to the Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 of the
drive-through uses, because it's kind of new language for us. To completely eliminate
drive-through establishments on number 4-A and C, I agree with the applicant on that,
but maybe it would be allowed drive-through establishments Tier 1 and staff had
indicated that that might be allowable. For mixed-use interchanges -- and considering I
-- I live in one as well for Highway 16, to be able to have a ten thousand square foot
store in a possible very congested area I think will be challenging and that's why the DA
modification for at least the commercial part of it, along with your preliminary plat, to me
would be essential. You want clarification, but the city needs transparency and so by
providing the DA modification, then, there is no surprises and because not only do you
disagree, but we also have challenges not only with this Commission, but with City
Council when it comes to intended uses for any zone or use on the FLUM, like mixed-
17
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 15 of 17
use interchanges, it can be interpreted in other ways. It may be your interpretation that
we are following the rules, but the reason why we manage each application individually
is because the corner of Franklin and Black Cat is a lot different than the corner of
Chinden and McDermott, even though they may be zoned the same way, but their
intended uses are going to be different and the fact that your application right now is just
two colors and very very vague leaves me hesitant to approve these conditions of
approval, because -- of yours, because I think there needs to be more information,
especially going to Council and I think annexing you into the city is the right choice if this
is the right time, even though that substation is not available, that's your choice. That's
fine. But through the DA modification and the preliminary plat and any other conditional
use permits that we might need for the commercial part of it -- and including the R-8 I
think needs to be better defined and you can do that during that permitting process. So,
because we have a usual and customary way of -- of managing how those next steps
go, I don't think those should be foregone here. So, to summarize my thoughts, yes,
you should be annexed. No, I don't think your conditions of approval -- your cross-outs
should be included at this time.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you. I agree with you on the conditions of approval, although I feel
like that conversations even preliminary I -- I just didn't hear from the applicant a really
compelling reason to annex this right now. It's just going to sit and there is not really
anything that can be done until we have the details that will be needed for the DA
modification. I imagine there is some financial planning maybe on their part that -- or
perhaps they feel it's necessary to be annexed to have discussions with end users and
that's okay, but this obligates the city to provide services to this area and obligates our
taxpayers and I just don't -- I -- I'm just not understanding why the need would be
necessary now. I would rather wait and see. I mean annexation that -- annexation is
the -- the first -- very first kind of latitude that we have to -- to see some, you know, more
clarity, more information on -- on what the applicant intends and so I'm always hesitant
to sort of give up that ability as a decision maker until we have more information.
Lorcher: Okay. Thank you.
Smith: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: I generally agree kind of with your position. I -- I -- I think I'm okay with annexing
at the time given some of the kind of -- I think direction and feedback planning staff has
gotten at a director level from what I understand. Yeah. I -- I think there is -- there is a
disconnect here, though, regarding these conditions and regarding the planning. Give
me grace when I say this, because I don't want to -- I'm not trying to cast any
aspersions or -- or -- or any implications, but it feels like there is almost a desire for
18
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 16 of 17
planning -- for city staff to act in a project development and project planning capacity,
like for the individual sites and -- and their job is to review from the perspective of the
city, not to dictate, you know, from whole cloth where everything should go on -- on the
map. And so discussing kind of plazas, for example, the staff can't tell where the plaza
should probably go until they see where the rest of the -- the plan -- what the rest of the
plan looks like. They can't dictate how, you know, traffic impact should be incorporated
into the plan until they have something to, you know, look at regarding a traffic impact
study or things like that. So, I think from -- from the city perspective it seems like
services are already kind of being extended this direction. I don't feel like there is an
obligation that the city is -- an additional obligation that we place on the city beyond
what is already kind of in the intention for -- for the near future from what I understand. I
really do think, though, that absent some sort of development agreement requirement or
future DA mod requirement, that there is just not enough developed here to -- to sink
your teeth into. I agree, I think that especially given that staff is okay with it, allowing
Tier 1 would make sense, honestly, if this were more developed I might even be
personally okay with the Tier 2 allowance. But we don't have -- again, we don't have
that -- that level. I could see a Tier 2 kind of amount of volume here potentially for -- for
some smaller kind of restaurant drive-through things like that, but, again, without more
clarity and without more transparency into the actual plans I know the -- I know the
applicant is not the developer themselves or the -- the intended, you know, builder of --
of -- you know, doing the -- the actual build out of -- of this application. So, they don't
have all that visibility, you know, locked in place. But, yeah, I think because of those
reasons we need to kind of limit that to, you know, absent some sort of DA mod or some
-- some sort of future application. So, I -- I'm okay with the annexation. I think all staffs
-- you know, staff's recommendations make sense absent, you know -- we can allow
Tier 1 -- Tier 1.
Stoll: Madam Chair, I'm -- I'm in agreement with your positions, particularly in
agreement because the directors have said that it's okay to do the annexation at this
point in time, even though the sewer facilities are not present. I would never -- okay. I
would not be supportive of the annexation without the development agreement
modification given the lack of detail that we currently have. I wouldn't recommend
moving forward. Okay. So, now we will try it. All right. So, if we -- and I am in
agreement with having the Tier 1 drive-throughs on there, so --
Lorcher: Commissioner Gelsomino, do you have any comments?
Gelsomino: Madam Chair, I will echo my fellow Commissioners.
Lorcher: Okay. Thank you. Anybody want to take a -- try a stab at a motion?
Smith: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Smith.
19 1
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 19,2026
Page 17 of 17
Smith: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony I move to recommend
approval to the City Council of File No. H-2026-0003 as presented in the staff report for
the hearing date of March 19th, with a modification to allow for Tier 1 drive-throughs.
Gelsomino: Seconded.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to approve North Meridian Fields. All those in
favor say aye. Any opposed motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Lorcher: I will take one more motion.
Smith: Madam Chair --
Stoll: Move to adjourn.
Gelsomino: Seconded.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any
opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much, everyone.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:54 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. )
APPROVED
4 2 26
MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
F20
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the March 5, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting
3
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
March 5,2026
Page 59 of 59
Smith: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend
denial to the City Council File No. H-2025-0052 and ZOA-2025-0002, as presented
during the hearing of March 5th, for the reasons that there is still too much lack of clarity
around site design and -- and use and as well as a lack of a CPAM.
Gelsomino: Seconded.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to deny VanTrust applications. All those in
favor say aye. Any deny? Motion carries. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Lorcher: I will take one more motion.
Smith: Madam Chair?
Lorcher: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Move to adjourn.
Perreault: Second.
Lorcher: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any
deny? Motion approves. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:22 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. )
APPROVED
MARIA LORCHER - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
F62
E K IDIAN:---
iuAn
Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline
h2
Planning and Zoning Commission , 2026 th March 19Meeting
FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the concept plan and building Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and UDC. property, and amend the concept plan to be
consistent with design elements outlined in the Field Sub . Prior to any future development and once sewer service is readily available at the site, the applicant iSewer has already
been stubbed to the site--and meets one of the following criteria:east (Parcel # S0429110001 and Parcel # R5743000010).N property to both Parcels to the -g. The applicant shall record
a cross access agreement from the Cf. Direct access to Chinden Boulevard is prohibited except at N. Owyhee Storm Avenue. e. Retail commercial uses shall be restricted to building sizes
of 10,000 square feet or less. Area Plan. -Subfencing, and other rural landscape elements in landscape buffers and open space as listed in the Fields mow fescues, naturalized plants,
dry creek materials, split rial -d. Future development shall promote noThrough Establishments. N zoned portion of the property: Fuels Sales Facilities, -c. The following uses shall
be prohibited in the Ctime of the development.b. Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the elevations included in Section
VIII and the provisions contained herein.
UDC 11pedestrian walkways and public or private open space.”including number of dwelling units and nonresidential building square footages, connectivity to adjacent properties, parking,
general location of buildings, development plan that depicts streets, site access, internal circulation patterns, permit or planned unit development, the applicant shall provide a conceptual
“Annexation and/or rezone requests are not accompanied by a conditional use 3:-5B-
-key design elements that need to be included. depth provisions for the residential portion highlighting -would add more inprior to development of that portion of the property. In addition,
staff for the commercial) and only require a DA Mod for the commercial portion Create 2 separate development agreements (1 for the residential and 1 -future which would trigger a development
agreement to be created. development agreement. This would require a rezone application in the 2 zoning district without a -Annexation of the subject property with the R
Changes to Agenda: None
Item #3: North Meridian Fields (H-2026-0003)
Application(s):
Annexation
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 71.445 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, generally
located at the southwest corner of SH-16 and Chinden.
History: While the project does not have history, it is important to note that the Community Development and Public Works Directors
made a determination for the subject development allowing for the annexation to move forward without sewer services being available.
Currently, the city is installing a sewer trunkline in McMillan Road that will ultimately serve the site.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Mixed Use Interchange and Medium Density Residential
Summary of Request: Annexation of 71.445 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N zoning districts. The R-8 zone consists of 47.8 acres,
and the C-N zone consists of 23.6.
The subject property falls within the Fields Sub-Area Plan located at the northwest corner of the City’s area of impact boundary. In
accord with the Fields Sub-Area Plan, the general character, design, and identity of this area shall have a cohesive theme that is
“modern rural,” which applies to housing, amenities, streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial. Additionally, some of the other
thematic design elements that contribute to the desired character of the area should be adhered to such as lighting, fencing (e.g. split
rail), landscaping (e.g. tall fescues, dry creek materials, wildflowers, street trees, etc.), public art, on-street bike lanes and/or off-street
multi-use pathways, signage (e.g. metal roof on sign), etc. – see the Character Framework – Amenities (pg. 3-12) and Streetscape (pg.
3-13) in the Plan for more information. A high-quality design is expected in this area.
Many of the details that would typically be required with an annexation have not been provided which is why Staff is requiring
a development agreement modification in the future. The future DA mod would be required to provide these details and
update the concept plan.
Because municipal services are not yet available, the applicant will be unable to develop the property until such services are
in place and a preliminary plat and development agreement modification are submitted and approved. During that time, the
applicant will be required to comply with the Field Sub-Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and Unified Development Code.
The applicant has submitted a conceptual plan proposing single-family detached residences on the southern two-thirds of the site and
commercial development on the northern one-third. At this time, detailed development plans have not been provided, however, the
applicant provided a road layout and open space layout for the larger development. This provides some high level detail into the
integration of the residential and commercial uses.
In the applicant’s narrative, the proposed R-8 portion of the site is described as single-family detached residential. The C-N portion is
proposed for commercial uses, and the applicant proposed excluded the following uses including fuel sales facilities, convenience
stores, storage facilities, and vehicle washing facilities. The Mixed-Use Interchange designation is intended for low traffic
generating uses, staff recommends further restricting permitted uses by prohibiting drive-through establishments, vertically
integrated uses, and retail sales or stores exceeding 10,000 square feet for a single tenant. The primary reason behind this is
to not allow big box retailers and drive throughs as they will generate significantly more traffic than the Mixed Use
Interchange designation is intended for.
The applicant has depicted the primary access points for the development coming off the future extension of N. Owyhee Storm
Avenue, a collector roadway. This extension will lead to a future signalized intersection with Chinden Boulevard. In addition, the
applicant is proposing to construct two (2) east/west collectors that would connect N. Ersatz Place with N. Owyhee Storm Avenue.
Written Testimony: None
Staff Recommendation: Approval with a development agreement. However, the applicant will be proposing changes to the
development agreement which staff is not in favor of. This is primarily due to the lack of detail provided with this application and that a
future development agreement modification would be a way to get these details before any development commences on the site.
Without a future development agreement modification, we may get uses, design elements, etc. that are not intended in the FLUM and
Fields Sub Area Plan.
Other options of the commission to consider if they don’t agree with staff DA recommendation:
- Annexation of the subject property with the R-2 zoning district without a development agreement. This would require a rezone
application in the future which would trigger a development agreement to be created.
- Create 2 separate development agreements (1 for the residential and 1 for the commercial) and only require a DA Mod for the
commercial portion of the development. In addition, staff would add more in-depth provisions for the residential portion
highlighting key design elements that need to be included.
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H-
th
2026-0003, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 19, 2026, with the following modifications: (Add any
proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2026-
th
0003, as presented during the hearing on March 19, 2026, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for
denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2026-0003 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
W IDIAN�
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing continued from February 19, 2026 for Syringa Crossing Mixed
Use Development (H-2025-0007) by Hawkins Companies, generally located at the northwest and
southwest corners of S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 and Amity Rd.
Applicant Requests Continuance
A. Request:Annexation of 62.43 acres of land with R-15 (9.76 acres), R-40 (18.01 acres) C-N (2.07
acres), C-C(9.12 acres) and C-G (23.47 acres)zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 8 building lots on 24.46 acres of land in the proposed R-
40 and C-C zoning districts.
C. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi family development consisting of 322 residential
apartment units on 16.35 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
F63
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C` fE IDIAN --
DEPARTMENT REPORT A"o
HEARING February 19,2026 Legend
DATE: Continuedfrom: 1211812025&215126 Project Location
Area of Impact @ s
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission = City Limits J��
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner Analysis --
208-884-5533
sallen@meridiancity.org ;
APPLICANT: Hawkins Companies
SUBJECT: H-2025-0007 1 r. _J_I
1 I
Syringa Crossing Mixed-Use -
Development(aka Hawkins Syringa ;
Crossing Subdivision)—AZ, CUP,PP \
LOCATION: Generally located at the northwest and I
1
southwest corners of S. Meridian
Rd./SH-69 in the SE 1/4 of Section 25,
T.3N.,R.1W and the NE 1/4 of Section
36,T.3N.,R.1 W.
I. PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
The Applicant has submitted the following application requests:
• Annexation of 62.43-acres of land with R-15 (9.76 acres),R-40(18.01 acres), C-N(2.07
acres), C-C (9.12 acres), and C-G(23.47 acres)zoning districts;
• Preliminary Plat consisting of 8 building lots on 24.46 acres of land in the proposed R-40
and C-C zoning districts for Hawkins Syringa Crossing Subdivision; and
• Conditional Use Permit(CUP) for a multi-family development consisting of 322
residential apartment units on 16.35-acres of land in the R-40 zoning district.
B. Issues/Waivers
Issues: The proposed conceptual development plan and C-G zoning is not consistent with the
general mixed use and MU-C principles in the Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons:
• The proposed development is not functionally integrated in holistic design and integration of
uses per the design principles in the Plan(i.e. the uses function as individual components,not
together, as desired).
• The southwest corner(SWC) of the development is 72%residential with a gross density of
18.23 units per acre,which is 22%more residential than the maximum allowed of 50%and
3.23 units per acre over the maximum allowed density of 15 units per acre. Commensurate
City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview
■
levels of employment and other non-residential elements supporting residents and reducing
local vehicle trips are not provided due to the excess of residential area and density provided.
• The proposed C-G zoning district on the northwest corner is too intense for the MU-C
designated area for the following reasons:
o The C-G district is not listed as a sample zoning district in the MU-C designation as it's a
more intense district typically reserved for the largest scale and broadest mix of retail,
office, service, and light industrial uses in Commercial and Mixed Use—Regional(MU-
R)designated areas.
o The C-G zoning district for the planned office and commercial areas doesn't provide for a
transition in zoning and uses between the proposed commercial and multi-family
residential development on the northern portion of the development area and future
residential uses to the west.
o The C-G zoning district allows a variety of more intense non-office uses,which may not
be appropriate adjacent to residential uses and could limit the mix of uses in the
development below that which is required.
• A mix of three (3)different land use types(i.e. commercial, office,residential, civic and
industrial)are required to be provided in each development area. The northwest corner
(NWC)includes a mix of three(3)different land use types(commercial, office and
residential),which if developed,meets the required mix of land use types. However, Staff is
concerned if other non-office commercial uses develop in the C-G district,the mix of uses
will not be adequate. The SWC of the development only includes a mix of two(2)different
land use types (residential and commercial).
• Community-serving facilities such as hospitals, clinics, churches, schools, civic buildings, or
public safety facilities are not provided in either development,which increases service and
transportation network impacts.
• Supportive and proportional outdoor public and/or quasi-public spaces and places such as
parks,plazas, outdoor gathering areas, linear open space and schools, do not comprise a
minimum of 5%of the development area on the SWC. These areas are not located in spaces
between residential and non-residential uses to provide integration and transition between
uses in either development area.
• The updated conceptual engineering plans for sewer and water service for the proposed
development, submitted on February 13',have not yet been reviewed by the Public Works
Dept. as of the date of transmittal of this report;therefore, it's unknown if this development
can be serviced as proposed.
Waivers: 1) The UDC 11-4-3-27C.8 states common open space areas in multi-family
developments 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 on the berm or
barrier to allow for pedestrian access. The Applicant requests approval through the CUP for
common open space areas in the multi-family development to be located adjacent to a
collector street buffer without a berm or barrier separating it from the street. The reason for
such is an enhanced interaction is desired between the street and 10' multi-use pathway along the
collector street with a narrower street section and wider pathway adjacent to common areas.
2) The UDC(11-3H-4B.2a)prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway. City
Council may consider and approve a modification to the standard upon specific recommendation
of the Idaho Transportation Dept. or if strict adherence is not feasible, as determined by City
Council. The Applicant is requesting Council approval of the proposed access; a
recommendation has not yet been received from ITD on the access.
City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview
■
C. Recommendation
Staff: Denial
Commission: Pending
D. Decision
Council: Pending
II. COMMUNITY METRICS
Table 1: Land Use
Description Details Map Ref.
Existing Land Use(s) Northwest corner(NWC): Single-family residential, -
vacant/undeveloped agricultural land. (There is an existing
multi-tenant building with a church and office space and a
transfer station for Northwest Pipeline Corp. along
Meridian Rd.,which will remain and are included in the
annexation but not the development area.)
Southwest corner(SWC): Wholesale nursery(Victory
Greens)
Proposed Land Use(s) NWC: Commercial(grocery store,retail shops,restaurants and a bank,some with drive-throughs),office(i.e.medical
office,gym,daycare,personal service,professional
service),and multi-family residential(townhome-style&
apartments).
SWC: Commercial(restaurants,retail shops,drive-through
establishments,fuel sales facility/convenience store)and
multi-family residential.
Existing Zoning RUT&LO in Ada County VII.A.2
Proposed Zoning R-15 (9.76 acres),R-40(18.01 acres),C-N(2.07 acres),C-
C(9.12 acres),and C-G(23.47 acres)
Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) VII.A.3
Table 2: Process Facts
Description Details
Preapplication Meeting date 1/21/2025
Neighborhood Meeting 1/21/2025
Table 3: Community Metrics
Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference
Ada County Highway IV.J
District
• Comments Yes—The proposed development requires revisions to meet ACHD -
Received policies.
• Commission No -
Action Required
• Access Access is proposed via S.Meridian Rd./SH-69,W.Amity Rd.,W.Lyra -
St., S. Solaris Ave. and S.Hermatite Ave. as shown on the concept plan
and preliminary plat.
• Traffic Level of Meets ACHD's LOS planning thresholds -
Service(LOS)
• TIS Required? Yes,mitigation is reuqired
ITD Comments ITD is reviewing the TIS and working on a staff report. IV.L
Received ME& A
City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics
■
Meridian Public Distance to Mainline: See Public Works site specific conditions;Impacts IV.B
Works Wastewater or Concerns: See Public Works site specific conditions
Meridian Public Distance to Mainline: available at site;Impacts or Concerns:none IV.B
Works Water
School District(s) (Enter school district providing service) IV.I
• Capacity of See Community Development School Impact Data III.I
Schools Enrollment Capacity
• Number of Mary McPherson Elementary School 526 550* Program Capacity -
Victory Middle School 1094 1000
Students Meridian High School 1739 2075
Enrolled
• Estimated#of This development could have 67 school aged children
students
See City/Agency Comments and Conditions Section for all department/agency comments received.
Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics
Reference Parcel:SM5449650 date Retrieved:2026 f 2 113
Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator:
L535 869 Surrounding Area
41 % cmy
® City Limits
1,11c}
Not City
Household Change Household&Population Grovuth
Households
132020
Population Change: 37.6°l0
Population ■Growth
(Household and Population Change
since 2410 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 15,000
Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses
■ Single-family %
0% 6
is
® Multi-family is
® Commercial
Preliminary Plats (last 5-years) Conditional Use Permit (last 5-years)
Proposed Proposed
Pending Pending
Approved PR Approved
i I I I � I I I I
0 1000000 2000d0U 30OD0DO 4000000 0 201) 400 to
■ Single-family ® Multi-family,
i
City of Meridian Department Report II. Community Metrics
■
2.00 1,500
Single-family N
Residential 1.50
� 1,000
Parcel Diversity w 1.00 ip.27
13ParcelCount i 0.50 500
a
0 Average Acres 0.00 0 0
R-2 R-4 R-15
Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average
15.00
DensityResidential Net
a 10.00 10.35
590 3.75 5.85 5.41
9-o0a.aa Dwelling Units i Acre
R-2 R-4 R,g R-15
Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts.
Figure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics
ACHD Planned Improvements
1. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP} Firm Year Plan (FYP):
Amity Road Is scheduled in the FYP as the Amily Corridor A project to be widened to 5-1anes
from SH-69 (Meridian Read) to Locust Grove Road with a construction year yet to be
determined.
* Victory Road is scheduled in the FYP as the Victory Corridor project to be widened 10 erthee
3-lanes or 5-lanes from SH-69(Meridian Road)to Locust Grove road with a construction year
yet to be determined-
. The intersection of Amity load and Margaret Avenue is scheduled in the FYP as part of the
Amity Carridcr A project to be improved with a pedestrian crossing with a construction year
yet to be determined-
. The intersection of Amity Road and Locust Grove Road is scheduled in the FYP to he
reconstructed as a rnulli-lane roundabout with 1-lane on the north leg, 1-lane on the south.2-
lanes east, and 2-lanes on the west leg with a construction year yet to be determined,
* Victory Road is listed in the CIP to he widened to 3•lanes from Linder Road to Meridian Road
between 2031 and 2035.
■ Lake Hazel Road is listed in the CLP to be widened to 3-lanes from Linder Road to SH-69
(Meridian Road)between 2036 and 2040.
* Linder Road is I isted in the CIP to be widened to 3-lanes from Lake Hazel Road to Amity Road
between 2036 and 2040.
Linder Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 34alnes from Amity Road to Victory Road
bel"en 2036 and 2040.
* The intersection of Amity Road and 811-1-65(Meridian Road)is listed in the CIP to be widened
to 6-lanes on the north leg, 6-lanes on the south, 7-lanes east, and Nanes on the west ley,
and re-signalized between 2031 and 2035.
■ The intersection of Amity Road and Linder Road Is Bled in the CIP to be reconstructed as a
single lane roundabout 4-lanes on the north leg, 4-lanes on the south. 2-lanes east. and 2-
lane5 on the west leg between 2036 and 2040.
* The intersection of Lake Hazel Road and SH•69 (Meridian Road) is listed in the CIP to be
widened to 64anes on dsa north leg, 6-lanes on the south, 7-lanes east, and 7-lanes on the
west leg, and re-signalized between 2036 and 2040.
Note:Notice the timing of the above-noted planned improvements.
City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics
■
Northwest Parcel:
Level of Service Planning Thresholds
1_ Condition of Area Roadways
Trarfir.Count is based on Vehicle5 per hour(VPHI
Roadway rrantage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Classification Traffic Count Level of SINICa
***SH-69(Wrldlan 1,219-feat Principal Arterial 1,561 NIA
Road
'Am ly Road 1,169-feet Minor Arterial 347 Better than"E'
—Lyra Slreei 450-fast Collector NJA NSA
*Acceptable level of service for a two-lane minor arterial is"E"(675 VPH),
�•Acceptable level of service for a two-Iano collector ig-D-(42:5 VPH),
*"ACHO does not set level of service thresholds for State Highways_
2. Average Daily Traffic Count(VDT)
A mage daffy lyaffro counts are based-on ACHO s most carrenl tmffm oot;rtts.
The averacje daily traffic Mount for SH-69(Meridian Road)south of Victory Road was 33.SM
on October 71,2D21.
The average daily traffic count for Amity Road between Linder Road and SH-69 (MendLen
Road)was 7.602 belween October W"and Novernber 2114,2024.
+ There are no currerrt traffic counts available for Lyra Street,
Southwest Parcel:
Level of Service Planning Thresholds
1. Condition of Area Roadways
Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH)
Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Classification Traffic Count Level of Service
** SH-$9Weridian goad 1,263-feet Principal Arterial 1,798 NIA
Amity Road 829-feet Minor Arterial 347 Better than"E"
Acceptable level of service for a two-lane minor arterial is "E"(575 VPH).
"ACH❑ does not set level of service thresholds for State Highways-
2. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT)
Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD's most current traffic counts.
• The average daily traffic count for SH-691Meridian Road south of Amity Road was 39,548 on
October Ss", 2024.
• The average daily traffic count for Amity Road between tinder Road and SH-69lMeridian
Road was 7,602 between October 161h and November 21", 2024.
Notes: See VIII.B Additional Notes &Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables, and Charts.
City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics
■
III. STAFF ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC)
Table 4: Proiect Overview
Description Details
History CPA-08-004/AZ-08-005/VAR-08-008-Meridian&Amity [an
amendment to the FLUM was approved from Medium Density Residential
(MDR)to Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R);Annexation with R-15,L-O,C-
C and C-G zoning approved pending DA;variance for(3)accesses via
Meridian/SH-69—withdrawn];MDA-11-010(2-year time extension to
sign DA-approved);VAR-12-001 [(3)accesses via Meridian/SH-69—
approved]Because the DA was never signed, the property wasn't annexed.
Phasing Plan 1 phase of development is proposed for the preliminary plat at the SWC.
Residential Units NWC: 101 multi-family units(mix of apartments and townhome-style)-
conceptual
SWC: 322 multi-family apartment units
Open Space SWC multi-family development: 1.85-acres required/3.14-acres proposed
Amenities SWC multi-family development:tot lot,swimming pool&spa,(2)dog
parks,(3)pickleball courts,half basketball court,basketball court,(2)
community gardens,and a shade structure
Physical Features NWC:Carlson Lateral runs along west boundary of site;the Williams
Northwest gas pipeline bisects the site. There is approximately a 10'grade
difference on the site, sloping down from Amity Rd.to the north.
SWC:The Carlson Lateral bisects the site in two(2)different locations.
There is approximately a 25'grade difference on the site,sloping up from
the northeast corner of the site to the center and sloping back down again
to the south(see topography on Sheet PP2.0 of the plat).
Acreage The annexation area is 62.43 acres,the preliminary plat area is 24.46 acres
and the CUP area is 16.35 acres.
Lots SWC: 8 building lots(6 commercial&2 residential)/0 common lots
NWC:NA(plat is not proposed)
Density NWC: 9.57 units/acre(gross)—Net density has not been provided
SWC: 18.23 units/acre(gross)—Net density has not been provided
A. History
In 2010,the property at the NWC of Meridian/Amity received approval of an amendment to the
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the Comprehensive Plan from Medium Density Residential
(MDR)to Mixed Use—Regional(MU-R) and annexation with R-15,L-O, C-C and C-G zoning
districts, contingent upon approval of a Development Agreement(DA)within 12 months. A
concurrent application for a variance for three(3) access points via S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 was
submitted but later withdrawn due to ITD's denial of the access.
In 2011, a modification to the DA was approved,which allowed an additional two(2)years for
the developer to sign the DA. In 2012, a variance was again submitted for the three(3)access
points via S.Meridian Rd./SH-69,which was approved based on ITD's approval of the access
due to policy changes. The DA was not signed within the required timeframe and the annexation
approval expired. An amendment to the FLUM designation from MU-R to Mixed Use—
Community(MU-C)was later approved with the Comprehensive Plan update in 2019.
In 2021,the property owner of Parcel#R4622730010,Jessica Condominiums,Inc., entered into a
Consent to Annexation agreement with the City,recorded as Inst. #2021-112368,and an
Agreement for Provision of Water Service Outside Meridian City Limits,recorded as Inst.#2021-
112398. The Consent to Annexation agreement states the owner consents to annexation when
such units are eligible for annexation and execution of such agreement is a condition of City's
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
commitment to provide water service to the property. The property is currently provided with
City sewer and water service.
B. General Overview
Proposed development application summary:
The Applicant proposes to annex a total of 62.43-acres of land located on the NWC and SWC of
S. Meridian Rd./SH-69 and W. Amity Rd. with R-15 (9.76 acres),R-40(18.01 acres), C-N(2.07
acres—out-parcel with church/office uses), C-C(9.12 acres), and C-G(23.47 acres)zoning
districts. At the request of Staff so as not to create County enclaves with the proposed annexation,
the Applicant included the 1.59-acre property owned by Jessica Condominiums Inc. (Parcel
#R4622730010),developed with a multi-tenant building with a church and office space;the 0.07-
acre property owned by Intermountain Gas Co. (Parcel#S 1225449220)with utility infrastructure;
and the 0.29-acre property owned by Northwest Pipeline Corp. (Parcel#S 1225449910)with a
transfer station.
A conceptual development plan is proposed for the overall annexation area, included below in
Section V.E., showing how the property is anticipated to develop with 423 multi-family dwelling
units consisting of 4-story podium apartments with parking on the ground floor, 3-story garden-
style walk-up apartments and 3-story townhome-style units; 146,840+/- square feet(s.f.)of
commercial space and 20,800+/-s.f. of office space. The property at the SWC is proposed to
annex and develop at this time(i.e.Phase 1)with a preliminary plat and conditional use permit
for a multi-family development. The NWC is only proposed to be annexed at this time(i.e. Phase
2)with a conceptual development plan. Both portions are eligible for annexation separately as
each are contiguous to City annexed land.
Phase 1 is proposed to consist of approximately 35,000 s.f. of commercial area anticipated to
include restaurants,retail shops, a coffee shop and a gas station/convenience store in the C-C
zoning district; and a 322-unit multi-family residential development in the R-40 zoning district.
Commercial structures are anticipated to be a single-story in height;residential structures are
anticipated to be 3 to 4-stories in height.
Phase 2 consists of 30.6 acres of land proposed to develop with a 65,000+/- s.f. grocery store with
retail shops,restaurants and a bank and 21,000+/- s.f. of office uses that could include medical
office, a gym, a daycare,personal care services or professional services in the C-G zoning
district; all structures are anticipated to be a single-story in height. A 101-unit multi-family
residential development is proposed consisting of a mix of 4-story apartments and 2 to 3-story
townhome-style units in the R-15 zoning district.
A Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit(CUP)are proposed for the SWC of the
annexation area. The plat consists of 8 building lots(6 commercial&2 residential)on 24.46 acres
of land in the proposed R-40 and C-C zoning districts and is proposed to develop in one(1) final
plat phase.
The CUP is for a multi-family residential development consisting of 322 apartment units on
16.35-acres of land in the R-40 zoning district,located on the southern portion of the SWC
property.A mix of 1, 2 and 3-bedroom units are proposed for a variety of living situations.
The Applicant requests the following be included in the development agreement to provide for
flexibility to develop the commercial and residential areas in accordance with changing
community preferences and values.All changes would remain in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan: (Staff's comments in italics)
o Allowance for up to 15 dwelling units per acre across the residential area of the overall site
for a total of 423 residential units.Because an arterial street bisects the project, the density is
calculated on each of the mixed-use development areas and not the overall property;
City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis
■
therefore, Staff is not supportive of this request. As proposed, the density of 18.23 units/acre
on the SWC exceeds the maximum allowed of 15 units per acre by 3.23 units/acre; and the
residential area (72%) exceeds the maximum allowed(50%) by 22%.
o Allowance for a deviation of up to 15%(higher or lower)of total gross floor area within each
use type and Phase(Office,Commercial,Residential). The general layout of the site will be
consistent with the submitted concept plan. The MU-C designation only includes a minimum
and maximum percentage of residential uses—there is no such requirement for office and
commercial uses. To achieve the mix of uses desired to support residential uses by providing
employment opportunities, neighborhood services and other non-residential supporting
services within the development, which reduces vehicle trips, residential uses should not
exceed the established 50%maximum. Staff is not supportive of any deviations to the
provisions in the Comprehensive Plan that would increase the allowed residential area or
density.
o Cross-access to the existing church/office parcel shall be granted at such time when
development plans are submitted for the northwest corner of the site. The reason is because
the exact location for cross-access will be determined by the final configuration of the
proposed development and the future use of the office and church space at the time when
cross-access is provided. Staff is amenable to this request as access is currently provided via
S. Meridian Rd./SH--69.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
This property is designated Mixed Use—Community(MU-C) on the FLUM contained in the
Comprehensive Plan and is part of a larger enclave area surrounded by City annexed land.
The purpose of the mixed-use land use designations is to provide for a combination of compatible
land uses within a close geographic area that allows for easily accessible and convenient services
for residents,workers,and visitors.
The purpose of the MU-C designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and
dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of
uses, including residential,and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings.
Non-residential buildings in these areas tend to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood(MU-
N) areas,but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU-R)areas. Goods and services in these
areas tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to but also walk or bike to(up
to three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the
neighborhood are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the
conceptual MU-C plan depicted in Figure 3E.
Functional Integration
Development review for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan will consider the integration
of use and holistic design sub-sections(below)in all mixed-use areas unless otherwise noted. To
be successful,the principles outlined must be considered as interrelated features serving the basis
of plan design. Contiguous Mixed Use identified areas that are bisected by an arterial or
highway are considered separate and independent areas for use and design integration and
will be evaluated independently of each other per the Plan(pp.3-14&3-16).
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
FA3. Mixed Use Community Concept Color Diagram with Markup
Preference for i Retail.t5ffic�or
fronting units with ti
! I Service Uses
on-street parking for + i - Relail AnEhar
new developments M �
Multi-family
5mge•#ansEly
it t Neighborhood Residential
Connectivity d
Neighborhood uses and
integrated open space that
_ "hold the corners"with
LEGEND inward facing focus.
Points of Interest
Support for a variety of
Primary Loral Corridor tom? l Community uses clustered
(Visual and Physical) ;�' around shared urban
amenities
Secondary local Corridar ~
(`risua!and Physiral)
i
Figure 3E: Mixed Use Community Concept Diagram
Single family
I I { i , Residential
Apartments,
four plexes L
or Duplexes Office,
Local or Collector Road Day-care or
Service Use
a
Integrated
Plaza Area
Do � ago
Office or 0
Service Use _� 4
Retail the
JL(Q:T
Arterial Road
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
Integration of Uses—Review
Successful projects reduce vehicle trips for nearby residents and/or visitors by having frequent,
accessible and safe pedestrian connections. Residential and non-residential areas feel cohesive, as
one neighborhood, even when developed across multiple properties over multiple years or by
different developers.
Consistent with the Plan Review
Yes No N/A Design Principle& Review
Design Principle: 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
Q ❑ ❑ use designation.
Review:A conceptual development plan was submitted for the
overall annexation area. If the property is annexed, a development
agreement (DA)will be required as a provision of annexation.
Design Principle: 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 designation area
may not warrant a mix of uses, provided compliance with a larger
vision and integration of uses. Note:For the purposes of the Mixed-
Use section, the City identifies five(5)different generalized land use
types:commercial(includes retail, restaurants, daycares, etc.);
Q Q ❑ office;residential;civic(includes both public and quasi-public open
space for leisure, active play, or enhanced natural spaces);and
industrial.
Review:The NWC includes a mix of three (3) different land use
types consisting of multi-family residential (apartment and
townhome style units), office and commercial,which complies with
this design principle.The SWC only includes two(2)different land
use types consisting of multi-family residential (apartments) and
commercial,which does not comply with this design principle.See
the conceptual development plan below in Section V.E.
Design Principle: 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
Q Q ❑ sub-category). The specific allowance of residential is 20-50%of the
development area with gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units
per acre;if transit is available, an additional 15%is allowed.
Review: In the NWC, 34%of the 30.66-acre site is residential at a
gross density of 9.57 units per acre based on 101 units on 10.55
acres of land,which complies with this design principle. In the SWC,
City of Meridian Department Report 111. Staff Analysis
74
72%of the 24.45-acre development area is residential at a gross
density of 18.23 units per acre based on 322 units on 17.66 acres
of land,which is not consistent with this principle.The excess
residential area and density limits commensurate levels of
employment or other non-residential supporting elements that
reduce local vehicle trips.
Design Principle: 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.
Q Q ❑ Review: Office pads are proposed on the NWC as a transition
between the grocery store and multi-family residential area that
could house such neighborhood and community services in accord
with this design principle; however,there is no guarantee these
specific uses will be provided, especially in the C-G district, which
allows the largest scale and broadest mix of retail, office, service
and light industrial uses, unless restricted for such through the DA.
No such uses are proposed on the SW portion of the
development,which is not consistent with this design principle.
Design Principle: 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.
❑ Q ❑ Review: No such facilities are included in the proposed
development,which does not comply with this design principle
and will have a negative impact on the service and transportation
network.There is an existing church on the periphery of the NW
portion of the site in the multi-tenant building oriented toward
Meridian Rd./SH-69 that is not part of the proposed development.
Design Principle: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
Q Q ❑ 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.
Review: On the NWC, a plaza area is proposed at the southeast
corner between Pads A& B with a pathway connecting to a linear
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
75
open space area adjoining Pads D & E; and another plaza area is
proposed between the office buildings on Pads J & K,which
complies with this design principle. On the SWC, a plaza area is
proposed at the northeast corner of the development area but no
other significant quasi-public areas are provided,which does not
comply with this design principle. No schools are proposed.
Neither of the quasi-public areas are located between the multi-
family and non-residential uses for integration and transition of
uses.
Holistic Design—Review
The uses and site elements of a proposed mixed-use project will be designed foremost around the idea
of visible, attractive, and accessible destinations. The designer(s) must purposefully layout features to
create focal elements that are visibly and physically linked within a development, to ensure that
residents and employees have prioritized access to the places and services of most interest.
Consistency with the Plan Review
Yes No N/A Design Principle& Review
Design Principle: 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.
Review: On the NWC, commercial building pads are arranged
❑ Q ❑ around a linear quasi-public space with pedestrian pathways and
green space that connects to the plaza area at the southeast
corner of the site that is highly visible. Only the commercial area
is situated around the area,which doesn't meet this design
principle as the larger mixed-use area is not centered around it
and therefore doesn't provide an integration and transition of
uses as desired.
On the SWC,the plaza at the northeast corner of the site is the
only significant quasi-public area and uses aren't centered
around it, it's on the periphery of the development. Other
common open space areas are part of the multi-family
development,are private in nature and situated internal to the
multi-family development,which does not comply with this
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
76
design principle. Permanent design elements to promote
frequent use and amenities that foster a wide range of
interests are not identified other than pedestrian pathways
and hardscape areas with planters.
Design Principle: 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.
Review: On the NWC, commercial Pads D & E on the eastern
portion of development are arranged to create a common,
Q ❑ ❑ usable green space area; commercial Pads A& B are arranged to
create a plaza area; and office Pads J & K are arranged to create
a small green space area between the buildings, which complies
with the design principle.
On the SWC, commercial Pads C& D at the northeast corner of
the site are arranged to create a plaza area, which complies with
the design principle.
Design Principle: Open space should be purposeful in supporting
a visible community and utilized to enhance synergies between
residential and non-residential uses.
Review: Open space in the proposed development is not
❑ Q ❑ situated to enhance synergies between residential and non-
residential uses—open space is provided separately in the
residential and commercial portions of the development, which
does not provide interaction between uses and does not comply
with this design principle.
Design Principle: 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.
Review:There are no natural amenities on this site—existing
Q ❑ ❑ laterals are proposed to be piped. On the NWC,the commercial
open space area is integrated with pathways, is highly visible and
located away from site features that may obscure visibility,
which complies with this design principle.
On the SWC,the open space areas in the multi-family
development are integrated with pathways and are highly visible
from within the development and from the collector street,
which complies with this design principle.
Design Principle: Commercial drive aisles must contemplate a
Q ❑ ❑ pedestrian friendly built environment with a minimal number of
conflict points, and oriented so that aisle ingress and egress is
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
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 planted
and/or hardscaped parkway treatment, or other enhanced
separation with both aesthetic and safety benefits.
Review:The proposed drive aisles contemplate a pedestrian
friendly environment with landscaped parkways providing
separation between adjacent drive aisles,with aisles generally
parallel to pedestrian walkways, which complies with this design
principle.
Design Principle: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.
Q ❑ ❑ Vehicle connectivity must not rely on arterial streets for
neighborhood access.
Review:The proposed projects are accessible to adjacent
existing and future neighborhoods by streets, sidewalks and
multi-use pathways, which complies with this design principle.
Design Principle: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
❑ ❑ Q be integrated as functional, convenient, and comfortable spaces.
Electric charging stations for a variety of transportation modes is
encouraged.
Review: No public transit routes exist or are planned in this area,
nor are ride share lots or other such services. Electric charging
stations are encouraged.
Design Principle: Non-residential buildings should transition to
and complement adjacent residential buildings in mass and
form, and include safe and meaningful mitigation for operational
impacts such as loading docks, storage, and outdoor equipment.
Review: On the NWC, single-story office buildings are planned
Q ❑ ❑ adjacent to 2 and 3-story multi-family structures, which
shouldn't have negative operational impacts and complies with
this design principle.
On the SWC, single-story commercial buildings are separated
from 3 and 4-story multi-family residential buildings by a local
street with landscape buffers on each side, which complies with
this design principle.There shouldn't be any negative
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
operational impacts from commercial uses on the adjacent
residential development.
Design Principle: 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
Q ❑ ❑ sensitive neighborhood preservation design features should be
considered with transitions.
Review:There are no existing single-family neighborhoods
adjacent to proposed pad sites. Proposed pad sites are
anticipated to have single-story buildings.
Design Principle: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.
Q Q ❑
Review: On the NWC, there is no such transition between the
residential and non-residential portion of the development,
which doesn't comply with this design principle.
On the SWC,the proposed multi-family buildings are separated
from commercial uses by a local street and landscaped
parkways, which complies with this design principle.
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
Mixed-Use Community(MU-C)—Review
The purpose of this designation is to allocate areas where community-serving uses and dwellings
are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses,
including residential, and to avoid mainly single-use and strip commercial type buildings. Non-
residential buildings in these areas tend to be larger than in Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N)
areas, but not as large as in Mixed Use Regional(MU-R)areas. Goods and services in these areas
tend to be of the variety that people will mainly travel by car to, but also walk or bike to (up to
three or four miles). Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood
are encouraged.
Consistency with the Plan
Yes No N/A Design Principle& Review
Design Principle: Development must comply with the Functional Integration
Q Q ❑ principles for development in all Mixed-Use areas.
Review: See above analysis.
Design Principle: 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).
Review: On the NWC, 34%of the 30.66-acre site is conceptually residential
at a gross density of 9.57 units per acre based on 101 units on 10.55 acres of
Q Q ❑ land, which complies with the design principle. On the SWC, 72%of the
24.45-acre site is residential at a gross density of 18.23 units per acre based
on 322 units on 17.66 acres of land,which exceeds the maximum allowed
and does not comply with the design principle. Note: The density is not
calculated cumulatively between the NWC& the SWC because the
development is bisected by an arterial street.
Design Principle: Supportive and proportional public and/or quasi-public
spaces and places should comprise a minimum of 5%of the development
area are required.
Review: On the NWC, quasi-public spaces and places appear to comply with
the minimum percentage of the development area required in accord with
Q Q ❑ this design principle.
On the SWC, quasi-public spaces and places do not meet the minimum
percentage required in the commercial area and the open space areas in the
multi-family development don't qualify toward this requirement since
they're private in nature and meant for residents of the multi-family
development, which does not comply with this design guideline.
Design Principle: Where the development site has transit available or stops
are planned, an additional 15% of the site may be dedicated to residential
uses. Alternatively, this bonus may be applied where the development 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
❑ Q ❑ 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.
Review: Public transit is not available in this area, no routes or stops are
planned and no ride-share-parking exists or is planned in this area, thus
making more neighborhood-serving uses essential in this area to capture
local trips.
Q ❑ ❑ Design Principle:Sample uses appropriate in MU-C areas include: All MU-N
categories, community scale grocers, clothing stores, garden centers,
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
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.
Review:A 65,000 s.f. grocery store, restaurants, coffee shop, a bank, drive-
through facilities, fuel sales facility/convenience store, retail shops, office
type uses (i.e. professional/personal services, medical office, gym, daycare,
etc.) and multi-family residential uses are proposed, which is generally
consistent with the MU-C designation. Staff recommends the grocery store
not exceed 65,000 s.f. to ensure a traditional community scale grocer.
Based on the above-noted general mixed-use and MU-C design principles and analysis, Staff
does not find the proposed development plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
therefore,cannot provide a recommendation of approval on the annexation request and
consequently the preliminary plat and conditional use permit requests.Additionally,the
plans for extension of sewer and water service for this development area do not meet City
standards as submitted and are not approved.
If City Council determines the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City at this
time, Staff recommends the following modifications to the Applicant's request:
• Removal of the NWC development from the annexation area until such time as
development is proposed to ensure zoning isn't granted without a more firm plan in
place for development that complies with the Comprehensive Plan.
• The zoning of the office uses on the NWC of the development(i.e.Pads 1,J,K and L)is
L-O instead of C-G for the following reasons:
o The L-O district is less intense and provides a better transition in zoning and uses
between the grocery store to the south and the multi-family residential development to
the north and future residential to the west.
o The hours of operation are limited from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm in the L-O district to ensure
less impact on adjacent residential neighbors. The business hours of operation in the C-G
district are limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or
district; extended hours may be requested through a conditional use permit.
o The L-O district ensures a mix of uses is provided consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan so the area doesn't end up developing with more commercial non-office uses.
Note:All the anticipated possible uses in the office portion are allowed uses in the L-O
district. However, a gym would require a CUP, whereas it's principally permitted in the C-G
district, and a daycare center would be principally permitted, whereas it's a CUP in the C-G
district.
• The zoning of the commercial uses on the NWC of the development is C-C instead of C-
G for the following reasons:
o The zoning is a more appropriate and less-intense preferred zoning option in the MU-C
designation as allowed uses in that district are a larger scale and broader mix of retail,
office and service uses with access to arterials or non-residential collectors per UDC
Table 11-2B-3. The C-G district is typically for the largest scale and broadest mix of
such uses in close proximity and/or access to interstate or arterial intersections, which
more closely aligns with the Commercial and Mixed-Use Regional(MU-R)FL UM
designations.
Note:All anticipated possible uses in this area are allowed as principle permitted uses or
conditional uses per the specific use standards, as applicable, in either district. The hours
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
of operation are the same in either district. The only difference in the dimensional
standards is the maximum building height, which is 65'in the C-G district and 50'in the
C-C district, which shouldn't be an issue since all buildings are anticipated to be a
single-story in height.
o It provides a better transition to future medium density residential uses to the west and
office uses proposed to the north in the recommended L-O zone.
Note:All the anticipated possible uses in the commercial portion are allowed uses in the C-C
district. A drive-through establishment requires a CUP in either district. Business hours of
operation within either district are limited from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. when the property
abuts a residential use or district; a CUP may be requested for extended hours in either
district.
• The conceptual development plan for the SWC of the development should be revised to
reflect residential uses comprising between 20% and 50% of the development area with
gross densities ranging from 6 to 15 units/acre(of the residential area). Currently, 72%of
the 24.45-acre site is residential at a gross density of 18.23 units per acre.
• If the NWC property is annexed,the conceptual development plan for that development
should be revised to include driveway(s) accesses to the out-parcels(#R4622730010,
#51225449220�) along S.Meridian Rd./SH-69 that currently take access
via S.Meridian Rd./SH-69 for internal access from within the site.
C. Site Development and Use Analysis
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):
NWC: There is an existing multi-tenant building with a church and office space and an
existing utility infrastructure for Intermountain Gas Co. and transfer station for Northwest
Pipeline Corp. with associated improvements on three(3) out-parcels along S. Meridian
Rd./SH-69 included in the annexation area. There is also an existing home and accessory
structures on the west parcel that will be removed with redevelopment of the site. The
remainder of the site is vacant/undeveloped agricultural land.
SWC: There is an existing structure and accessory structures on the property that will be
removed with redevelopment of the site.
2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2):
The proposed uses as shown on the proposed conceptual development plan and described in
the application narrative are all desired uses in the MU-C designation, although the
percentage and density of residential uses on the SWC of the project exceeds the maximum
allowed.
The proposed uses are all principally permitted in the proposed zoning districts except for
multi-family residential,which requires conditional use approval, and drive-through
establishments,which also require conditional use approval if they're within 300' of an
existing residence or residential district.
3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
See UDC Tables 11-2A-7 and 11-2A-8 for dimensional standards of the R-15 and R-40
zoning districts,respectively;UDC 11-4-3-2713.1 for multi-family residential; and UDC
Table 11-213-3 for dimensional standards of the C-N, C-C and C-G zoning districts.
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
4. Specific Use Standards (UDC 11-4-3):
Staff has included links to the specific use standards below applicable to the identified uses
for information purposes only. Staff is only including analysis on consistency with these
standards for the multi-family residential proposed on the southwest portion of the SWC
development with the CUP application. Analysis of the other use's consistency with these
standards will take place with future Certificate of Zoning Compliance(CZC) and/or CUP
application(s), as applicable.
Restaurant—UDC 11-4-3-49
Financial institution—UDC 11-4-3-17
Fuel Sales Facility—UDC 11-4-3-20
Daycare Facility—UDC 11-4-3-9
Arts,entertainment or recreation facility,indoors and outdoors (i.e.gym) —UDC 114-
3-2
Drive-through Establishment—UDC 11-4-3-11
Multi-family Development—UDC 11-4-3-27
A CUP is only requested for the multi-family residential development on the SWC of the
development;therefore,the following analysis only applies to that multi-family development
and not the one proposed on the NWC of the development.
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.Note:Although two (2)
lots are proposed for flexibility of ownership and financing/refinancing opportunities for the
multi family development, the development will share all common areas, open space,
amenities, and maintenance responsibilities and operate as a single development.
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
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.
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
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 11-513-5 of this title. The
open space exhibit states 80 sf. will be provided for each unit. The floor plans
submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application should
demonstrate compliance with this standard if the use is approved.
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 111.1). 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.
The location of these items are required to 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 development
consists of 16.35 acres of land; therefore, the baseline requirement is 1.64 acres;
a total of 2.28 acres is provided per the open space exhibit included below in
Section V.M.
City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis
■
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.
The proposed open space areas have been integrated into the development as a
priority, are accessible by pathways and internal drive-aisles, are highly visible
and incorporate a mix of active and passive uses as desired.
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.
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.
Several common grassy areas are provided that meet and exceed this standard.
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.
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.
c. Three hundred fifty(350) square feet for each unit containing more than one
thousand two hundred(1,200) square feet of living area.
All 322 units have between 500 and 1,200 square feet of living area. Therefore, a
minimum of 1.85 acres of outdoor common open space is required—a total of
3.14 acres is provided, exceeding the minimum standard by 1.29 acres.
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 counted toward qualified open space 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
dwelling units. The development is not proposed to be phased.
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. The
common open space adjacent to S. Meridian Rd./SH--69 will be separated from the
street by a 3-4'tall berm and barrier. The common open space adjacent to S.
Hermatite Ave. is proposed to not have a berm/barrier—the Applicant requests
City Council approval of such through the CUP.
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.
a. Enhanced landscaping as set forth in Article 11-313,Landscaping
Requirements;
b. Multi-use pathways;
c. Enhanced amenities with social interaction characteristics;
d. Enhanced context with the surroundings.
Because the landscape buffers along the collector street(i.e. S.Hermatite Ave.)
and arterial street(i.e. S.Meridian Rd./SH--69) are both counted toward the
required common open space, compliance with these standards is required. Ten-
foot-wide multi-use pathways are proposed along both streets.
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
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
(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.
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.
The amenity rendering included below in Section V.M depicts the following
amenities from each category:
Quality of life: Clubhouse,(2)dog parks
Open space: Community garden, shade structure
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
Recreation: Swimming pool and spa,walking trails, children's play structure and
sports courts [(3)pickleball courts and a half basketball court].
If the use is approved,based on 322 units, Staff recommends the following
additional amenities from the Multi-modal category: bicycle repair station
and charging stations for electric vehicles.As part of the proposed amenities,
waste stations in the dog parks and a picnic area,including tables,benches
and landscaping are required with the shade structure.A detail of the
proposed children's play equipment should also be submitted.
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 per the standards in
UDC 11-3B-7C. Parking lot landscaping is required with site development per the
standards in UDC 11-3B-8C and will be reviewed for compliance with these
standards with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
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.
If the use is approved, the landscape plans submitted with the final plat and
Certificate of Zoning Compliance, as applicable, should be revised to reflect
compliance with these standards.
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.
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 obtain
approval by MPD for any such systems.
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. Existing structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-19):
Compliance with the structure and site design standards in UDC 11-3A-19 is required. The
purpose of UDC 11-3A-19 is to encourage site design that provides an interconnected
network of walkways,pathways, streets, and/or drive aisles that combined promote
pedestrian and vehicular mobility within the development and connect to adjacent
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
developments; and to facilitate the efficient movement of traffic into, out of, and through a
site,protect pedestrian and bicycle users, establish an aesthetically consistent street presence
and limit the visual impacts of large parking areas on a site.
NWC: There is an existing home and associated outbuildings on the west side of the
development area and an existing multi-tenant building with a church/office space,utility
infrastructure for Intermountain Gas Co. and a transfer station for Northwest Pipeline Corp.
along the east side of the development area adjacent to Meridian Rd./SH-69.
SWC: There is a wholesale nursery(Victory Greens) occupying the site.
Future development is required to comply with the structure and site design standards listed
in UDC 11-3A-19.
2. Qualified Open Space &Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3G):
The standards in this section are not applicable; see the standards in UDC 11-4-3-27C for
common open space and site amenity requirements for multi-family developments addressed
above in Section CA.
3. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B):
i. Landscape buffers along streets
Landscaped street buffers are required to be constructed as part of the subdivision
improvements on the SWC of the site, as follows:
• A 35' wide buffer is required along S. Meridian Rd./SH-69, an arterial street and
entryway corridor;
• A 25' wide buffer is required along W. Amity Rd., an arterial street;
• A 20' wide buffer is required along S. Hermatite Ave. and W. Lyra St.,both collector
streets; and
• A 10' wide buffer(s)is required along local/private streets.
Street buffers are conceptually proposed for the overall site as required. On the portion
of the site being platted(SWC), all street buffers should 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 owner's association.
Landscaping is required within the buffers per the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C.
Additional landscape design features are required within street buffers along entryway
corridors per UDC 11-313-7C.3f,which may include berms of no less than four to one
(4:1) slope to at a three-foot minimum height, decorative landscape walls(no greater than
three (3)feet in height), decorative open vision fencing(no greater than four(4)feet in
height), or design elements with a similar level of effort(Example: a dry creek design
with river rock,boulders, etc.). Detached sidewalks within landscaped buffers are
required along entryway corridors.
On the SWC,in the southern portion of the street buffer along Meridian Rd./SH-69
adjacent to residential uses, a 3-4' tall berm at a 4:1 slope is proposed with a 10' wide
detached sidewalk/pathway,trees, shrubs,vegetative groundcover and decorative
boulders/rocks. In the northern portion of the buffer adjacent to commercial uses, a dry
stream bed with river rock is incorporated into the buffer with a 10' wide detached
sidewalk/pathway,trees, shrubs,vegetative groundcover and decorative boulders/rocks.
ii. Parking lot landscaping
Parking lot landscaping is required with development per the standards listed in UDC 11-
313-8C. Development of the area not included in the CUP application will be reviewed for
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
consistency with these standards with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)
application for future development.
The landscape plan submitted with the CUP application generally complies with the
required standards; a detailed review will take place with the CZC application. The
"hatched"areas identified in the Plant Schedule as internal parking lot landscaping
should be further defined to demonstrate compliance with the standards in UDC 11-
3B-8C.2d and 11-3B-5N,which requires planter islands to be covered with low
shrubs,lawn,or other vegetative groundcover at a coverage of at least 70% at
maturity.
iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses
A 20' wide buffer is required to adjoining residential uses in the C-N district and a 25'
wide buffer is required to adjoining residential uses in the C-C and C-G zoning districts
per UDC Table 11-2B-3, landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-9C.
Because the out-parcel proposed to be zoned C-N is already developed, Staff
recommends a 20' wide buffer is provided on the subject property to buffer the
proposed residential uses to the west in Building H.
iv. Tree preservation
Mitigation is required for all existing trees 4"caliper or greater that are removed from the
site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100%
replacement per the standards in UDC 11-3B-1OC.5.
There are several existing trees on the SWC that will be removed with development,
some in poor and some in good condition. The Mitigation Calculations shown on the
landscape plan submitted with the preliminary plat included below in Section V.J, state
190 caliper inches are required for mitigation with 200 caliper inches provided, in accord
with UDC standards.
There are also several existing trees on the NWC that will be evaluated for mitigation
requirements with submittal of a development application for that property.
v. Stormwater integration
An adequate storm drainage system shall be 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.
vi. Pathway landscaping
Landscaping is required along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C.
Minimum 5' wide landscape strips are required on each side of all pathways with
landscaping consisting of a mix of trees(one per 100 linear feet), shrubs,lawn,and/or
other vegetative groundcover. The landscape plan should reflect compliance with
these standards.Because trees are not allowed within the Northwest gas pipeline
easement on the NWC,an alternative compliance application should be submitted to
UDC 11-3B-12C.2,which requires one(1)tree per 100 linear feet of pathway.
4. Parking (UDC 11-3Q:
All parking spaces shall comply with the required stall dimensions in UDC Table 11-3C-5.
i. Residential parking analysis
Off-street parking is required per the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for multi-
family dwellings; the number of parking spaces is based on the number of bedrooms per
unit.
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
SWC: Based on(116) 1-bedroom units, (168)2-bedroom units and(38) 3-bedroom units,
a minimum of 656 spaces are required with 322 of those in covered carports or garages.
A total of 693 spaces are provided,with 330 of those being covered in podium(129),
carports (145)and garages(56),which exceeds the minimum standard by 37 spaces.
NWC: Parking will be evaluated for compliance with these standards with future CUP
and/or CZC applications.
ii. Nonresidential parking analysis
Off-street parking is required per the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-6B.1,unless
otherwise required by the specific use standards for the use. Parking will be evaluated for
compliance with these standards with future development applications for detailed site
plan approval.
iii. Bicycle parking analysis
A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space must be provided for every 25 vehicle
spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to
comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C.
For the multi-family development on the SWC, a total of 693 vehicle parking spaces are
provided; therefore, a minimum of 28 bicycle parking spaces are required—28 are
provided.
5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan, Architectural Standards Manual):
Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the single-story commercial Pad A at
Plaza A building along with perspective drawings of Plaza A and B and the adjacent
commercial buildings,included below in Section V.F.All commercial buildings are
anticipated to be a single-story in height. Building materials consist of brick veneer, stucco
and wood siding in neutral colors with flat roofs and parapets. Conceptual elevations were not
submitted for the grocery store.
The multi-family structures (Building F)at the NWC are anticipated to be 2 to 3-stories in
height, depending on the number of bedrooms,with first floor garages similar to the photos
below in Section V.O of the Broadstone project in Nampa. Building H is proposed to be of
similar architecture to Building E on the SWC shown below in Section V.N.
Elevations were also submitted for the 3-story garden-style and 4-story podium-style multi-
family buildings with parking on the ground floor on the SWC, included below in Section
V.M. Building materials consist of fiber cement siding variegated board&batten in a variety
of colors and styles(8"clapboard, 10.25"vertical shiplap,lap siding), stucco and brick.
All structures are required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural
Standards Manual.
6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
No fencing is proposed.
The UDC (11-311-41))requires traffic noise abatement to be provided for residential
uses adjoining SH-69 consisting of a berm or a berm and wall combination parallel to
the state highway that meets the standards listed in UDC 11-3H-4D.A detail of such
should be depicted on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat application.
7. Parkways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-17):
Detached sidewalks with landscaped parkways are proposed along all streets. The
minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be 8'; the planter
width for Class II trees may be reduced to 6' if there are root barriers that are a
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
minimum of 18" below subgrade adjacent to the sidewalk and a minimum of 24"
below subgrade adjacent to the curb. The root barriers shall extend 2" above
grade. Compliance with these standards is required.
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).
The primary transportation considerations for this development involve the timing and
coordination of required off-site improvements, access management along Amity Road and SH-
69, and completion of internal street and pathway connections needed to support a functional
mixed-use neighborhood pattern. The project would add measurable traffic to a network that
already experiences operational strain during peak hours,underscoring the need to align
development phasing with programmed intersection and signal improvements. Because of its
proximity to two major transportation corridors,the design must emphasize efficient site access,
safe circulation, and continuous pedestrian and bicycle connections consistent with the City's
adopted street and pathway standards. The Ada County Highway District's recommended
conditions and findings addressing intersection mitigation, access spacing, and collector
completion reflect these shared objectives and are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan
and Unified Development Code policies for coordinated land use and transportation planning.
While traditional traffic modeling evaluates vehicular capacity, it does not fully capture the
pedestrian,bicycle, and access-conflict dynamics that accompany higher-intensity mixed-use and
multi-family development.Within these contexts, design features—such as continuous multi-use
pathways, clearly defined pedestrian crossings, separated sidewalks, and internal circulation
loops—serve a critical safety function that extends beyond aesthetic or amenity value. The City's
Comprehensive Plan and adopted Pathways Master Plan identify these elements as necessary
infrastructure to ensure that residents and visitors can move safely and efficiently between uses
without over-reliance on the arterial network. For this site, intentional design of frontage paths,
internal connections,and collector stubs is essential to mitigating localized conflicts and
supporting the overall transportation performance of the surrounding system.
The City's mixed-use policies emphasize pedestrian-oriented design as the foundation for
functional,higher-density development. These areas are intended to place walking and biking at
the top of the circulation hierarchy,with vehicular access and parking designed to complement—
not dominate—the public realm. As projects seek both greater residential densities and auto-
attractive commercial uses,design quality must correspondingly increase to manage the intensity
and ensure safe, direct, and convenient pedestrian movement throughout the site.Features such as
continuous sidewalks,building-oriented pathways,compact block structure,and minimized
driveway conflicts are integral components of this expectation. This approach aligns with the
Comprehensive Plan's mixed-use and transportation policies,which direct that density and design
be balanced through form, connectivity, and safety rather than by roadway expansion alone. The
proposed site plan includes elements that are detrimental to this concept that should be
revised if the application is approved.
Additionally, as noted in the ACHD report under Traffic Impact Study—Summary and Findings,
"The applicant has indicated that site is multi-use and that contributes to trip capture rate.
While there are a mix of uses proposed on the site plan they are not integrated, as the multi-
family is stand alone and separated from the commercial uses by parking lots with no clear
vehicular access via drive aisles or dedicated pedestrian facilities. The commercial uses are
oriented towards SH-69 and include auto-oriented uses(fast-food with drive-thru,drive-
thru coffee shop,gas station, etc.).Because of the mix of uses,the layout of the site plan and
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
parking lots, and prior experience with trip capture,ACHD will not be accepting any trip capture
for this development."
1. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4):
Comprehensive Plan Policy#3.07.02B—Locate smaller-scale, neighborhood-serving
commercial and office use clusters so they complement and provide convenient access from
nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadways and multimodal corridors.
Comprehensive Plan Policy#3.02.01 G-Establish and maintain levels of service for public
facilities and services, including water, sewer,police, transportation, schools,fire, and parks.
Comprehensive Plan Policy#6.01.02B-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.
Access is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-3 and 11-3H-4 for state
highways. The intent of these standards is to improve safety by combining and/or limiting
access points to collector and arterial streets and ensuring that motorists can safely enter all
streets.
Access is proposed for the overall site(NWC& SWC)as shown on the conceptual
development plan,included below in Section V.E. ACHD's Master Street Map(MSM)
depicts a planned collector street along the west boundary of the NWC property connecting to
W. Lyra St at the north boundary and S.Meridian Rd./SH-69.
See the ACHD report for existing conditions, analysis of the project and improvements
required with the proposed development(SWC).
NWC: This portion of the development is estimated to generate 10,366 vehicle trips per day,
1,166 trips per hour in the PM peak hour,based on the Traffic Impact Study(TIS).
The conceptual development plan depicts two (2) driveway accesses via W.Amity Rd. as
well as a collector street(S. Hermatite Ave.)access at the west boundary of the site in accord
with the MSM; one(1) driveway access via S. Meridian Rd./SH-69;two(2)accesses via W.
Lyra St., a collector street; and two(2)accesses via S.Hermatite Ave., a collector street.
South Solaris Ave. is proposed to extend into the site 45' from the north property line.
ACHD only supports one(1) access via Amity located a minimum of 660' west of the Amity
&Meridian/SH-69 intersection since the property will have access to a lesser classified street
(i.e. Hermatite)—UDC 11-3A-3 supports this by limiting access to arterial and collector
street to improve safety and ensure motorists can safely enter all streets. ACHD recommends
this access is a temporary full access,restricted to a left-in/right-in/right-out when the
Hermatite/Amity intersection is signalized in the future. This driveway may be further
restricted in the future as traffic conditions warrant, as determined by ACHD or if the west
leg of the Amity&Meridian/SH-69 intersection is widened beyond 5 lanes.
Comments have not been received from ITD pertaining to the access via Meridian/SH-69. In
2012,the City granted a Variance(VAR-12-001)to UDC 11-3H-4B.2a,which prohibits new
accesses to a state highway,to allow three(3)access points to SH-69/Meridian Rd. between
Harris St. &Amity Rd., one of which lies on the subject property. This approval was based
on ITD's approval of the access. All existing approaches should be removed.
UDC 11-3A-3A.2 requires cross-access/ingress-egress easements to adjoining properties,
either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat.Additionally,UDC 11-3A-
3A.3 requires all subdivisions to provide local street access to any use that currently
takes direct access from an arterial or collector street—this applies to the three(3) out-
parcels along Meridian Rd./SH-69(i.e.Parcel#R4622730010,#S1225449220 and
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
#51225449910)—the existing accesses shall be removed with development of the site and
sole access should be provided internally from within the development area.
The access points depicted on the conceptual development plan are not approved and
should be evaluated with a future subdivision application.
SWC: This portion of the development is estimated to generate 6,378 vehicle trips per day,
551 trips per hour in the PM peak hour,based on the Traffic Impact Study(TIS).
There are three(3)existing driveways via Meridian/SH-69—the use of these driveways
should cease upon development, and the approaches should be abandoned and removed in
accord with UDC 11-3H-4B.
The conceptual development plan depicts one(1)driveway access via W. Amity Rd. and one
(1)driveway/private street access via S.Meridian Rd./SH-69.A portion of a future collector
street(Hermatite)via W. Amity Rd. is depicted along the southern portion of the west
boundary of the site and stubs to the property to the south—the portion that connects to
Amity Rd. is off-site on the adjacent property to the west and is not proposed to be
constructed with this development. The collector street access is needed for emergency
service providers to adequately provide service the multi-family development;
therefore,the collector street should be extended from W.Amity Rd.to the site prior to
issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy within the multi-family development.Two
(2)access driveways are proposed via Hermatite in the multi-family development.
The UDC (11-311 4B.2a)prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway.
City Council may consider and approve a modification to the standard upon specific
recommendation of the Idaho Transportation Dept. or if strict adherence is not feasible,
as determined by City Council.The Applicant is requesting Council approval of the
proposed access; comments have not yet been received from ITD on whether they
already have granted or will grant the access.
A backage road generally paralleling Amity Rd. and Meridian/SH-69 is proposed for access
to the properties fronting those roads in accord with UDC 11-311-413.3.
As part of the development,the Applicant proposes improvements to the existing Amity&
Meridian Rd./SH-69 signalized intersection. ACHD has modified these improvements to
include widening of the west leg of the intersection to 5-lanes,with two(2)receiving
through-lanes, one(1)left-turn lane, one(1)through-lane and one(1) shared through/right-
turn lane,which will require adjustments to the striping on the east leg to reflect this
configuration and any necessary modifications to the existing signal. Although ACHD
cannot require the Applicant to improve/widen the eastern leg of the intersection,
ACHD Staff recommends the Applicant improve/widen the eastern leg of the
intersection to 5-lanes to match the west leg.If the proposed development is approved,
City Staff recommends these off-site improvements are required as a provision in the
DA.
2. Multiuse Pathways (UDC 11-3A-5):
All multi-use pathways should be constructed in accord with the City's Comprehensive Plan,
the Meridian Pathways Master Plan,the ACHD Master Street Map and Roadways to
Bikeways Master Plan per UDC 11-3A-5.
The Pathways Master Plan(PMP)depicts multi-use pathways along S. Meridian Rd. and
along the Northwest gas pipeline corridor with a connection across the northwest corner the
NWC property to the future north/south collector street to the west at the half mile between
Meridian&Linder Roads. The conceptual development plan depicts 10' wide pathways in
accord with the Plan.
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
All pathways should be located outside of irrigation district easements unless permission is
specifically obtained from the governing irrigation district. For pathway segments and other
improvements within the pipeline easement,the developer should work with Williams
Pipeline Co.to secure the necessary permissions and approvals.
Easements for the pathways should be a minimum of 14 feet wide(10' pathway+2' shoulder
each side). Public use easements are only required to be dedicated for multi-use pathways that
lie outside the public right-of-way.
If this project is approved and if the developer can obtain permission from the property
owners, Staff recommends a DA provision that requires the developer construct a 10'
wide detached pathway across the frontage of the out-parcels (i.e.#R4622730010,
#S1225449220 and#S1225449910) along Meridian Rd. for continuity and pedestrian
safety.
3. Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-8):
All pathways shall comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-8. Internal pathways are
proposed through common open space areas in the residential and commercial areas and
throughout the development for pedestrian connectivity as shown on the exhibit below in
Section V.G.
4. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17):
Sidewalks are required along all streets in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17.
Detached 10' wide sidewalks are required along all arterial and collector streets and 5' wide
attached sidewalks are required along all local streets although detached sidewalks may be
provided.
The proposed plat depicts sidewalks as required. The proposed conceptual development
plan for the NWC doesn't include 10' wide sidewalks along the collector streets
(Lyra/Hermatite) and should.
5. Private Streets (UDC 11-3F-4):
Private streets are not proposed but should be provided for addressing purposes in the
locations shown on the exhibit below.A private street application should be submitted
with the final plat application for approval of these streets and should be depicted on
the final plat. The requirement for private streets on the NWC will be evaluated with a future
subdivision application for that property.
14
i
a.a
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
6. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6C):
The design, location and widths of all street and street intersections shall comply with the
requirements of the transportation authority,unless alternative standards are adopted by the
City.All driveway openings in curbs shall comply with the requirements of the transportation
authority.
i. Dead end streets
The proposed plat does not depict any dead-end streets.
ii. Common driveways
The proposed plat does not depict any common driveways.
iii. Block face
The proposed plat complies with the block face 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 Carlson Lateral runs along the west boundary of the NWC and crosses the SWC property
in two(2)locations. The laterals on the SWC property are proposed to be relocated and piped
with development in accord with UDC 11-3A-6B. Easements for such should be depicted
on the plat; any development within the easements should be approved by the easement
holder.The Applicant has secured agreements with the Bureau of Reclamation to relocate
the easements as shown below.
— ------
ICI'
TE
_ � a
II �
t t
nY� a�..a wuaxic I
I:rM
B
City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis
■
2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15):
An underground pressurized irrigation system is required with development to provide
irrigation water to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15.
There is a 30-40' wide gravity irrigation easement on the commercial portion of the SWC
proposed to be improved with a drivable rock dry stream bed for access when needed by
Boise Project Board of Control vehicles(see exhibit in Section V.P below). Irrigation piping,
trees, and large herbaceous shrubs are not allowed within the easement.
3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18):
An adequate storm drainage system shall be required in all developments in accord with the
city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow
Best Management Practice as adopted by the city. A Geotechnical Investigation report was
submitted with the application, included in the public record.
4. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21):
Comprehensive Plan Policy#3.02.0IE-Phase-in developments in accordance with their
connection to the municipal sewer and water system and the provision of other necessary
infrastructure and services.
All utilities for an approved use should be installed at or below grade in accord with the
City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances.
Street lighting should be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications
and ordinances.
All development should connect to the City water and sewer systems,unless otherwise
approved by the City engineer.ITD has granted conditional approval for this development to
install a sewer line within the SH-69 right-of-way.
Adequate fire protection is required in accord with the appropriate fire district standards.
IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Meridian Planning Division
Staff is recommending denial of the annexation application and consequently the preliminary plat
and conditional use permit applications; therefore, conditions of approval are not included.
If the Commission and/or City Council determines the proposed annexation is in the best interest
of the City with the proposed development plan,the project should be continued to a later hearing
date in order for Staff to prepare recommended conditions of approval.
B. Meridian Public Works
The updated conceptual engineering plans for sewer and water service for the proposed
development,submitted on February 13th,have not yet been reviewed by the Public Works
Dept. as of the date of transmittal of this report; therefore,it's unknown if this development
can be serviced as proposed.
C. Meridian Fire Department
Based on the review of the current Fire Access Exhibit provided by KM Engineering,the
proposed access outlined for the Commercial Development is acceptable however the access for
the Multi-Family Residential Development is only sufficient upon the completion of S. Hematite
Avenue before being acceptable and meeting the criteria as outlined in the 2018 IFC,Appendix D
for secondary access and remoteness.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
■
D. Meridian Police Department
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=420383&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
LU See Service Accessibility Reports below in Section V.B.
E. Meridian Park's Department
https://weblink.meridiancity.orzlWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=420384&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
iv
F. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho(COMPASS)
https://weblink.meridiancity.org WWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=421739&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
G. Irrigation Districts
Boise-Kuna Irrigation District
https:llweblink.meridianciU.org WWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=423842&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Boise Project Board of Control
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=421301&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
H. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ)
https://weblink.meridiancity.orglWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=421645&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
I. West Ada School District(WASD)
https://weblink.meridianciU.oLvlWebLinkIDocView.aspx?id=422248&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
J. Community Development School Impact Data
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=420985&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
hty
K. Ada County Highway District(ACHD)
NW portion:
https://weblink.meridianciU.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=418302&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
SW portion:
https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=418301&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
Lty
L. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD)
ITD has not yet issued a staff report for this project.
https://weblink.meridianciU.org WWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=422848&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC
V. FINDINGS
A. Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-513-3E)
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:
City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings
■
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Stafffinds the proposed conceptual development plan associated with the map amendment to
the R-15, R-40, C-N, C-C and C-G zoning districts is not consistent with the general mixed-
use and Mixed Use—Community development guidelines in 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;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to the R-15 and R-40 zoning districts and
conceptual development plan with a mix of multi family housing types (i.e. apartment and
townhome-style units) complies with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that
it provides for a range of housing opportunities. However, the percentage and density of
residential uses on the SWC is greater than allowed in the MU-C designation; therefore, the
map amendment with the proposed development plan is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to the C-N, C-C and C-G zoning districts and
conceptual development plan complies with the purpose statement of the commercial district
in that it provides for the retail and service needs of the community. However, the percentage
of commercial uses and public/quasi-public uses on the SWC is less than desired in MU-C
designated areas. Therefore, the map amendment with the proposed development plan is not
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment with the traffic generation anticipated from the
proposed uses and intensity of development will 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
Stafffinds the map amendment may result in an adverse impact upon the West Ada School
District as the 2024-2025 enrollment for Victory Middle School was over capacity and
additional children from this development could further adversely impact services.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
Stafffinds the annexation is not in the best interest of the City with the proposed development
plan as it isn't consistent with the mixed use and specifically the Mixed Use—Community
development guidelines as noted above in Section III. Further, the revised conceptual
engineering plans for sewer and water service for the site have not yet been approved by
Public Works so it's uncertain if services can be provided in accord with City requirements.
B. Conditional Use(UDC 11-513-6E)—Multi-family Development on SWC
Because Staff is recommending denial of the annexation application based on the proposed
conceptual development plan,Findings analysis is not included for the associated conditional use
permit request.
C. Preliminary Plat(UDC-6B-6)—SWC
Because Staff is recommending denial of the annexation application based on the proposed
conceptual development plan,Findings analysis is not included for the associated preliminary plat
request.
City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings
■
VI. ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed annexation based on the proposed development not
being consistent with the mixed-use and MU-C development guidelines as discussed above in
Section III. Consequently, Staff recommends denial of the associated preliminary plat and
conditional use permit requests.
B. Commission:
Pending
C. City Council:
Pending
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Project Area Maps
(link to Project Overview)
1. Aerial
Legend fill
Project Location �_.....aa73�f
Area of Impact
OAnalysis
i
Ail x III
r`�
City of Meridian Department Report VI. Action
1 00
2. Zoning Map
Legend R7
Project Location _ 0
Area of Impact
L4-
OAnalysis R-4
R=8 S�LMA -t
1R=8
R1 RUT
RUT
7�
R-4
TN-R
A` R-8 R1
R�6 FR=2
e R74
3. Future Land Use
�R� � u�wwuweu
Legend
Project Location
ff
Area of Impact Low Density
Residential
OAnalysis
_��_� Mecllum,Dens
High Re denf�—rI
Density Residential
Med-High
Density <
Residential
c
--F-
L] 2 MU-C
ra
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
1 01
4. Planned Development Map
Legend ® ff 0
Project Location
0"Area of Impact
T= City Limits ^ !
Planned Parcels
®
® ®
OAnalysis LLL
,
i
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
102
5. Map Notes
Northwest Parcels:
Recent Area Preliminary Plats(last 5 years): H-2023-0033; H-2023-0041
Recent Area Conditional Use Permits: H-2018-0100 H-2018-0054 H-2018-0129 H-2019-
0129 H-2020-0067 H-2019-0150 H-2020-0117 H-2021-0021 H-2021-0036 H-2021-0087 H-
2015-0005 H-2019-0097 H-2022-0050 H-2023-0031 H-2023-0041 H-2023-0055 H-2024-
0014 H-2024-0022 H-2024-0067
Southwest Parcel:
Recent Area Preliminary Plats(last 5 years): H-2023-0033; H-2023-0041
Recent Area Conditional Use Permits: H-2018-0100 H-2018-0054 H-2018-0129 H-2019-
0129 H-2020-0067 H-2020-0117 H-2021-0021 H-2021-0036 H-2021-0087 H-2019-0097 H-
2022-0050 H-2023-0031 H-2023-0041 H-2024-0014 H-2024-0022 H-2024-0041 H-2024-
0067 H-2025-0041
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
103
B. Service Accessibility Reports
Northwest parcel: Southwest parcel:
PARCEL S1225449650 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY PARCEL S1236110060 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY
Overall Score: 8 2nd Percentile Overall Score: 8 2nd Percentile
Location Within 1/2 mile of City Limits YELLOW Location Within 1/2 mile of City Limits YELLOW
Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains<500 ft.from parcel Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains<500 ft.from parcel
Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or>2 acres Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or>2 acres
Emergency Services Fire Response time>9 min. Emergency Services Fire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOW
Emergency Services Police Reporting District does not meet most response time Emergency Services Police Reporting
results
por ing District does not have enough data to report
goals -
Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways Pathways Within 1/4 mile of current pathways
Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route
ll ltimate configuration(#of lanes in master streets Ultimate configuration(#of lanes in master streets
Arterial Road Buil dout Status plan)>existing(#of lanes)&road IS NOT in 5 yr work ■ Arterial Road Buildout Status plan)>existing(#of lanes)&road IS NOT in 5 yr work
plan plan
School Walking Proximity From 1/2 to 1 mile walking YELLOW School Walking Proximity From 1/2 to 1 mile walking YELLOW
Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a
School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving ■ School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving
(existing or future) (existing or future)
Park Walkability No park within walking distance by park type Park Walkability No park within walking distance by park type
Report generahsi on 01-07-2025 by MERIDIAN15all- Report generated on 01-07-2026 by MERIDIAH1s 11-
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
104
C. Site Photos
NWC (looking northwest):
�i.
,ate
6
SWC(looking southeast):
.� --
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
105
D. Annexation Legal Description& Exhibit Map
lam
E N G I N E E R I N G
September 1,2023
Project No.23-151
Annexation
Legal Description
Exhibit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the East 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25 and a portion of the
Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36,Township 3 North,mange 1 West,Boise Meridian,Ada
County,Idaho and being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at a found aluminum cap marking the Southeast corner of said Section 25,which bears
500°32'54"W a distance of 2,664.88 feet from a found aluminum cap marking the East 1/4 corner of said
Section 25,thence following the easterly line of said Northeast 1/4 of Section 36,S00'37'50"W a distance of
1,320.65 feet to the North 1/16 comer of said Section 35;
Thence leaving said easterly line and following the southerly line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4,
N89°13'03"W a distance of 893.66 feet to afound 5/8-Inch rebar;
Thence NOQ"36'05"E a distance of 1,322.93 feet to the northerly line of said Northeast 1/4 of Section 36;
Thence following said northerly line,N69"04'18"W a distance of 343.66 feet;
Thence leaving said northerly line,ND6'15'42"E a distance of 1,4W.39 feet to a found 5/34rich rebar;
Thence 552°04'27"E a distance of 240.08 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence S89°15'25"E a distance of 274.79 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar on the boundary of Stapleton
Subdivision No.1{Beak 120 of Plats,Pages 18746-18750);
Thence following the boundary of said Stapleton Subdivision No.1 the following six(6)courses:
1. S89°15'25"E a distance of 66.00 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
2. S00`32'50"W a distance of 79.93 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
3. S89°18'36"E a distance of 144.81 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
4. 89.63 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 300.00 feet,a delta angle
of 17"07'04",a chord bearing of N82°07'52"E,and a chord distance of 89.30 feet to a found 5/8-inch
rebar;
5. 98.89 feet along the arc of a curve to the right,said Curve having a radius of 300.00 feet,a delta angle
of 16"58'30",a chord bearing of N82°03'35"E and a chord distance of 88.56 feet to a found 5/8-inch
rebar;
6. 589°27'10"E a distance of 15617 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence leaving said subdivision boundary,S89"27101 a distance of 82.00 feet to the easterly line of said
Southeast 1/4 of Section 25;
Thence following said easterly fine,S00°32'50"Wa distance of 1,280.20 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 62.432 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements a KL L4 s
and/or rights-of-way of record or implied. �51 �,�EHSFQ u4
All subdivisions,deeds,records of surveys,and other instruments of record referenced � �
herein are recorded documents of the county in which these described lands are situated.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof_ all 4F ti9
91r/7013
5725 North Discovery Way•Boise, Edaho 91713-208.639.61339• kmenGllp.cum
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
106
EAST t/4 CORNER 25 30
SECTION 25
�� Unplatted Stapleton
N o L2 O o vbdivision No. 1
L5 C. � L6
0 400 8OD 1200 L4 a °
Plan Seale: 1" =400' L7
LEGEND
FOUND ALUMINUM CAP o I
„} FOUND 5/8" REBAR
r°x CALCULATED POINT �� CID N��
SECTION LINE ZD� �
BOUNDARY UNE w CD nJ
zo Annexation Area:
ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE 20: V
62.432± AC
0 0Lei
POINT 0F' BEGINNING
EDUTHEAST 1/4 CORNER
SbUTH 1 f4 CORNER SECTION 25 SECTION 25
25 1398-77' W.Amity Rd. 29 3+3�
_ _ 343.fi6' 394.34'
36 R N89'04'18"W — — y 36 311
N89'04'18"W 2636.77'— 1
3 w
CURVE TABLE
zz
CURVE RAprLJS LENGTH DELTA CHORD BRG CHORD
Rl
C1 300.00' 89.63' 1707'04" N82'07'52"E 89,30' w 'r
C2 3DD_DO' 88.88' 16'58'30" N82'03'35"E 88.56' w
� � w
LINE TABLE
O
LINE BEARING DISTANCE w
Ll S5Z04'27`E 240.08
z
L2 S59'15'25"E 274.79
L3 S59'15'25"E 65.00
L-4 S00'32'50"N 79.93 0
N99'13'03"W 893,66'
t�
L5 SB9'18'351 144,81 llnplatted
LIS SB9'27'10"E 156.27
L7 S89'27'10"E 82,40 rA57 1/4 CORNER
SECTION 36
E N 0 1 N E E R I N G 36 3]
5775 NORTH DISCOVERY WAY
3015E,IDAHO 93723
PHONE[2VN 537-5939 Exhibit B
Ian@nEllp c
Annexation
PATE: Srpt—b-7R)9
i'ROJEC: 23-151
SHEET: A portion of the E 112 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 25 and a portion of the
1 OF 1 NE 114 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 36, T3N., R1W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
107
km
E N G 1 N E E R I N G
February 25,2025
Project No.23-152
Rezone to R-15
Legal Description
Exhibit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the East 112 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25,Township 3 North,
Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada Cc unty, Idaho and being more particularly described as
follows;
Commencing at a found aluminum cap marking the Southeast corner of said Section 25,u+hich bears
500'32'50"W a distance of 2,664.88 feet from a found aluminum flap ma rking the East 2/4 corner of said
Section 25;
Thence following the easterly line of said Southeast 1/4,N{)W32'50"E a distance of 910.29 feet to the
boundary of the Plat of Jessica Condos Project Amendment No.1(Book 12.3 of Plats,Pages 19519-19522);
Thence leaving said easterly line and following said subdivision boundary, N89"27'10"W a distance of 297.81
feet to the PAINT OF BEGINNING.
Thence leaving said subdivision boundary,NB9°27'10"W a distance of 25.11 feet;
Thence SOG 32'50"W a distance of 30.00 feel;;
Thence N89"27'10"VV a distance of 177.12 feet;
Thence S00D32'50"W a distance of 51.95 feet;
Thence N89"27'10"W a distance of 655.57 feet;
Thence N06`15'42"E a distance of 656.20 feetto a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence 552°04'27"E a distance of 240.08 feetto a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence S69115125PE a distance of 274-79 feetto a found 5/8-inch rebar on the boundary of Stapleton
Subdivision No.1(Book 120 of Plats, Pages 18746-18750),
Thence following the boundary of said Stapleton Subdivision No.1 the following six(6)courses:
1. 589015'25"E a distance of 66.00 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
2 S00°32,50"W a distance of 79.93 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
3. S89"18'36"E a distance of 144.51 feet to a foun d 5/3-inch rebar;
4. 899.53 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 300.00 feet,a delta angle
of 17°07'04",a chord bearing of N82°07'52"E,and a chord distance of89.30 feet to a found 5/8-inch
rebar;
S. 88.88 feet along the arc of a curve to the right,said curve havang a radius of 300.00 feet,a delta angle
of 16°58'30",a chord hearing of N82°03'35"E,and a chord distance of 88.56 feet to a found 5/8-inch
rebar;
6. S89°27'10"E a distance of156.27 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence leaving said subdivision boundary,589°27'10"E a distance of 82.00 feet to said easterly line;
Thence following said easterly line,500°32'50"W a dicta nee of 68.23 fleet;
Thence leaving said easterly fine,N89'27'10"W a distance of 70.00 feet to the Northeast comer of said Plat of
Jessica Condos Project Amendment No.-1;
57,Z5 North Discovery way• Boise, Idaho 53713 • 208.639.6939• kmengllp.com
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
108
Thence following the boundary of said Jessica Condos Project Amend ment No. 1 the following two(2)courses:
1. S86°13'04"W a distance of 245.22 feet;
2. S02°49'51"E a distance of 283.67 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 9.762 acres, more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of--way of
record or implied,
All subdivisions,deeds,records of surveys,and other instruments of record referenced herein are recorded
documents of the county iri which these described lands are situated.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof,
*A t. L A,ya
v
CD
PAGE 12
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
1 09
CURVE TABLE
CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA CHAR❑BRG CHORD
C1 300.00' 39,63' 17'D7'04" N82'07'52"E 89.30'
C2 300.00' 83,88' 15'58'3O" N82'03'35"E 88,56' p 230 5DO 750
Plan Scale: 1" 250'
LINE TABLE z5 3O
LINE BEARING P15TANU EAST 1/4 CORNER, SECTION 25
L1 S89'15'25"E 86.t}4
SS Unplatted Stapleton m
L2 SQ6'32'50"IN 79.93 � 5ubdfvision No. 1 1
L3 589'18'36"E 144.81 2 C�p } ' S89"15'25"E L1 PO
L4 SB9'27'1 Q"E 156-27 274,79'
L3 C1 G2 L4 L5
a
L5 S59'27'10"E 82.00 to cv qa
Rezone Area:9.762±AC 58Gi 3'04"W L7 ❑o U ro
L6 SOO 32'50'1N 6$.23 APN:S1225449650 z
Z45.22' `10
L7 N89'27'10"W 70.00 Proposed Zoning: R-15 Jesslca
Current Zoning: RUT 502 49'81"E Condos
253.67' 0 o
Project (D
N89'27'101Y 25.11 Amendment
S00'32'50"W 30.00' No. 1 0
N89'27'10'W 177.12' 297.81'
5OQ'32'54"YV Naa,27'10'
51,96,
N89'27'10"W 655.87' POINT OF
BEGINNING
Unplatted I
LEGEND
FOUND ALUMINUM CAP
Q FOUND 5/8" REW _ Li
CALCULATED POINT n 1
I+7
SECTION LINE ,
BOUNDARY LINE I a
LOT LINE 34i
-- ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE t
r-a liy
POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
SOUTHEAST CORNER, SECTION 25 JJ
25 30
— W.Amity Road — — '
E N G I N E E A I N G
5725 NOM DISOOV€RY WAY
E015E,IDAHO 93723
PHOPMf 2081639-6939 Exhibit B
kmang]Ip.wm
Rezone to R-15
DATE: Fcurwary 2025
PROJECT: 28-151
SHEET: A portion of the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 25,
1 OF 1 T.3N., R.1W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
1 10
km
E N G I N E E R IN G
December20,2024
Project No.23-151
Rezone to CG
Legal Description
Exhibit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25,Township 3
North,Range iWest,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly
described asfollows;
BEGINNING at a found aluminum cap marking the Southeast comer of said Section 25,which bears
5D0.32'50"W a distance of 2,664.89feet from a found alum inum cap marking the East 1/4 corner of said
Section 25;
Thence following the southerly line of said Southeast 1{4of the Southeast 1/4,N89`U4'18"W a distance of
1,238.0D feet;
Thence leaving said southerly line,N06°15'42"E a distance of 824,19 feet;
Thence 589.27'10"E a distance of 655.87 feet;
Thence NOD°32'50"E a distance of 51.96feet;
Thence S89°27'10"E a distance of 177.12 feet?-
Thence NOD°32'54"E a distance of 30.00 feet;
Thence SB9°27'10"E a distance of 25.11 feet to the boundary of the Plat of Jessica Condos Project Amendment
No.1(Book 123 of Plats,Pages 19519-19522,Records of Ada County,Idaho);
Thence following said boundary,589'27'10"E a distance of 207.81 feet to said easterly line of the Southeast
1/4 of the Southeast 1/4,
Thence leaving said subdivision boundary and following said easterly line,500"32'50"W a distance of 910.29
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING,
Said parcel contains 23.470 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of
record a implied.
Attached hereto is Exhibit Band by this reference is made apart hereof.
�� tL L48
¢ � a
�lE 4 F 4p�
t 202�
5725 North Discovery way•Boise, Idaho 83713 • 20&639.6939+ kmenglip.cam
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
■
I
25 30
U 200 400 600
Plan Scale: V=200' EAST 1 f4 CORNER SECTION 25 1
i Jessica Condos i
Project I 1
+ Amendment
S89'27'1a'E No. 1 ti
i 25.11' Se
27'i 0"E 297.81 T
Unplatted 5892710E . .
NOI?'32'54 ' ' "
"E N00'32'50'"E
SW27'10°E 656.87' 51.96' 177.12' 30.04'
i
as Coo to
�t4Z O
Rezone Area:23.470±AC 1°ac=
APN:51225449650,51225449910,51225449920 O1 Nm
04 Proposed Zoning:CG o o-0
in
Current Zanfng:RUT NN—
C LEGEND m
a
I
z FOUND ALUMINUM CAP
1� CALCULATED POINT
�— — — — SECTION LINE
BOUNDARY LINE
PARCEL LINE
— — ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE
25
— Id89'D4'18"W 1238.6D' w _ 3 31
T —N89'04'T�"V�1 2636.77'— --
SOUTH 1/� CORNE{ SECTpDN 25 W. Amity Road POINT OF 6EGINNING y
SOUTHEAST CORNER
SECTION 25 ``I
zl�r7
r�
E N G I N E E R I N G
5.725 h1QRTH DI 5COVERT vuAy
GG ISE.IDAH083713
OHDNE{2b8�699-6939 Exhibit 8
kmer3g11p.rom Rezone to CG
DATE: oecern[xr1824
PRD1EC! 2i151
SHEET- A portion of the SE 1 f4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 25,
1 OF 1 T3N., R1W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 12
km
E N G I N E E R I N G
February 25,2025
Project No.23-151
Rezone to CC
Legal Description
Exhi bit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 114 of Section 36,Township 3
North, Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly
described as follows:
BEGINNING at a found aluminum cap marking the Northeast corner of said Section 36,which bears
NOQ"37'50"E a distance of 2,641.47 feet from a found aluminum cap marking the East 1{4 corner of said
Section 36,thence following said easterly line,500°37'50''W a distance of 684.11 feet,
Thence leaving said easterly line,N89'22'10"W a distance of 336.00 feet,
Thence 51.84 feet along the arc of a curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 33AD feet,a delta angle of
90'OD'00",a chord bearing of N44'22'10"W,and a chord distance of 46.67 feet;
Thence N09°37'50"E a distance of 248.08 feet;
Thence 235.62 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,sald curve having a radius of 150.00 feet,a delta angle
of90'00'00" a chord bearing of N44'22'10"VV,and a chord distance of 212.13 feet;
Thence N89°22'10"W a distance of 375,19 feet;
Thence NOD°36'05"E a distance of 267.68 feet to the northerly line of said Northeast 114 of Section 36;
Thence followi ng said northerly line,589"04'18"E a distance of 894,34 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 9.120acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of
record or implied.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof.
l � NL LAN�s
a �
L5 v�o
OF 0
5725 North Discovery Way• Boise, Idaho 83713 • 208,639.6939• kmengllp.com
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
113
zz
NORTH 1/4 CORNER SECTION 36 POINT OF BEGINNING
. Amity Rd, NORTHEAST 1/4 CORNER
SECTION 36
— —S89'04'I8'E 2636.77' — — —
SBT04'18"E 894.34' 25 30
35 31%
ni ^
CURVE TABLE
w
o CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA CHORD BRG CHORD i
b C1 33.04' 51.84' 90'DO'44" N44'22'10"W 46.67'
v o
m C2 150-00' 235.62' 90'D0'00° N44.22'10'W 212.13'
c _
N89'22'10'W 375.19'
L, LO
C
Rezone Area:9.2201+4C
APN;S1236110060 Nm
lf}WLL.—
+ Proposed Zoning:CC
Current Zoning: RUT
bin vi
fl Q
� Z
Unplatted M
0
b
I z
LEGEND
r N89'22'10"W 336,00'
FOUND AI,UhAINLJhA CAP �
L� CALCULATED POINT
r.
— SECTION LINE ova
BOUNDARY LINE EAST 1/4 CORNER SECTION 36
ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE
36 31
I
a ISO 3010 450
ENGINEERING Plan Scale:1"=150'
5725 NORTH oiscovERV WAY
EDGE.1DAHO 837L3
PHONE JZN8 39.Wn Exhibit$
kmenglrp.wm
Rezone to CC
DATE Fehruary2025
PROD EGT: 2 3-151
SHEET; A portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 36,
1 OF 1 BIN., R1W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
■
km
E N G I H E E R 114 0
September 1,2023
Project No.23-151
Rezone to 13-40
Legal Description
Exhibit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36,Township 3
North,Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,,Ada County,Idaho and being more particularly
described as follows-
Commencing at a found aluminum cap marking the Northeast corner of said section 36,which bears
N00"37'50"E a distance of 2,641.47 feet from a found aluminum cap marking the East 1/4 cornerof said
Section 36,thence following the easterly line of said Northeast 1/4 of Section 36,500"37'SOr,W a distance of
694.11 feet to the PIOINT OF BEGINNING.
Thence following said easterly line,S00'37'50"W a distance of 636.54 feet to the North 1/16 corner of said
Section 36;
Thence leaving sa id easterly line and followingthe southerly line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4,
N89`13'03"VV a distance of 893.65 feet to a found 5/8-inch rebar;
Thence NOO°36'05"E a distance of 1,055.25 feet;
Thence 589°22'10"E a distance of 375.19 feet;
Thence 235.62 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 150.00 feet,a delta angle
of 90-00'00",a chord bearing of SW22'10"E,and a chord distance of 212.13 feet;
Thence 500°37'50"IN a distance of 238.08 feet;
Thence 51.84 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,so id curve having a radius of 33.00 teet,a delta angle of
90`00'00",a chord bearing of 544'22'10"E,and a chord distance of46.67 feet;
Thence 589'22'10"E a distance of 335.00 feet to the POINT OF 6EGINNING.
Said parcel contains 18.OID7 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of•way of
record or implied.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof.
LANp S
rye LOGE N 5 t^
a o
9p 0 F kaP
5725 North discovery Way + 6oise, Idaho 83713 *208,639.6439* kmenjllp.com
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
115
0 200 400 600 -7
Plan 5ca'e: V'=200'
I V ram,✓S
W. Amity Rd. �F
- _ — — 25 30
36 3
POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
NORTHEAST 1/4 CORNER SECTION 36
� I
589'22'10'E 375.19'
Rezone Area: 18.007f AC ' f
ARN:5123611O46D
Proposed Toning: R-40 oG i-- Unplatted
Current Zoning: RUT N o
rn
ify
589'22'1 O"E
Ln 336.0p'
u�
m LEGEND POINT OF BEGINNING
�a
w
o FOUND ALUMINUM CRP
} FOUND 5f8" REBAR
o b CALCULATED POINT 'Z ct
�- SECTION LINE M
BOUNDARY LINE
ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE aaQ q�
CURVE TABLE b o m+aj
Lni
CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA EHoRD 6RG CHOPID I
Cl 150,00' 235.62' 90'0O'OT S44'22'10"E 212.13'
02 33.00' 51.84' 90'01)'00" S4422'10"E 46.67'
o f
N89'13'03-W 893.56' iv•
Unpiatted&am o I
N
r]
EAST 1/4 CORNER SECTION 36 fl
E NGIN EERI NG 3fi 31
5725 NORCM PLWQV[RY WAY
NOISE,IDAHO erns r
PMONE{2os)fin-l"19 Exh i b[t B
kmengffpAc Rezone to R-40
Waif: 5eptem6w 2A29
PROJECT: 23-251
SH=: A portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 36,
1 OF 1 UN., RlW., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 16
krn
E N G I N E E R I N G
Novembers,2023
Project No.23-151
Rezone to CN
Legal Description
Exh i bit A
A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25,Township 3
North, Range 1 West,Boise Meridian,City of Meridian,Ada County, Idaho and being more particularly
described as follows;
Commencing at a found aluminum cap marking the Southeast corner of said Section 25,which bears
SW'32'50"W a distance of 2,664.Sa feet from a found a I uminum cap marking the East 1/4 corner of sa id
Section 25,thence following the easterly line of said Southeast 1/4,N00°32'50"E a distance of 910.29 feet to
the POINT OF BEGI NNING.
Thence leaving said easterly line,N89°27'1D"W a distance of 70,O0 feet to the westerly right-of-way line of S.
Meridian Road and being the Southeast corner of the Plat of Jessica Condos Project Amendment No.1(Book
123 of Plats,Pages 19519-19522);
Thencefollowing the boundary of said Jessica Condos Project Amendment No.1 the fallowing three(3)
courses:
1. 1189°2TXl V a distance of 227.91 feet;
2. NO2°49'51"W a distance of 253.67 feet;
3. N86°13'04"E a distance of 245.22 feet to said westerly right-of-way line;
Thence leaving said subdivision boundary,5B9°27'10"E a distance of 70.00 feet to said easterly line of the
Southeast 1/4;
Thence fallowing said easterly line,500"32'50"W a distance of 301.69 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 2.072 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of
record or implied.
All subdivisions,deeds,records of surveys,and other instruments of record referenced herein are recorded
documents of the county in which these described lands are situated.
Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof.
�4*pL L A Np
a . 0 5
a� �o
g�f OF
HY r.C11/4/2025
5725 North Discovery Way• Boise, Idaho 83713 • 208.639.6939• kmengilp.com
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
■
25 30
EAST 1/4 CORNER
SECTION 25
}
0 150(IN 300 450 I4
Pian Scale: 1" = 150'
m� •
I
STAPLETON
SUKIVISIO E W. 1
L
.FNo.
E 245.2Z L2U NP TATTED LEGEN❑ 7o.aa cc �rea:2.072 AC FOUND ALUMINUM CAP R4fi22730()CALCULATED POINT ed Zoning:CN a 0SECTION LINE nt Zoning: LO -NI 4
BOUNDARY LINELOT LINE A CONDOS Cn
ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE AMENDMENTo. 1
N89'27'10"w 227.81' L1
POI NT Of
BEGINNING
LINE TABLE
LINE BEARING ❑157ANCE i f
L1 N$9'27'1O'W 70.DD UNPLATTED .m
L2 SB9'27'1O"E 70.00 o i
f
yin
POINT Of COMMENCEMENT ���n
SOUTHEAST CORNER ~
SECTION 25
25 30
E N G I N E E R I KG 30 31
5725 NORTH DISCOVERY WAY
13015E.IDAHO S3713 MOW[ZN9 639-6939 Exhibit B
kmergllpmum Rezone to CN
DATE: Nuv mh".X23
PRCUECT: 23.151
SHEET: A portion of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 25,
1 OF 1 T.3N,, R.1W., B.M, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
118
E. Conceptual Development Plan for Annexation Area(dated: 1/6/26)
SYRENGA CROSSING MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT PHASE 2
OPEN5PACE 4JMUL71-FALMLY `■COMMERCIAL OFFICE
W. I�IRIA
I �
J 4rI. ➢
Pf
NO-M PART
OF
IEJ �D
. �
-.� -
�o
YAl1L 4 I 2 x
C G.
f Ir H .... ` NOT A z
+ PART I �
�I
+ I v
i I
CONCEPTUAL,SUBJECT TO CHAK k
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
119 1
SYRINGA CROSSING
OPEN SPACE MULTI-FAMILY ■COMMERCIAL
I
rnuq „A vnutl -
J I I
F ## 1
R-40
. k.
}
-------------------
I 1
I �
IIIIrI ... S9] !J5}
�4- Y
., -
EI ,
,(;; - @IIAdHGEl.9 I r � -I tll.�lM11G1-13 �;I;' HVIL:V�L'., YllIl9HG ClA
L J 1
°i' ---
I I � �.r HIlII3JFlCa Ih1
u
_' euuortG�a� i tee.:.
I eU1011+G@] AUII�i4G&1 i AUIL7{V�C2.']
I I
I � I
@UIIAWG a7r6- i
- -- e4niowc�,
OW
C4NCEPTUAI,5U JUECT Tp CHANGE
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 20
=4.
c
I
w.imAsmuT
. •� � � w.waASTPEET I I I I I
d I Y
�Y
r '
j I I I I
vnol WDI PAOK PwL RS
I
8�8�
a l M i II
� I
Y
el
.'3 PAOA
I I I I
S { I I I I I
w,Nnm A'1W —————
W,:vniivm4o
gp 9 SEESHEUEN1.0[WRCONTNUATION
Hf
RRRRttRR�___
gE
® ceG&�t
YP RA. .� . � S F 6666�66 tl6Yp e R �� INp,.
Lt Nn E
5 >aA&�S
AMITY&MERMAN-NORTHWESTCORNER P�Isnus
}[ � MERIDIAN,IDAHO
0 0 1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 21
SEESHEET 1 FORCgryIIN UATION
I
------ — ———
.en,rRow—
J N
•S `. i r
II
1 Ti uT_V
BWIA'NG1
Mwa
0
BA� fl
r 4 q
NEI
lz
o k'c y
ztc
II II
II
R Q II II
FaY3P F�� 3 e'�9'�alfi 5'�#fi 0 a_ v'. ..f r I
u
II I
[ p6 €
��� I - Its Wlnl
gg
I
Iwom�9 A'e° - I
a'Pioss.mj
131 g � Y S
14 € 9? '� �3flseuf5 n
•nnn
s
$a,.a B n
R�`B gg pp R z
LAJ
pill
SrkWsese��-
5
� � S•' r5 GGK KKGGGGKev EAAa� 5�
py tsR- � _ � 5 er:meals �a,
5
5` AMITY&MERIDIAN-SOUTHWEST CORNER ncwsnus
MERIDIAN,IDAHO
o ,9 FS� � CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
Hill— 5�
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 22
F. Conceptual Commercial Building Elevations&Perspectives for Plaza Areas
:a F
ozroseaai rvviaiaa�n � �
N- ei $ to LE9al'35i0e'OOEb 15OVOMe MSSBOki NV10Ia3YY SSL6e- P�tfik � C") I
€ m� NVIflRI3W V AIM
R,
!p 5 i �$F 2'16 R!
Y '1111101 1 11€¢'-"
p
I
zl
C9
NI
r
I
Z
.-
I
I
I _ _
I �
o �
� pG pK
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
123
4 H RIL I C 1 Y 3 'SS#.I
MIXED-USE DEVL�LOP?0. ENT
ODKEPMAL.SuHAUT4liatGE COMMERCIAL PLAZA A
A
n
- —
-�.., W.LYRdSTREET 'a
#'1 I
i
• L'�
i ..
r .. • # O� i O�q}.
'o
�4. a a
. , # �.. w
B COMMERCIAL PLAZA I' P_.JL * � L `
Ob
'"02j }' DININGLSTABLISHMENT
r PLAZA
11 4 L
�"
ir1w"
I�NMI 4 _
L
r'{� 7JIplG6i Ill R4G 41� V� .
To
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 24
jj
- 1
IL
L i[a) It wo y
if
Ali-
a
411-
COMMERCIAL PLAZA A
PERSPECTIVE 2
ME
PAAB
f -
PLAZA A
OMMERCIAL PLAZA A
PERSPECTIVE +
PAD B
5-MERIDfAN fipAp
PLAZA A
Y�
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
F126]
1 PLA
liBLISH ENT
PAD. ER
-
PAD A
r
STABL6HMENT PLAZA
City of Meridian Department
�• �.^ �^rw��-,��-�' � p � .ram � 1 -
I I f f� _ �•T
I
Report
G. Overall Pedestrian Plan
SYRINGA CROSSING
QED-USE DEVELOPMENT
T
� ��..:,':�-,,...._-moo-.—- 1 ; '�• s
' W.LYRA SIRE
R
NOT APARTIE
IE
AV
C-G IV
ICT
r J
''Ji• Ad
- ;, 4400
�
Y,
4D CA
-1 - ........• y
1 .'llll4Yli...�XXX�yyy�, 1 I........•••..t.t•.......i..•....S1tl..�.....r.•P..1. ylt 3
3 A
c;x "
auranc Ra
Am
-- 11
i -
I_
uno
CONNECTIVITY LEGEND
Qc... 5•6SIDEWALIC `:#LT,' auilmco-x ewLmxc�t ;.`:r•' ,i
lCL-In s'51uEWALR "n"" v ILI—
E
CONCE PTUAL,SVHJ ECT TO CHA NG E
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
128
H. Preliminary Plat(dated: 1/23/26)
Ur ~z¢
z cn z = a a
W
�N O'n
00 00o py r•. W
_ Z m �� _ �e ss ax sxsss 4b=_aa�sss a115 z
Ln L Q O ¢ w a
J w H w F 0
dZ > jOZj �_ o Z
�� 0 F2�p G 4 `aix'o
Q m = 6 9 gg �� apR G y E<� a gp �'a� do e F- 2pF H
0~_ h �� 'dd7 9 � 3B 11F11 3 V
2Z !S ;,z
CL p
Q ==z G S '� d ti C a 9 q
_ ~ ° ��NI 4 g 00 x Q.
8, 1 12
66VIN: g � 4 Y
�,6!g f
S H10s[61g [A S a; �§�°g�g ��°1 J.
o
c
21
IT
All-
0
a
Mm
'� 9 b Duos xupisow's
I a s ati�.rw�a3wa �Ig
5.a w __` w xr ueure.wun T I
1 3 I ROB I 1 w I yl I
0.. - 1/nor � , 4®qs� I Ia
I I i i �i p - u IIa
w
1 1 I
1"+.w�a a� II I� ✓`.sl i I
1 � i I I II AY I I
sl----------- —r Lr a II
I
�I i le_ III I rl
I wmaio I I � I e 5 I
f I of-sales w JI I I
j I II I I I
'I
IF
_______ _________ _____
/ I J— _ _— µ—_Nam_
�I
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
129
m
=mz `j5i�ID Q O R
4
V=1(.') O
Q <
d Z W Z j
III II
Q� m �=�a
500a
Z ��z �i Nis s
d w
Q CCxz
= a¢K O 9
¢ z~ a
8 aF g sg t3 3
s a ® j a�=
rr r
— — r e — — — --- --- _----_---- `-------
s
�\--I� f
I.pI
�! i � � I rI�� IIIIII �� � �'/! 3�11 �f fIlrrrlrlrllr' I � II II
f ! 1 1 I1l11 / 1 rllll I f l I I
I ! 11 frlr I I I I
4/1 11 I , , 11 1lI 1 1 i t
Ell
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
130
W
(> z Q @ @ ® y m
I�
�_ 0 0 s g 4 4 �SylS
2 0-
W w g
Z � Z U �p gS' � 3� � � � "•
} � o �Zzfr o W �illlllllallll!II � �_
Q [% � o? o �� iIIIIIIII00000 ���
Z N N Z r Q e $ o 4
w Y o a g � z�i
a Q
adz
a Z i �46 in g
^I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-------------
wi
gV�o I
it
I �s
I ms�9
I
I I I 9s a�N
II �� rl •���' J _ -- --- � � it
9 I I
! it
Yy
i1c
k ICIj1( II'I
3 I
1 C
II
J ------------
J I it
/N a I
11
I
IIf
I
P
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 31
I. Access Exhibits for Southwest Corner
a
a �� llalNx3ss3��vlvla3lad =��i�g � o
I( s
°^• �• ❑I'NVIGN3W m��
1N3Wd011/00 NVIOIa3W ONVALIWV �S
- - - - - - - - - - - -
I I
RTR
f 1
I IR
I I
I I
I I
1i i d Q`
11 I a
I
I
I
I �
I I o
I I
I I
nrmrnon arena al3<.oaaea
�a I
13 I
I� I
i51 oa
I I
I 1
I I �
I I _
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 32
$y SEE SX E 7 E](l A FOR CONTIN NARIO"
77—� _ '——————— ————————————————————�I III g�Ag �����€ 8g� �'°�sY:tiRF�N�1n']YkNHiah� .•,�•��giLG2P1G3i%S:ii°2F1"i3�uw'LRf�X�Y� .._-. _ __ __ I
�k��'� ���3�@ 0� p �. �` � x45°`�—`i--'t`'P-��•-``�--� �p-s�':t3"-'.3'a:a�-R83a
i
�aR � a RA gg €
R 55
4�9� i4i 3R�X euAp16A 1 I I I
• _ •� ! 1 9F b i 6 x �3i Lv q $` �....RL a ` •1 1
�I } Ir
i I1
pp P {r
i Akita
p3OW QFQ'pp
� II
ate.JE
_...�L'�•b� p x':Wre� _ w I.i.=f�", V�:ii -
1: •� I
I PIN
ii �i PP yZ
ifi i3 gc E .�co �z
��C��l� tlC�GGCCCCCGGCggEEE�� E� �El�tltl•��
AMITY&MERIDIAN-SOUTHWEST CO RN ER
MERIDIAN,IDAHO
E is CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
133
J. Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan(dated: January 12,2026)
0
g Egli Ell
�o NO � S
l5
z s
Pgk � 3tl3 _S �,8 }kg� - ------ U_
R HR
s��'
g• -n 5 �' i� z $ � � a a a a r g
aS� n
j� lea s"€
8e
Z F S N•
@ lui
12
T
- - - - - - - - - - r ...... - - = - - - F - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
@ I I' roles
1 i
9
q I
I
I $ 1 I
AlIIr pT��
i g O
Q Cv
I �
e.
I �
ahnh
1 f1
Q �g
I I y
r
I
Z
t�3�3�F2
=8.,�°
€§��xii�
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
134
1 � s
I i li IE3 I III 1 a a.
I 1
I I II 1
I I I I 1
' I 1
it 1
I I 1
vi
-A �•
oil Eg ad
I + •I`, I III I i' � i � �� �p"p� �� �� e° � �s� ����
�1 Jl�r
1*
A
Pt
5� a c e
Ir 1
A.
"Eat
1 I I g y= y 5�
� 1
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
135
u
m
oaf� a
. , °
z_0 5 @ 9
s
1
0
�1
m I i g
� a x
1 m s s R ao gc F� o:aa ' 4^1
0000
1
9"YHdliilli iii-illl H3LYW
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
...........................
.. 771!11�
�` - _ — ------ --- ------
--
1
� 1
i
:1 p
o �
c
1 '
I
_ I
I 1
DVWJ33HS33S-3Wl HOLLVW
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 36
u
0
- s
� m ■
1 oFlmd3�s3�-■inmdm m
Fuu
o€ 1 000000 �offi
Ws $� n 1 II s
Vet Wlo f 1 '1
3 3 ] 9 3 a e x 1 `1
E
m 11,1� 1
In Y ■
@lap g4li � J€-A ioi
�
S"' C
C Ud333N5335-3NI7 Helm
IIIIIIIIII
1
II I
1 I I
I
1 II I
I
1 I I I
I �
1 I I ❑
rill I I
S I
g�F ° ■ I gI _
I I I
1 I g
1 a' a
bl w
a
1 I I IIo
cc
I
I I I II
1 }sa
I I _
I
I i I
I
1 � I
I a
Zq
f Lu
City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 37
s
si gg
m �3�
t�
=�4
=a 4
O
C O p
Z�w
_ Z
Y w
d �
2
t
0 � z c g a
yy � s y s ggZ g qp ptlg
�H —
_ 1
l
II } I I
I
I
I
V I
I I I
I
J I I
i 11 • annaa J I I
I
I
I
} I I
O
igar Imaa I II I ��� F I I�
' ��,,q k 3 F,..,af3-�,#aaTi�!f�" Y:rru�:,'-�'�.�kr:-:wsi..�t;c'tl:3vk�".z..c�,:<.c.xi..I;Y'fi4�N:`4•°.c�,c,...�A�.S;"
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 38
K. Conditional Use Permit Site Plan for Multi-family Development(dated: 12/18/24)
U3A03-11YNU3d 3SnIMOLLI0NO3
OVHdI•NVIOIU3W B "
•s3f15 9N ISSOU3 VDNIUAS SNIUMVH :@
Baas
I g
Q Y BBB 3 E A
P;
•tggP4
E " 4rEEF »333a 5�a
G
�9
� �ARA � R � � �� � ��•$
Will
sa$ eaa$ �
� p$g$gggqg Cam ggqq
a � 3Y m��a ���
pppppppp pppppp pppppp pppppp m 1! .. � g� � yff s
9q 5�tl
a=1:g5 'tl 8R3 Qee I
Fl6 H WV' I •,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
;;i.f--- - - - - - _—_- - - _ _ - - _ — — _ _ - - - - ----- -- - _
moMMA9tl3lV3
a � I
1�-
I
I III ,•-.% �.I - li.'. • - -")
F9
I I qal ao�a •I - I1�
••11 1 m II{�.,� `�� I� I
b bt R
II � 99
/ tl
IJ1
I I -
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
139
NV1d 311S 03NOISN3W10-11WQd3d 3Sn WNOW0NG1 W g!a=a o
_ OVHOI'NVI01N3W
sMdsren 'qns ONISSOM VONINASSNIMMVH
rl
�OO�C�O00000� III
I
1
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — — — —
T�
—- -- —
lz
1
YOM— I ae@�h `�O
T - w
I.. 1
3' Jyv
I
_ 7 -
� LI I f LLLLI l
a.
1
m
iopa� amm�rvudwxxs '
�n 3sloe vlo3w 3tivnb5rvMo1 —1
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 40
N, ld 311S03NOISN31NI(I-11WH3d 3Sn 17NO111UNW_
_ GVH01'NNIOIN3W
srvask3a 'gns!)N ISSOM tl9NINAS SNINMVH :@
Jujj
w
1
1
1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 - - --- --
1 ' -
1. •, w
1
1
-
1
u� a , -
1 I -
LA
1
'9
1 A�
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
141
9NIH33NI9N3 AlIVNIV41 Id-llWtl3d 35f1 IVNOLLIaNO3 W
OVHOI'NVICHOW
s sn3u 91159NISSOI V9NIUASSNIJIMVH
LIP
29
�es�e
J a
ee�g
to
1
1
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -—u-- - 1
1
rl
ge I ,1
Z.
,lo
r�Mm
sI�i 1
�F. , —' 1
(ry 9mmnP
77-
III' II � IIII
1"—
—
im
m 351DA YIRYI3JY(IOSNMOI /
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 42
9NIH33N19N3 AQdVNIWI139d-11WN3d 3Sh IVNOLLI(INO:) 9 -i
OtlHal'NtlI41N3W
snusra• '9f159NISSONJ tl9NINA5 SNINMVH :@� ������
g
°s�� s $�
¢a! yy gg as ®®a
@a. �
�P�° I IIIIIII• ��� ���
� t � �000
- - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _
— LI~
` —T-
R.
1 —L,
-IN
.-� IA =g -
°i—��•�� � I ' �R�, III: �' —
u
1 • Ir •
'/�1.. ;l I y III .��I I- I m •y�2 ...
III
l i
1
f I
a� IIII ' �m
11 __—
IME
'
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
143
L. Conditional Use Permit Landscape Plan for Multi-family Development(dated: 1/12/26)
3 Mild 3dVS5ONV9 dO7 W d § o
OHV01�NVIOIH3W
sr�dsn e w -am xJNI550H]tl9NIHAS SNIHMVH
€I � n �� §
d a n FI & P Y gaff y e $ se
�-
5�
N
ss oi� sa R$ �� e G 2 5��� 'S �'�� as ffa (� w S
�s z e.3s g. sa Ee B e g Yq
yEY E
a �B�FQb�9 s 93
V 1'
gg 99 c
id E �€�r
❑
in $ O H W t e w a V ffin c 4�19 Ci:gESa =
g ✓i r � e � � � ii V� P w � 'E� L� k�` �G 33�n� �3
F Y r z s s a w s R 3w z F �g • pd �e
� �;3 r �,��tg�=
aN
1
-
.�
II I
l
i � a
m
z
R s
z
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
144
M. Conditional Use Permit—Multi-family Development Open Space & Site Amenity Exhibits
(dated: 1/12/26)
LIUIHX33]VdS N3d4dn x
OHVOI•NVIOIN3W °
sndsreu '9ns 9N I90'3 V9NINAS SNDIA&VH s @
»» sa r» a
°86 86 c e 'e 8 6 86 9 8 e 8 8 86° a 2 8 6
as o 4 @4 ag a $ @4 Ha @4 g
F ggHB a � �E.. gFgHgBg�
'y ww ��EH�H4 Ell pi ���
�!H H"g1 e�� ��4g ggw @»yBw gI � a
e ` a .�� d as ���"
a p dd33 �_� yH gg''gg q @ @ pj
z 5§ � 6b.`^�6 68�kaa, Bbt aka a5 B��.
I; `u
B � a@@• T H
I .
I �
I' R
I —
I
f i
Ogg P
go OIL
pFF� ry
_ Z
A§��s
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
145
L ---• .. K" ��'� z.�. ♦�tiR �� � r.t r �� .� aye•
42
m
11111VIhOEM
.= r
Sol
Poo
City
,M
' �..
t
of MeridianDepartment Re 11Exhibits
SYRINGA CROSSING
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
PMENT
COMMERCIAL GREENSPACE
COKEPTLIh4 SUBJECT T404kiNGE
C B p
_ W.LYP.ASTREET 1110E
q ,retie .`.1 i�1 A
i 63
LL.—-W- "
ij
E A►iffYmain
--- LMrrlr"D w&, am
4ka MULTI FAMILY ENTRANCE
GREENSPACE
MULTI FAMILY AMENITY I «max! J.k B
GREENSPACE _
407.
+-
ail [
;v� �IGG
5
lI lOML6] ILLR4G 1.1
M0 . a # 4 f ..1-.-
IN I�� I■.a ten. �# �.�auarc
Imo, 96MOL
F S
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 47
N. Conditional Use Permit—Multi-family Building Elevations
T Q
:5 "+�-, I xs__rs� o c (el(�arsanr•�
I I I I I I I I I
A3.00A
s —
s
9
4 x 4 4 - 4 4 4 _
IN
(f
Y 4 T Y r
I I I I I
C A3-OOB
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
148
i
I � �O
IM
I I I I I I I I
�eeebxs�.�.e E�„nx rlewinwv�.soE E�e.nx., e
A3.00C
I a
HN
E
E
i�
I �
4
— $gg rt�Fr#xe. i
:�euwwc o.fimxr e�ee�mx r�avawxc o.awee�evanox.� .,„J1L_..,y
� A3.aao
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 49
eau,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - --
A3.00E
j
j I I
A�
A3.00G
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl-5o
I 7atun& VIEW 5
p z
md
VIEW 2
VIEW 6
z
f
N
F
G �q
� o -
VIEW 3 .-
VIEW 7 'J
OPMEAMW
g
E a
VEW ® ® _
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
Fl 5-1
O. Conceptual Building Elevations for Multi-family Residential Buildings at NWC
Building H: Anticipated to be of similar architectural style to Building E on the SWC
Building F: Elevations will be modeled off of units at the Broadmore project in Nampa and will
be 2 to 3-stories in height, depending on the bedroom count,with first floor garages, as follows:
I
■P
rii i it 1r rr loss F-r
nr if
11 v
ed
City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits
152
P. Schematic Gravity Irrigation Exhibit for 40'Wide Easement
I
�Tn
N, 1,
M
r be
011
-i 21
15
LAl
P i
Mg
w q
V
City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits
153]
VIII. 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 is derived from enterprise application and GIS database, and exported in dynamic
reporting. The system references the most recent available from a variety of sources including
sewer main lines, sewer trunksheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times,police
crime reporting,pathway information, existing and planned transit, existing and planned roadway
improvements, school proximity,park proximity, and other resources.
The overall score represents the total points scored using weighted criteria(it is not a ranked
order), and the percentile score is relative comparison value of the parcel being considered versus
every other parcel in the City(the higher the better). This tool was developed as a City Council
prioritized outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan.
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
conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD
considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions
City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report
Maps, Tables, and Charts
154
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.
City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report
Maps, Tables, and Charts
155
Development Application Transmittal
Link to Project Application: Syringa Crossing Mixed Use Development H-
2025-0007
Hearin Date: December 18, 2025
Assigned Planner: Sonya Allen
To view the City of Meridian Public Records Repository, Click Here
The above "Link to Project Application" will provide you with any further information on
the project.
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application
referenced above. To review the application and project information please click on the
application link above. The City of Meridian values transparency and makes a variety of
information available to the public online through our public records repository.
We request that you submit your comments or recommendations prior to the hearing
date specified above. When responding, please reference the file number of the project.
If responding by email, please send comments to comment(a)_meridiancity.org.
For additional information associated with this application please contact the City of
Meridian Planner identified above at 208-884-5533.
Thank you,
City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208.888.44331 Email: cityclerk meridiancity.org
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
156
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for North Meridian Fields (H-2026-0003) by Emily Mueller,
generally located at the southwest corner of SH-16 and Chinden Blvd.
A. Request:Annexation of 71.445 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N zoning districts.
157
C l0 00 V 0) U7 .p w N N
N
O
N
v °
(
T1
V) C:
rDz Z
O.
rt
CD �
O
c � �
T
CD OrQ
N N
N
01
� O
O
O
W
`ONO
crQ CO
crQ
=t;
O
c
o D o �
w
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C��fEPIDIAN*,,--,
DEPARTMENT REPORT
HEARING 3/19/2026 Legend
DATE: i_=i Project Location
TO: Planning&Zoning Commission Area of Impact
&= City Limits 4 '
FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Q Analysis —t
Supervisor
208-884-5533
napoli@meridiancity.org z
APPLICANT: Emily Mueller _
SUBJECT: H-2026-0003 '
North Meridian Fields
LOCATION: Generally located at the southwest corner
of SH-16 and Chinden Boulevard in the
W'/2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 29, TAN.,
R.1 W.
I. PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
Annexation of 71.445 acres of land with the R-8 and C-N zoning districts. The R-8 zone consists
of 47.79 acres, and the C-N zone consists of 23.655.
B. Directors Determination
The Community Development and Public Works Directors made a director's determination to
allow for the annexation of the subject development without sewer services being available.
Currently,the city is installing a sewer trunkline in McMillan Road that will ultimately serve the
site.
C. Recommendation
Staff: Approval with a Development Agreement
Planning and Zoning Commission: Pending
D. Decision
City Council: Pending
City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview
158
I1. COMMUNITY METRICS
Table 1: Land Use
Description Details Map Ref.
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/Agriculture in Ada County -
Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial and Residential -
Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County VII.A.B
Proposed Zoning R-8 (Medium Density Residential)and C-N
(Neighborhood Business District)
Adopted FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential and Mixed Use Interchange VILA.0
Table 2: Process Facts
Description Details
Preapplication Meeting date 1/13/2026
Neighborhood Meeting 1/15/2026
Site posting date 3/3/2026
Table 3: Community Metrics
Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference
Ada County Highway District IV.D
• Comments Received Yes; Staff Report -
• Commission Action Required No -
• Access N.Owyhee Storm Avenue off of Chinden Boulevard and -
McMillan Road,and Ersatz Place off of McMillan Road.
• Traffic Level of Service Star Road:F -
McMillan Road:Better than E
ITD Comments Received No -
Meridian Public Works Wastewater R
• Distance to Mainline Sewer Not Available at Site
• Impacts or Concerns Yes; Sewer is not available and won't be made available
until the city completes the trunk line in McMillan and a
developer pulls the sewer to the site.
Meridian Public Works Water IV.B
• Distance to Mainline Water Available at Site
• Impacts or Concerns None
Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see the public
record. Past the following link into your browser:
hgps://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/browse.aspx?id=430059&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCitX .
City of Meridian I Department Report
159
Figure l: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics
Reference Parcel:S0429120006 Date Retrieved:2026/1/23
Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator:
804 1144 Surrounding Area
70% Not city
848 n- ® City Limits
497.3 ■ Not City
Household Household& Population Growth
Households 02020
Population Change:284.6°I°
Population ■Growth
(Household and Population Change
since 2010 Decennial) 2,000 4,000 6,000
City of Meridian I Department Report
F160]
III. STAFF ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC)
A. General Overview
The proposed annexation and development spans across 71.445 acres of land with the northern
half being designated as Mixed Use Interchange(MU-I) and the southern half being designated as
Medium Density Residential on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). In addition,the subject
property falls within the Fields Sub-Area Plan located at the northwest corner of the City's area of
impact boundary. This area is bounded by Ustick Rd. on the south, Can-Ada Rd. on the west,
Chinden Blvd./US Highway 20/26 on the north, and McDermott Rd./SH-16 on the east.
In accord with the Fields Sub-Area Plan,the general character, design, and identity of this area
shall have a cohesive theme that is"modern rural,"which applies to housing, amenities,
streetscape/open space, and retail/commercial. Additionally, some of the other thematic design
elements that contribute to the desired character of the area should be adhered to such as lighting,
fencing(e.g. split rail),landscaping(e.g.tall fescues,dry creek materials,wildflowers, street
trees, etc.),public art,on-street bike lanes and/or off-street multi-use pathways, signage(e.g.
metal roof on sign), etc.—see the Character Framework—Amenities(pg. 3-12)and Streetscape
(pg. 3-13)in the Plan for more information. A high-quality design is expected in this area.
At this time,the applicant is requesting annexation into the city and intends to return at a later
date to amend the development agreement and further subdivide the property. It is important to
note that utilities are not currently available to serve the proposed development. However,the city
is in the process of constructing the Can-Ada Lift Station and extending sewer infrastructure
along McMillan Road,with completion anticipated in late 2026. Because municipal services are
not yet available,the applicant will be unable to develop the property until such services are in
place and a preliminary plat and development agreement modification are submitted and
approved. During that time,the applicant will be required to comply with the Field Sub-Area
Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and Unified Development Code.
Comprehensive Plan Policies:
- Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs,preferences, and financial
capabilities of Meridian's present and future residents. (Goal 2.01.02D)
The 47.8 acres of land designated as R-8 will include a variety of lot and house sizes that will
be in close proximity to the future Cole Valley Christian School. This will provide a different
type of housing than what is already approved in the immediate area.
- Plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample open space, and
generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices. (Goal 2.02.00)
While the applicant did not depict lot sizes for the residential portion of the development, they
did depict open space and road layouts. The current layout depicts several different open
space nodes. However, with the future preliminary plat, the applicant shall provide more
north/south connections to the future school site.
- Jointly plan and site schools and subdivisions to ensure mutual benefits,neighborhood
identity,and community health. (Goal 2.03.01)
The Cole Valley Christian School has already been approved to the south of the proposed
project. This along with the approved subdivision directly to the east will provide close
connectivity to subdivisions and the future school site to provide neighborhood identity.
- Establish distinct,engaging identities within commercial and mixed use centers through
design standards. (2.09.03A)
This project falls within the Fields Subarea Plan and will be required to adhere to the design
standards listed in the plan. In addition, it will be required to comply with the Architectural
City of Meridian I Department Report
161
Standards Manual. Th intent of these design standards is to give the area a unique modern-
rural theme.
- Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services. (Goal 3.03.03F)
The Community Development Director and Public Works Director determined that even
though this property cannot be served by City sewer, that we can annex it due to it being
contiguous and the City is currently constructing the sewer trunkline in McMillan Road.
Table 4: Project Overview
Description Details
History N/A
Phasing Plan To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
Residential Units To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
Open Space To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
Amenities To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
Physical Features West Tap Lateral
Acreage 71.445 Acres
Lots To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
Density To be determined with a future development agreement modification and
preliminary plat.
B. Site Development and Use Analysis
A. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2):
The applicant has submitted a conceptual plan proposing single-family detached residences
on the southern two-thirds of the site and commercial development on the northern one-third.
At this time, detailed development plans have not been provided,however,the applicant
provided a road layout and open space layout for the larger development. This provides some
detail into the integration of the residential and commercial uses. Prior to any development,
the applicant will be required to further subdivide the property and complete a development
agreement modification.
In the applicant's narrative,the proposed R-8 portion of the site is described as single-family
detached residential. The C-N portion is proposed for commercial uses, and the applicant
proposed excluded the following uses including fuel sales facilities, convenience stores,
storage facilities, and vehicle washing facilities. As the Mixed-Use Interchange designation
is intended for low traffic generating uses,staff recommends further restricting
permitted uses by prohibiting drive-through establishments,vertically integrated uses,
and retail sales or stores exceeding 10,000 square feet for a single tenant. The primary
reason behind this is to not allow big box retailers as they will generate significantly
more traffic than the Mixed Use Interchange designation is intended for.
B. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
The development shall comply with the dimensional standards for the C-N and R-8 zoning
districts as listed in UDC Tables 11-2B-3 and 11-2A-6.
City of Meridian I Department Report
162
Direct lot access to the collector roadways are prohibited in the R-8 zone and access point off
the collector the C-N zoning will be limited as required in UDC 11-3A-3.
C. Design Standards Analysis
A. Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-19):
For mixed-use developments, at least 40% of the buildable street frontage must be occupied
by building facades or public space. The building footprints are not shown with this
application.
In addition,the applicant shall meet the requirement for no more than 50%of the total off
street parking is located between building facades and abutting streets in the proposed C-N
portion of the site.
Future development plans shall incorporate the following design elements with the
future MDA application.
- Include the following elements: Plazas between commercial and residential include a
main focal point,active and shared open space within the mixed-use designation and
neighboring uses,and 8-foot parkways with on-street parking and bulb-outs.
- In developments where multiple commercial and/or office buildings are proposed,
the buildings shall be arranged to create some form of common,usable area,such as a
plaza or green space.
- The applicant shall provide details to ensure the quality of the design is in accord
with the Fields Sub-Area Plan. The general character,design, and identity of this area
shall have a cohesive theme that is "modern rural,"which applies to housing,amenities,
streetscape/open space,and retail/commercial.Additionally,some of the other thematic
design elements that contribute to the desired character of the area shall be adhered to
such as lighting,fencing(e.g. split rail),landscaping(e.g.tall fescues, dry creek
materials,wildflowers,street trees, etc.),public art,on-street bike lanes and/or off-street
multi-use pathways,signage(e.g.metal roof on sign),etc.—see the Character
Framework—Amenities(pg.3-12) and Streetscape(pg.3-13)in the Plan for more
information.A high-quality design is expected in this area.
- New buildings on pad sites adjacent to single-family neighborhoods shall be limited
to no more than a 1-story disparity in building height.
- For mixed-use developments, a minimum of 40% of the buildable street frontage
must be occupied by building facades or public space.
- Transitions between different residential product types and dissimilar land uses
shall include the use of alleys,roadways with landscaped parkways, or highly connected
open spaces.
B. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B):
i. Landscape buffers along streets
The landscaping will be evaluated with the future development agreement modification
and preliminary plat. A thirty-five(35) foot landscape buffer will be required along
Chinden Boulevard which is an entryway corridor. In addition, a twenty(20) foot
landscape buffer will be required along all future Collector roadways.
ii. Tree preservation
Per UDC 11-313-10,the applicant shall preserve existing trees four-inch caliper or greater
from destruction during the development.
City of Meridian I Department Report
163
Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are
removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an
amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten-inch caliper
trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four-inch caliper
trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees).Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or
greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within
common open space, and when used as focal elements in landscape design.
A Tree Mitigation Plan should be submitted with the future development agreement
modification and preliminary plat detailing all existing trees and methods of mitigation
outlined by the City Arborist before any trees are to be removed as set forth in UDC 11-
3B-10C.5.
iii. Storm integration
Storm drainage is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-18.
iv. Pathway landscaping
Pathway landscaping is required to comply with UDC 11-3B-12. A minimum of 5 feet of
landscaping shall be provided on both sides of the proposed pathways.
C. Parking (UDC 11-3C):
i. Residential parking analysis
Future residential will be required to comply with the residential parking standards listed
in UDC Table 11-3C-6.
ii. Nonresidential parking analysis
Non-residential parking will be evaluated with future submittals and shall comply with
UDC 11-3C-6.
iii. Bicycle parking analysis
One bicycle parking space shall be provided for every 25 proposed vehicle parking
spaces. This will be evaluated with the submittal of certificate of zoning compliance and
design review applications.
D. Building Elevations (Comp Plan, Architectural Standards Manual):
The applicant submitted conceptual building elevations with this application. The submitted
elevations are for both the commercial and residential that is proposed on the site.At this
time,the applicant does not show any building footprints, so these elevations are subject to
change with the future development agreement modification. However,the building
elevations submitted provide a mix a material including fiber cement, stucco CMU, stone
veneer,wood composite,board and batten, and lap siding.
The elevations submitted with the future development agreement modification shall comply
with the Architectural Standards Manual,UDC,Fields Sub-Area Plan, and the
Comprehensive Plan.
E. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-
3A-7.
City of Meridian I Department Report
164
D. Transportation Analysis
A. Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4):
The applicant has depicted the primary access points for the development coming off the
future extension of N. Owyhee Storm Avenue, a collector roadway. This extension will lead
to a future signalized intersection with Chinden Boulevard. In addition,the applicant is
proposing to construct two(2) east/west collectors that would connect N. Ersatz Place with
N. Owyhee Storm Avenue.
The concept plan depicts one(1)access point off of Collector A to the C-N portion of the
site. This single access point aligns with the one on the south of Collector A leading in the
residential subdivision. In addition,a single access point is shown to Collector B,Owyhee
Storm Avenue, and Ersatz Place which is consistent with UDC 11-3A-3.
The applicant shall provide a cross access agreement from the C-N property to both Parcels to
the east(Parcel# S0429110001 and Parcel#R5743000010)to provide better future
connectivity and restrict direct access points on Chinden Boulevard.
Prior to any future final plat or certificate of zoning compliance application being submitted,
the applicant will be required to construct half plus 12 on all collector roadways on the site.
B. Pedestrian Connectivity(UDC 11-3A-51 UDC 11-3A-8, UDC 11-3A-17):
The applicant submitted a proposed pedestrian access plan as part of the concept plan. The
plan depicts ten(10)-foot multi-use pathways along N. Owyhee Storm Avenue,Future
Collector A, and Future Collector B, all of which are designated collector roadways.
However,the plan does not show a multi-use pathway along N. Ersatz Place, a partially
constructed collector located along the eastern boundary of the site. Prior to submitting future
applications,the applicant shall coordinate with ACHD to confirm the alignment of Ersatz
Place,which may require the installation of a twenty(20)-foot landscape buffer containing a
ten(10)foot multi-use pathway along the west side of Ersatz Place.
In addition,the applicant has proposed an internal pedestrian pathway within the residential
subdivision that runs north—south through the future development.Additional details
regarding pedestrian connectivity will be provided with future application submittals.
C. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6):
The subdivision details have not been provided with this application. However,the applicant
will be required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 with the future
development agreement modification and preliminary plat.
E. Services Analysis
A. Waterways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-6):
The West Tap Sublateral bisects the property near the middle of the property. This waterway
shall be piped in accordance with UDC 11-3A-6.
B. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15):
Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the
subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15.
C. 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. Design and construction shall follow best
management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18.
City of Meridian I Department Report
165
D. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-21):
Sewer service is not currently available at the site and will remain unavailable until
development extends it from Star Road to the subject property.Water service is available at
the site. The Community Development Director and the Public Works Director determined
that,because sewer infrastructure is actively being extended along McMillan Road,the
CanAda lift station is being installed, and the property is contiguous to the city limits,the
development may be annexed.
IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Meridian Planning Division
A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior
to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,
the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. Currently,
a fee of$611.47 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement
of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division
within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,
incorporate the following provisions IF City Council determines annexation is in the best interest
of the City:
a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the concept plan and
building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein.
b. Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in
effect at the time of the development.
c. The following uses shall be prohibited in the C-N zoned portion of the property: Fuels
Sales Facilities, Storage Facilities,Vehicle Washing Facilities,Vertically Integrated
Residential Projects, and Drive Through Establishments.
City of Meridian I Department Report
166
d. Future development shall promote no-mow fescues,naturalized plants, dry creek
materials, split rial fencing,and other rural landscape elements in landscape buffers and
open space as listed in the Fields Sub-Area Plan.
e. Retail commercial uses shall be restricted to building sizes of 10,000 square feet or less.
f. Direct access to Chinden Boulevard is prohibited except at N. Owyhee Storm Avenue.
g. The applicant shall record a cross access agreement from the C-N property to both
Parcels to the east(Parcel#S0429110001 and Parcel#R5743000010).
h. No development shall commence on the property until sewer service is readily available
at the site and meets one of the following criteria:
- The connection to this City's sewer collection system is actively being installed by
the applicant; or
- Sewer has already been stubbed to the site
i. Prior to any future development and once sewer service is readily available at the site,the
applicant shall submit a development agreement modification, a preliminary plat to
further subdivide the entire property, and amend the concept plan to be consistent with
design elements outlined in the Field Sub Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and UDC..
B. Meridian Public Works
City of Meridian I Department Report
167
wastewater
r Distanee la Sewer Se�Lrer rLOR aral6abfe lu slte.
5errloes
• Sewer Shed
EstJrna(ed Pw)ed See appicaUon
5ewer ERLf s
• WRRr Lledining
Balance
Projed GmLslsL,enl Tes
wllh mm Muter
PlanfraLllitp Plan
briL�atL�ooncerrla
f 5ee Public WorlE Site spe&ic Conditions
Wafer
* Distance Ln Water water Ava liable at Me
5e"lces
* Pressure Zone
• Eslilrlaled Pro*U Seeappicalion
Waref ERU s
+ Wafer QMM:V None
• Pr6Jed C&RdISLent Tex
wllh Water Masker
Plan
• Ilnpa[tsfCancerns Nom-
NO -PLA7'CONUITIOIVS
Maul:Wl K.!l RWpA rrm urr
Site Sprdf r'1.4milliGo a of App"val
L. HL-wL-r nut avaiLahk lu srlc.Prgrnry W 6c svrsd by fu1LVL-{:;ul Ado laR SuLxm.Laft s[a[imn to 11L
cumpkrc aL dw Lind oP 202 k City wdl aLw cxu:mi LnuLk IMC LL!filar LRLud aiung McM iltm.
Rlalu 4 YN T alrmg Star nLOLL and uvcr NO Lhl-Lanz to ruLL IL prcgrLiLy iY dcrclffjr 7 dnrco_
2. Ilk LtL vclugcT's Engim-u o;w reify ifthLm is a wdl um;irc arxlxlalc if iL wiU IX:Lnocd ur3urL It
Ls t"Sumg Lo be axed it umm he abrandun d Fw7 Ory and tL)WR myuimn ,LN-
3. EmA pkwz oflil 4LCrcliTrnrnt will FwW Lo be nLL+L kxll Nr vclify minimmn fire flaw Frum u Ls
4. 71�-will 6utwu w LcT rl m L inslu lie 9m Penn tbu mALL6(usual Ibc uwtblixl cvrrocr anll
sOWhmNLcamu).Nucd In Lm L7mma in bulb dwinlg Lhc fir-.;I p6awc um cmcAm L1Km.
S_ ensure tlo sewer scrviccx pass lhmugh inflluaiion trcnehm.
b. F mvidc 24'l"-incnLx fur Lnanray hydrant IJkFAN WKI wa1L'r xLTri4X.N.LaNcubuiLN ahuuld cxlLiul
Lip In LILu Lind of mainlhyd mWwa rr nLLIT mid ltr hLycmd iL
S. No permanent rtrudures(trots,bwhcs,huildingp,carports tra9h rMcptadc walls,frnocs,
infilualion ucndws,light Wm,etc.)uF he builtwilhin dw uGlitgraecmcnt
City of Meridian Department Report
168
Gereral[:orddGors of hpprowIll
L. Applrcml sball LmurduuLr walLT and srwLT roam xiu wpirnlliog wiLhllir Public WurLx
Ikparhrn L
2. PLT McTrdian Lily C96;(IACV; Lhr appbr,mLL shall bL:m mpLmmLhLL W mslall wcwLT amd waILT
mans Lu amd lhrcmgh[him drrrlaprrmmL ATg1Jiuin1 may 6u cl igrbly fire a mimburnmomL
agTmmmi Pin mCmNuuc[Loc carlLamxnrcmLlxr Mt'(-'ll 6 5.
3. The appli4mnL xhad prorLdc cwxcrrrmL(i)fur all public walLrAL'wLr rruuns 43LwNKk of public right of
way(iorl Lmk all waILT m 7*i=aril hyd=Lx). SLwLTlwn[cr caeclnnrnl inn L�&xmd3ng um mLnM LT
dLpLIL:Fewer U N tl dl'Lp rcquiTc a 30 R+urnncm,2U 35 R x'IU fL camLmm a,aril 25 30 fl a 15 lL
camLT7rL'oL 1'.muirc mu pLTmmvvl sUuLlmu.N(Vcrw,huNkm,kiklinp,carlrudm,Iraah TcmtVt clt
walls LrKx�infrLVaLim tmmvhrs,liylr[pubm crr.)arc bmik wilhim Zhu uLLiLy LalaTrrLTIL Sulx mit
an uccxuLud LaeunurL(m Lhr funn avaiLabk fmnn Public Wurlcsk a kFA dLSrr4ftmTu puLd by
ao Jdal.Lioue:J Land%,.y+n,whiLfr mmsl iMludc 1hr area u f Llrc Lav==L
{r Lcd iimi1BPP A)aod an SL{2"x I I"map wilkL buaro&s mddimtanrc�(13arkcvl 14XI IIHIF B)
furrcvicw.liulhcxhihLLsmuxL hl simlkA aip"midaind hya Pruflssmmul lauA%urrryur_LXl
N[YI'KhIX)Rlk
4. llrc CiLX mf MrsiLlian TL'iluirmi Ural prmmi Ld imgft6on syracmL;Ire srgq Kd by a ymv rLmml
swuce of wa[cr(UI1L 11 3 ES 5)_ThL applrran[m6uuld hr n.Nurn-A Iu rta any rxrmLing murfaur m
well.wa&r&n L6c primary a{Luror. if a.mrfacr or will muurLT:n mil axailAlr,a mingle pumL
curmuc[urn ui 7hrcul.inary wa[cusym[croslLmLl he rltLrurrnl.Ifa singkc puinLrLaurLrLiuo ix LIAL&IJ,
Lhc dc-wkgp 7 will.6c mmrxmimrblu fur Lhr payimml u P amsxmmmmu fur Lhr cunmrrlm arcam prior w
prior Ur rLa.-+Civim6 dl-'LalupmLTLL plan appvvxal_
S. Any mutewms Lhat an:anima L Lo TLTIL1nr whaLl Ix mubjL [Ur L�alualmm amd pus96Lc�igomuLL
of mmca.'L mLkkm-ping Lu bu in cumplimrl+r wiLb PALL.
6. All irrigalmmr diLLJ1Lw,LmxLJ3,ULTalx,ur dminx,cxclrmxc Lrf ma wal vrab,7wan iOLcTmxIxrW,
cT ingmr layingm4ammLand mmhgrmLmw mr L6L area beingsubdividcdshall buadLh-Lsw FL7
LJLX-'113A6_ brpcTfoimmg3mbwurk,7bcgVLiLmrl m xlLallun LJbh plywildnCxdu421207
aril any 4abL:rappliLoblu Law mrLSmLaLium_
7. Any w Lk 7haL will not camLmm Lu be usud nmL [hr pTgx7ly abandomxl a mdvrg to khL6 WLA1
{_unlink im Slmmiuds Rule adminm47LTr:ik by Lk-LdalrL DLparlrr crIL of WaLcr Rcmurmc=
{IUWR).7lm ULvulupLT,UwnLT,mprujcxc Euhg a 7,wlLall pnrvuk a wra Lcw LntaLhlnwsing
w—h'-c'1Lhu Lhcrr are any cxim[inF,WLAIN rn Lhc&Yc6pprrmun,aald i f sir,how LhLy will.cuoLinur ur be
ML-4 ur pnrrrdr TL mnl of Lkxn mbmx1.ImnwmL J f wLA6 nrr Ur 6r alvzrxhma IhL:Fm4L�l owns m
Lhrir mTrLvwLTnaLrc mml cxmlarL Ihr 11]WR U"n dwAkr Fmk'Imm SL 'Liuo(Aanm Xki- T,
ItydrogumlWis[20N 2K7-1972)111:10X1RE amy work is June Lo dmurmneaiun an cxim[ing well
JLZLm iP n im 6cliL.YLAthat11ho well n Loa than 1J4 R drag).ILmuf ufcummwn m6m wrLh IDWK
nruwL hl mubrnluxi Nr Lh:Ville priurw why wwk bcmgd mL:w dl'iirrmrrLlmlum Lhc wull.F'milmn:In
cummrmimmc wrLh IDWK TrLmy TLMIL inaddilivml.work ardcxpLTm lu Lk:ivmmnLxsicW Ibe Well—
K. Any cxislnrZsLp6o ymlLT within duxpmju—IahallbLmmovu llf wcrvrcrper{_illy(hdiimcC
.iLz Umr 4 14 arrd 9+1 K_ tirrrlacL[.LTrlral Iliabx[]IraIILT&rr abanJunmLTLI prrLXvhlnx amd
inmpL:l-Um {2tgl"5211.
9. All 4mymrunLxrlw rclalod Ur puhlrc lrfv,wafrLy mPLL hcuAh skal I Iw L uimplrlyd prom Lo wxupanLy
ofLhL 31nKLLum-
LO. Applrranl mkrall 6L m:yuimi w pay Publk W4W6 dcvc ULpnrnn plan r WLT,and UMLmLrucliimi
inspuikm(Lam,as dL:LCTrninLxl durimg LhL plan Tcvicw VaNam,prruQ W[Ire Lssumiax of;L pl;mi
nppruval kLILT.
11. hshaLl hl Lhc nMmmibility raf dLc applivZOL UrcnYLLTc LhdLall dcxclrymrmnl LaUu c m pJy WILli
Lh L'Aniu mmmx W3Lk Disabi Ltm:w An am]L'krr FZiT Jluusing AOL
12. ApjrJwml mhall hl rcwpLmrmilrlu fur applm:amnL and LNmmpbMur wrdL any 1cc64m-0U4 Jkmnking
LhaL may Irr mgLurLd by Lhc Army LkLrps arC I:nginoLTs.
City of Meridian I Department Report
169
13. L1LvckrpcT shall uLurdiLoLc moilhux Imalxncwil6 16c MLTiduin Bow IHYiLY_
1S.Cur TacLi tin LLB[FLm l[ss1uL1 hL xulnnfaud lu 11ir MLTId]an Buildmig IkpanLrn fur al I lvmldjng
padsTUL1LIUrig L7L'&ImLnA bark ill,whLTL'&tu[ing Would siL a[up rill IF6uk'rial_
1S_The duupi cuginxr shall 6c ruxluircal lu m-miPy diai Lhr sulx[rcraLTLinr ckval ms am s-L a
mmimum or 3 fixl ahuvc IN;highLNl LmlaLhlishLd punk grumKLwaL-LT rlrt sLiuo. TUN is[u u=LiL"
LhaL 11hr 6uu=cicialion or Lhr LTawL wp2um of 6umlzs is aL k3&-A 1 fuix ahuvr-
16.11ic a1Lp&i Ls JLsigm L�Jg ML7 xhal I hL nislmnxihdr&lr iLmre Lism ofall impLiun:mdlur
drmmo#c faLiLiLX wiLllln lhi}Tm}j L1rL LILaL Llo TIdL full LLLxk7 Ibc jLuimliotiLm uran nTigaLiuo daxviL-L
ua ACHD.'rho&sign LMVML7 shall TmaYidreLT13rKLWx9L"L L]tu faciliLim bare hour mLsmdLcd m
amu&nm wllb dIc NI]Mh4LTJ ihsign planx.11ux Lx:rLiriLOLiun will hr rU jiFL-AL k-furr accrlirxm[r
Of LK=tTallm+y is LOULl&w any NEMOL L's W7Lhin Ih L'TmxjL L.
17. Al lh:umm iztiiumi uILhc pMijLY'l.[hc aTTlx:anlshall 6r m%Tmmsihlr LIIsm6miLn rd drawing pLT
LhL:(,iiy ur MLrid.A.bAu AD s[aoLiardx. '115csr rcL4wd drawings 1nus7 he Mx:caicd;utd UPPM-fcil
pti-iLi ILL Llir L1mLdnP ufaourtirmalim oro mpanry Lcm any Am Llim wilhinthr Tm)jccL.
19. h sum m Ii6hl plan will nod Lo be imrlui"m Lhr aril cxnm mLYxnL TrLmrs.!iUr L IighL pmm
rugauv K--mLsan;LiL;RA m mxlkm6 5 ul Lhc InTrorunLTLISIalx6riN rur:ir=Ughuog.A Lxlpy
of be smndaidx L=m lb.fuundaL hLLpllwww_lncriL6a iLy�&puhLic wui6..q.'?id-232.
19.1110 CiLy of MLai bm Tcyuims Ilmd Lhc uwtiLT piisl W the Uily a pLr&mnanor Nuray mu im Lk aLmL
of 125%mflhu L+Lhd cimLs Lruclum cost 6m all imcurg4Liu s. r,wa1LT and mi a m&T NE JL[um
Tmiu lu fnmi plmLsignalurr_Mix s Ly will hr vcTiricd by a Linr ilun LlSd cslimalc pruridud by
Iho uwricr trf 1bL'CiLy_ I he amn:Ly can hL"p mLLd in 11hr farm of an mTi:*iK:L1rIL"Lc LILT of cTL"d1L,L3xh
Jgnlsil urhund l4TrplKML mhLLNL Pik m uMdxmLiim&n sunay,whinccm hL fimind m the
f:urmnusily IkMcltTmusL D.pallnlLnL Wdnilr_ Pk2m cunlacL hand lhrultipmLml Sur iLi far
more irL&unrmlium aLRR7 2211.
20.The Lily of MLTiiham mmyuims doL LIM uwncr This[Lu the Uily a warranLy sul Ly in Lhr turxnmil of
0%of Ihr UAJ LYm%LnKLLLJo oLis[&R LxAL unit lL7LYlNLW-LT,wa1LTand rcLur In rmu'LLL'[m L'for
di. 6110 u P Lwo years_I hls sunfLy Will 6L YL riff Yl by a lim iLL utiYL L�Lilmaw rWV3dud by Zhu
uw1tLT ILl Ibc{:11y_'1111'surLLy CM bu Txiiwd io Ibc&min of an LuLvL1LahIu ILVLT of mlVdii,mm%h
&-rx il[ur lmnd.Aprj1lican[times[No ao 3Lpli4Wi4m&R NUrAy,wlLirlL can 6L fULLmd Lrn the
tunnnumily Drrrlu ji=m lkFaiLL mi wcbxilr_ Plcww cuxlacL hand ILLY lupmaall 9vii im for
mun:ildbu aum al 887 2211.
City of Meridian I Department Report
170
C. Meridian Park's Department
ha t
IrnTk%Ilnd Rexrrutinn
Iter;rtmer: Kim Warren/PaLhwaysPro*d ManLLg%r
Fbrwrr►m*rsmll: NirkNipoli
Pmjns*14hc Fkrlh Meridian Fldds Fiel/oc14-202 COBI—p,g DAM 2112a26
The rdbwir!g will bL rcclurod for daolopmenk of the propam!d project:
COMMONS OFAPPRIYVAL-PATHWAYS
1. ThL prLiptA dL-ecla er shall deign and coraru t nwliimu •PuOrwayo-mnvstent wilh the location Lod
1pmfiratiurLs xr ILrh in Lhc Meridian kml-w.hya Master Plan Map and Ibk-rst Lr Ratlwaya Flan Dcwun LMM
CkpLor 3k Amypr::p:::,00 A.ur.LmLmL!.to pLMhway aligrrrerl shall bee=dnatud Lhrough Lhc Palhwags
Pnyect MLrnegLr. .. .. ... -'.an 4"Fs NfLw,CrlY 4Ye•h�r!r.
2- Prnr to Fnal piaL apprcr l Lhc applk: L shall dedoLe a public acmes caSemLMM for a detached,W wide
mulfi-raw plthwayvaithin Lhc I:n&AwL buffer along Sfi•14wl-ere iL fronts the project.
1Q'wide dct:xkiyArnulLkm. Palhrrls 31"1al5olxrucluiradalongbothsidm44Lhacm&riQra dtragtxA
rnn thepmrcL
+ kblii" paofiwa y¢ mcnLs shall bL a minimum of IX rrdc(10F paLhwaK«2•shotider Lad`
!ide).
+ All paLhrw2WshalbakPM Ld002idealirri.S3Lk)nck6trWLascmerdsunksspermesionisspcciiwlfk
ohtairodhorn thcgwerningirrigationdinlrkL
+ FolowA134Dgukkgine&rwdodioLionctFca.orncnbwp!thw-ap;dj:x nmLoACIIDrigMsvf-wary.
We standard City ierrrPktlr:far pubic oas OmEwrWa 3tbtrif d emvvletr�orrice l'lrolr�r fi"dtvrt�
Ara F4rME
3- Cunstnrt mdtrux puthw.rys pLr pumnS sLTuDn koed on masurtg sdL mwWitiorLs as remmmL•nded by
project mil mgintoer in aawrd wiLh UGC ii-3A-9 and Prior Lo Final approval the applicant'!
mginaerskslprovidewriltmdoeurrKx"ionIlLanpcdplayadcp ggr=mmondL•d paving s¢tkw1[d%A
the puAhwayscentw.trscon r,ryedpethermornnwndwdspmficawwLti.
A- The ewrrcr Im representAivc ass Liam of the propQAY affected by each pubic aoxsa�t shill
hmwanongoingoblijpAontonxmnumntheFrwld-u:a paLhwlsY-
h- 9hoopLmuWonrencingskslbeiratallLdbemeenpathw.rya and(IivuOvrMerirrjgai3nonds and laLurafs
as de:rlLd in the Moidian PaLhw:sp Mamar Flack.CF&VtLT 3,p:LgeM,All oLhLrILmdewLperLIM11-
3A-7-
C, Pmry'cridn kpershallbempo ilok-Fwuht:hinrnglit. :gnemcnL and othcrpmTnLL ionF5[: required
fur ouru ruLting wilhin irrigaLiundisitricLoasmYents-
7- R uild;rrgdxrcpunLymj!AbetwmnthcxtvrttiLkwn.arapprwulwdlhLrrqtircnxdsulLhcinigakn
dd rw±,the-de4LkpLr shill work with Rkhways Pwimt kkmagcr La Lw=lw c a paLhwary dojgn lhal nxuF
buth{ity and irrigation disLrk:t olq¢tiv City rL•quina nts Ln ALAS shall not I nor arL they intmdod lof
mmn-ida lhLxw rli Lhc irrigation dslricL h:rAng orisdktiun Lwcr lhL prelorL area.
Riv u�ur�5
City of Meridian I Department Report
171
D. Ada County Highway District(ACHD)
wi rr�u{'alA.rtiryriwa
ACHD i5r.�o-Wrrrri Currrwctianr
� parr+ua Hlhmn Cunr'•IWrwrs
Date; Fabruary24,213M
T,�E Emily MLAlber
Staff Contact Kairal-do Troyer,planner
Project Descfolo,t NarthMandian RMS
trip Genera#Ion Slip 9+enera4ion tiaVq k�e�e#e+rmrned as par#of 81<lrturede�relop�menG
gppllcant tahwd on oliher(lie Mtrtoto of TranVortmNnh En9rnea s rrlp Guriotal w
Manual,121 ednion or"itaffic irnpactstud*y.
r —
F
■
'OOrnmeraa The tabby abOvv list IND cehsl1rwi Corlailior,S of the surrburldrrlQ
roadways wit hoot the proposed development as this appliratian a for annexation
and rezone only.With a future development appkatrDn.Lhls summarywill he
updated to+efletr IheOwwelvprnent and rtslmp ct.
connecting you eG more
Ado QNrft wio—f bwct-!SW M r+wKv Lwrtrr-Poin I[?-y srrf-au 7063W4 VP-cx SM--MW-W-NAd4qkVhWuR
V. FINDINGS
A. Annexation(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall,
at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the
council shall make the following findings:
A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Community Development and Public Works Directors made a determination that since
the city is installing a sewer trunkline in McMillan Road and this property is contiguous to
city limits, that we can annex the property. The subject development will not be able to apply
for further applications or do any development until sewer is available at the site or the
City of Meridian I Department Report
172
applicant is actively extending sewer to the site.As a result, the Director finds the proposed
map amendment complies with the comprehensive plan designations of Mixed-Use
Interchange and Medium Density Residential. The applicant will be required to come back at
a later time with a development agreement modification and preliminary plat to show
conformance with the comprehensive plan design elements.
B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district,
specifically the purpose statement;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment complies with purpose statements for the Mixed-Use
Interchange and Medium Density Residential designations. The Mixed-Use Interchange
designation is meant to have low traffic generating uses which is why the C-Nzoning with the
further restriction of uses such as drive throughs, and gas stations is compatible with the
FL UM designation. In addition, while the applicant has not provided a plat with a density for
the residential portion of the site, they are requesting the R-8 zoning district which is our
medium density zoning designation.
C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare;
Stafffinds the proposed map amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety
and welfare as the proposed uses will be compatible with the current and future uses in the
area.
D. 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 Community Development Director made a determination to allow for development to be
annexed when sewer extensions are in progress.As a result, the director finds that the proposed
zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing services to this site.
E. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city.
Stafffinds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City.
VI. ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation with the requirement of a Development
Agreement per the provisions in Section IX in accord with the Findings in Section X.
B. Commission:
Pending
C. City Council:
Pending
City of Meridian I Department Report
173
V IL EXHIBITS
A. Project Area Maps
(link to Project Overview)
A. Aerial
Legend
Project Location
;,•;Area of Impact
Analysis •` ••- ``` ,,
wy"
1 }
••r• _
e 3+ wAViY4lI�
ORRIN
,ix�r.f a� �� �ta�AA�R■ALlM•
.WOOZY ..•y�.3..,.a..
1 ilfaA !Ir•�•na:,
��anyy�g ra+•n.'f�
m y FIbI11A1 i• e n..
'1f r 4 ssr ••N,
-�' 14Ut4k•••r
B. Zoning Map
Legend R-4
Project Location
Area of Impact
® Analysis ' M1
/ R'1. ----MU C2'-.. %ll�, C-G RI
RUT J.
R-4
a
-1 R 5
1 � _ --
City of Meridian Department Report
174
C. Future Land Use
Legend
Project Location
Area of Impact
OAnalysis t
.'r
a alt. MU-IT C
{
JTMU-RG
le Ids MixedUse -
Subarea -. �jlnterchange
Plait
Tug
Me u nsi
Low Densi `� ���`' � -
tde flat
Residential
Med-High
Density I� Egg �®
Residential Civic
FielAi Subarea Plan �
D. Planned Development Map
Legend o
i
Project Location
Area of Impact
City Limits
Planned Parcels r
OAnalysis --
;, r
vz
r
r q
r i
r
r
r
r a
i
r
r
City of Meridian Department Report
175
B. Subject Site Photos
City of Meridian Department Report
Fl 76
C. Service Accessibility Report
PARCEL S0429120006 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY
overall Score: Q 1 st Percentile
Description
Location Within 112 mile of City Limits YELLOW
Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains > 2,000 ft_from parcc RED
Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodphain or > 2 acres GREEN
Emergency Services Fire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOW
Reporting District does not have enough data to report
Emergency Services Police RED
results
Pathways Within 1/4 mile of future pathways YELLOW
Transit Not within 114 of current or future transit route RED
Ultimate configuration (#of lanes in master streets
Arterial Road Buildaut Status plan) > existing (#of lanes) & road IS NOT in 5 yr work RED
plan
School Walking Proximity From 112 to 1 mile walking
Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a
School Drivability Middle or Elementary School within 1 mile driving GRE
(existing orfuture)
Park Walkability No park within walking distance by park type RED
City of Meridian I Department Report
177
D. Concept Plan (date: 1/16/2026)
i
City of Meridian Department Report
178
E. Building Elevations(date: 1/16/2026)
North • Building
Comm Building Design
Materials
Fibor-cement siding(smooth&hoard-and-batten)
Stucco(tan,huff,white).
Split face CMU(huff,tan,or gray).
• Corrugated metal(galvanized or muted color).
Thin stone veneer(neutral tones).
f
* Wood-look composite(soffits,accents).
Exposed steel(awnings,trellises).
4
U
Color Palette
Buildings shou€d incorporatea minimum of one
Base and Accent Tone:
Base tones:tan,huff,muted sage,fightgray.
• Aecenttones:sage,brick,charcoal.
Wood tones:Warm medium stain.
Conceptual 8 ukding Fle va r t vns
Single Family
Architectural Character. Single family homes
will reflect a Modern Farmhouse style,
characterized by clean architectural fines,
gable and shed roof forms,and a balanced
combination of traditional and contemporary
materials.
Materials and Colors.Exterior elevations will
incorporate elements such as horizontal lap
siding,hoard and batten accents,and simple
vim details to create visual interest w!'We
maintaining a cohesive streetscape. Neutral
color palettes with contrasting tones will `ll �
• i�
enhance the architectural form and
complement surrounding development.
■
Fencing.6'cleervisron iron fence,or 6'closed �,_
Vision vinyl fence Conceptvaf
Elevations
41
f17
{] - r:
i�
City of Meridian I Department Report
179
North •
Pathway Desk Standards
The Project will feature a comprehensive pathway system
designed to integrate with the City of Meridian's existing pathway
network.The internal circulation system establishes clear, F :•_� a y
connected routes between residential neighborhoods,
commercial centers,and community open spaces,creating
safe and convenient alternative to vehicular travel.
Two primary pathway types are proposed throughout the
development,which shall be constructed in accordance with the
following standards:
• Macro Pathways.Macro pathways will serve as the primary
circulation routes and will he constructed as 10-foot-wide Conceptual
multi-use paths.Where these pathways run adjacent to
public roadways,they will be separated from the curb by a
Lawn parkstrip,providing both a comfortable buffer for
pedestrians and cyclists and an enhanced landscaped edge ti
consistent with Meridian's streetscape objectives. 1
Micro Pathways.Micropethways will function as secondary } _
neighborhood connectors and will range from 5to 8feet in
n"
width,depending on context.
City of Meridian I Department Report
F180]
F. Annexation Legal Description& Exhibit Map
uesenphan tar
Annr,xppan
'+wry 20.2026
A pinion of the Norlhearl 114 of Suction 29.Tawnehip 4 North.Range 1 West
Bails Meridian.Ada County,Idaho.more pert+cularly descnted safollawa:
C-Dmrwr,dnq al The 114 corns common to Sections 20 and 24 T 4N.R 1W.
B M horn whi-,h the Setrion tamer wmmon to Somns 20.21.20 and 29.T 4N
R 1W.B ht.gear%SoulN N'15'11"Ea1't.M7 241ee1 thence on the nort++boundary
line td sad Seellon 29.South a9"15'11"E*SI.709 00 Fpe1 to the PQElr of
BEGINNING
therm continuing.5auth 013'15'11'Epps,$25Aa feet to the Elko W a oomw
cammen is said Se dears 24 and 29.
theme leaving Said north boundary line,South Q13'55'39'Weyt,1,316.79 reel in
the Northeast 1116 corner of said Section 29;
thence on the nortli b nwil ry Ind of thff MutheeM 114 of the NorWeaN Vill cl
said 20.South 96'i8'61'EA1t,25 00 feet to th•C' Hilims of N.Rutz Plea
theme leaving said narth boundary line an said€enteehne.tteing parallel we.h
and 25.131)feel east or the weal Uour4ary lm*of the 5otj h"5j'A Of the Ngrthe;l#1 V4
of said Sa76o3 29,South 0p'5599'West 1.316 76 Feet tc the south boundary line of
the Sculheesi T rdii of the Now•thseei 1A-of said Sedan 20;
Hwnce 4-awing said wierlins on said swh boundary line,Ncslh 89'22'31"
West 25.00fee.to the Cemer-Essi V16 comer of said Section 29:
Ihemx Ir.,gwing said sgclh bourriaey line,tJorth 09 22'31'1Nest, 1,320 05 feel is
the Center 114 tamer of said Section 29;
Ihenoe an 1he rrarlh-sawh C*n*1r**r wio Sild iM 2g.Norlh 00'51'09'EUL
2.090 39feat;
1henpe leaving$Xd rwrth-south centcriinc.South 89'15'11'East.703 00 poet
thence N"D13'6 1 TY't est �416 LID lees in the PVl1Tr OF BEGFNNTNG
Curtaining 72.201 sues,more or less.
EM of �L t 4.%,
xCENs ---
11779
t1
� * OF x
k"atrc 1 aFF 1
City of Meridian Department Report
181
. BU8i8 Gr N4Grimp ........................
S69'35'WE 2657.24'
1/4 -S.2g AP7' 625.1a
s29 / Yi Gdndm Li to kl 3.20 S2t
Po}+k ai
I link kv hvR
4WhA wun tcn
S
Yg'11'€ m
m gw
i
m
F}
W
1
O
f 207 W
Acrem
� Line Tat�lr
it sow,Wni'f
3 ry4��'37'p i :SaU
25
a�,L LA vo
LZ
In
11779
I I IrP' '+FJ+
CI OF lQ*Y
`IDAHO W Amaxation EKhlbit For 2&-ETi
SURVEY �4„`�" 7007 Chinden OIvd. ,••IL''°'
���W
i
GROUP, LLC a plrL . 11 x1 fa nl}klp 77L *'1 Ism■
7 1+1, Kw.,J u hm[a.,�e qy.a ffh}'6,Sa
City of Meridian I Department Report
182
description for
C-N Zane
January 22. 2026
A portion of the Northwest 114 of the Northeast 114 of Sacaion 29, Township 4
North, Range 1 West. Boise Meridian,Ada County. Idaho, more particularly described
as follows.
Commencing at the 114 Corner Common loSeotions 20 and 29.T.4N R 1VV.,
B M.from which the Section comer common to Sections 20.21, 28 and 29,T.4N.
R.74V., B.M.,bears South 89'1611"East, 2657.24 fleet:thence on the north boundary
line of said Section 29, South 891511"East, 703.00 feel to the POINT()F
BEGINNING;
thence oorKtinuing_South 0941611"East.625.49 feet to the East I M 6 corner
common to said Sections 20 and 29;
thence leaving wid north boundary line on the east boundary line of the
Norttwmst 114 of the Northeast 114 of said Section 29,South 00'55'Ur West, 1,D66.34
feet:
thence leaving said east boundary line, North 89'W51"West, 1,327.09 feet to
the north-south centiedne of said Sectian 29;
thence on said north-south centerline,North 00°51'09"East,517.89 feet;
thence leaving said north-south carTleriine.South 89 15'11''East,703:00 feet;
thence North 00'51'09"Easl,W.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Ccotainirrg 23.655 acres, more or less.
End of Cesuiption.
yP1 LAND
C6 143ce_'F
ji7 a°
rnr ,o
0 ?, of: % V,
Pauc 1 of 1
City of Meridian Department Report
183
Basis of Bearings ...................
589'15'11'E 2657,24'
_ 1/4 5.20 l_D3.U0 625-49' 1328.7S 5.2d 5.21
S 29 44. h�den Ivd E1 p s __ S-29 S,28
Paint of
Eipginning 10 -6
i o
i ch .J
# * Mint Ranehettes s
G 09 SuDdMaiah No. 1 � r
4 w
U9'15,11'E
703A4'
Ln
-03
o m 23,555
Acres `'
v
r N'W51'w 1327.09'
ron
nl I^
yy I cd
w
o �
i
LAB
-
i
#1 7
lPA �rRO
OF
�#CCK
Scale: ,".40D'
'•.>x -an x ao--;,y�x--�[ate G rty Ir�,xas +a x+� o ,do 3m 100 Imo
Job No.
II)AHO Exhibit Map for �-on
SURVEY C—N Zone
e=ise oaa_asro+ Sheet Na.
,auinw�s,o 1
GROUP, LLC n parhloo M the Hwl/4 od ,he HEif4 o-r Sc loon 29- 4wg. Data
TAH., R.W., B.M., Mu €wnt Idaho 1/2V2026
City of Meridian I Department Report
Fl 84
D*scrlp'tichn for
R-8 Zone
January 22, 2026
A porlon of the West 1!2 of the Northeast 114 of Secbon 29,Township 4 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,Ada County, Idaho,more parlickilarly described as
follows:
Commeming at the 1Y4 mmef common to Sections 20 and 29.T 4N R IVV„
B-M.from which the Section comer common to Sections 2A 21, 28 and 29,TAN.
R.1W. B.M ,bears South$001511"East_2557.24 feet:thence on the north-south
centerline of said Section 29_South 00`61'00"West. 1.063.89 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING;
thence leaving said north-south centerline, South 89'W51"East, 1.327.09 feet
to the east boundary line of the West 1t2 of the Northeast 114 of said Seefian 29;
thence on said easl boundary line. South 00'$$'39"VVest, 1,a97,23 Feet to the
Center-East 1116 oornrer of eaid Section 29:
thence North W2211"Vilest, 1.326.05 feat to the Center 114 corner of 5aid
ectlon 29:
thence on the north-south centerline of said Section 29.North 0015T0T East,
1.572.50 feat to the POINT OF BEGINNING
Containing 47.790 aces, more or less.
End of Description.
wL «INS
` cr r*s
VA
ai 11779
OF O
Q J4#CCA
Page II of f
City of Meridian Department Report
185
Oasis of $earings
S89*15'11"E 2657.24' 1
1f S.2♦] 132S.49' 132a 5' 5.26 5.1�1
:S 29 ——— —— Ik, Chlnden $Ivd, El f16 S.PB S.26
rc
�� 1� 41ink Rgnph9ti65 1
rj I M SWbdfArion No. 1 E I
A m I
� 3
G �
ua I I
SE9'ae'S1'E 1327-Oe'
Poini ni
Begrnning
f 4 7,79b
Acres #
vs in
5 �
O
2
--- L,+ D
C'I N69'22'31"w 1S2S-45' C—E1/16
I
1779
166 FP� 01F
MOO
�f
Sale; i"=4p4'
Q 100 200 4N Soo
IDAHO Exhibit Mop for N-p11
SURVEY R-8 Zone
GROUP, LLC A parLiw al th■ Y1/2 al the Ngi/4 m Sactkn 29, 4wq data
TAN- R,141., B.M.- ACM Cuwlty, Uaho Ala=
City of Meridian I Department Report
F186]
VIII. 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
conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD
City of Meridian I Department Report
187
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.
City of Meridian I Department Report
188
Development Application Transmittal
Link to Project Application: North Meridian Fields AZ H-2026-0003
Hearing Date: March 19, 2026
Assigned Planner: Nick Napoli
To view the City of Meridian Public Records Repository, Click Here
The above "Link to Project Application" will provide you with any further information on
the project.
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application
referenced above. To review the application and project information please click on the
application link above. The City of Meridian values transparency and makes a variety of
information available to the public online through our public records repository.
We request that you submit your comments or recommendations prior to the hearing
date specified above. When responding, please reference the file number of the project.
If responding by email, please send comments to comment(a)_meridiancity.org.
For additional information associated with this application please contact the City of
Meridian Planner identified above at 208-884-5533.
Thank you,
City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208.888.44331Email: cityclerk(cD_meridiancity.org
Built for Business, Designed for Living
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request,unless exempt from disclosure by law.
189
E IDIAN;---
Applicant Presentation
North Meridian Fields MARCH 19, 2026CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
CITY OF MERIDIAN 70 Acres 7007 Chinden -+/•Property Preliminary Plat, CUP, etc.•Future Applications Zoning w/ DA •Annexation •Applications CITY OF STAR
Future Land Use Map C2 Use Interchange-Mixed•Medium Density Residential•
Annexation
Zoning(Ada County)C2 Owyhee Storm Ave Residential8) Medium Density -47.81 Acres (R•N) Neighborhood Business -23.64 Acres (C•
Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines
Conditions of Approval Area Plan, Comprehensive Plan and UDC.concept plan to be consistent with design elements outlined in the Field Sub , and amend the preliminary plat to further
subdivide the entire property. a a development agreement modification, the site, the applicant shall submit Prior to any future development and once sewer service is readily available
at IV. (A)(f)feet of lessRetail commercial uses shall be restricted to building sizes of 10,000 square IV. (A)(e)., and Drive Through EstablishmentsVertically Integrated Residential
Projectsproperty: Fuels Sales Facilities, Storage Facilities, Vehicle Washing Facilities, N zoned portion of the -The following uses shall be prohibited in the CIV. (A)(c)