HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-04-07 Regular
Mayor Robert E. Simison
City Council Members:
John Overton, President
Anne Little Roberts, Vice President
Brian Whitlock
Liz Strader
Doug Taylor
Luke Cavener
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Tuesday, April 07, 2026 at 6:00 PM
The City of Meridian is committed to providing equal access to all public meetings. If you need accommodation, an alternative
format, or language assistance to fully participate, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@meridiancity.org 72 hours
prior the scheduled meeting. Materials presented at public meetings are subject to disclosure pursuant to the Idaho Public
Records Act. Public Meetings of the Meridian City Council are streamed live at https://meridiancity.org/live and can be joined
virtually at https://bit.ly/meridianzoommeeting
Minutes
ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Councilman John Overton
Councilwoman Anne Little Roberts
Councilman Brian Whitlock
Councilman Doug Taylor
Mayor Robert E. Simison
ABSENT
Councilwoman Liz Strader
Councilman Luke Cavener
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted
PROCLAMATIONS
1. Week of the Young Child
2. Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND RECOGNITION
PUBLIC FORUM
DEPARTMENT REPORTS \[Action Item\]
3. Appointment of David Miles as Director of Community Development
Motion to approve appointment made by Councilman Overton, Seconded by
Councilwoman Little Roberts.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
PUBLIC HEARINGS \[Action Item\]
4. Public Hearing for Alamar (H-2026-0005) by Midas Corporation, generally located at
the Northeast corner of Black Cat Rd., and Franklin Rd. Continued to April 21, 2026
A. Request: Modified Development Agreement to amend the building elevations and
deviate from the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan design elements.
Motion to continue to April 21, 2026 made by Councilman Overton, Seconded by Councilwoman
Little Roberts.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
5. Public Hearing (continued from February 24, 2026) for Latitude Forty Three
Subdivision (H-2024-0059), by Rodney Evans + Partners, LLC., located at 675, 715 and
955 S. Wells St. Approved
A. Request: Annexation of 17.27 acres of land with R-8 (13.78 acres), R-15 (2.42 acres)
and C-N (1.07 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat to re-subdivide lots 7, 21 and 22, Magic View Subdivision,
Amended into 79 residential lots, 1 commercial lot and 11 common/other lots on 15.97
acres of land in the R-8, R-15 and C-N zoning districts.
Motion to approve made by Councilman Taylor, Seconded by Councilman Whitlock.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
ORDINANCES \[Action Item\]
6. Ordinance No. 26-2120: An Ordinance (Tong H-2025-0049) annexing land located in
the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 19, Township 3 North,
Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit;
rezoning 0.496 acres of such real property from the R1 (Estate Residential) zoning
district to the R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff
to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all
official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian
in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed
with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder,
and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting
ordinances; and providing an effective date. Approved
Motion to approve made by Councilman Taylor, Seconded by Councilman Whitlock.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
7. Ordinance No. 26-2121: An Ordinance (Driftwood Townhomes H-2025-0051) for
rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 36,
Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as
depicted in the map exhibit, rezoning 5.01 acres of land from the C-C (Community
Business) zoning district to the TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) zoning
district in the Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area
maps as well as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the
boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this
ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County
Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date. Approved
Motion to approve made by Councilman Taylor, Seconded by Councilman Whitlock.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
8. Ordinance No. 26-2122: An Ordinance (Farrington Heights H-2025-0016) for rezone of
land located in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 3
North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted
in the map exhibit, rezoning 2.9 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium Low-Density
Residential) zoning district to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning
district in the Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area
maps as well as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the
boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this
ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County
Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date. Approved
Motion to approve made by Councilman Taylor, Seconded by Councilman Whitlock.
Voting Yea: Councilman Overton, Councilwoman Little Roberts, Councilman Whitlock,
Councilman Taylor
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
ADJOURNMENT 7:52 PM
Meridian City Council April 7, 2026.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, April
7, 2026, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, John Overton, Doug Taylor, Anne Little Roberts and
Brian Whitlock.
Members Absent: Luke Cavener and Liz Strader.
Other Present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Dave Miles, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Steve
Siddoway.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Liz Strader X Brian Whitlock
_X_Anne Little Roberts X John Overton
_X_ Doug Taylor Luke Cavener
X Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is Tuesday, April
7th, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. We will begin tonight's regular City Council meeting with roll call
attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us
in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
Simison: Next item will be our community invocation, which tonight will be delivered by
Jason Billester. If you would all, please, take this -- join us in the community invocation
or take this as moment of silence and reflection. Mr. Billester, if you would like to come
forward.
Billester: Thank you so much, Mayor and City Council Members. Ladies and
gentlemen, please, join me in prayer. Mighty God, Heavenly Father, we just thank you
for this evening, God, and I thank you for your servants, our Mayor, our city manager,
our city staff, our City Council Members and the Meridian community and, Lord, we ask
you for your guidance, wisdom and discernment and support as we begin this meeting.
Lord, we just -- excuse me -- we give this meeting and time to you, mighty God, and
pray that you will guide all discussion that brings meaningful discussion and stronger
bonds for our community. Help us, Lord, to trust you more with an impartation of your
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 2 of 34
guided wisdom and discernment. I pray that they will be able to solve our city's
problems and make good policies and, Lord, please bring a new level of peace and
clarity to everyone involved in this meeting. Grant them excellence in their governments
and may your will be done, in Jesus Christ's mighty name, amen.
Simison: Thank you, Jason, for all you do and all the team down at Boise Rescue
Mission for our community.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Simison: All right. With that we will move on to adoption of the agenda.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: There are no changes to tonight's agenda. I move that we adopt the agenda
as published.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the agenda agree to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
PROCLAMATIONS
1. Week of the Young Child
Simison: So, our first two items up are proclamations, which we will do down at the
podium and the first one will be the Week of the Young Child. So, if I could ask Laurie
to join me and any member of the team that is with you that you would like to at the
podium. Okay. So, this evening we are joined by Nicole. So, we will go ahead and
read the proclamation and turn this over to you for any comments you would like to
make. Okay. Whereas the City of Meridian, in conjunction with the Idaho Association
for the Education of Young Children, Idaho AEYC, are celebrating the week of the Idaho
-- of the Young Child, April 11th through 17th, 2026. And whereas the Idaho AEYC is
working to promote and inspire high quality early childhood experiences for our state's
youngest citizens that can provide a foundation of learning success for children in
Meridian and whereas early childhood educators and those who work with or on behalf
of young children birth through age eight, who make a meaningful difference in the lives
of young children, deserve our thanks, support and recognition and whereas public
policy supporting early learning for all are crucial to young children's futures and to
prosperity of our society and economy and whereas this is time to recognize the
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 3 of 34
importance of children's earliest years in shaping their development and to recommit
ourselves to ensuring that each and every child experiences the type of environment at
home, at childcare, at school and in the community that will promote early learning.
Therefore, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, proclaim April 11th through 17th, 2026, to be the
Week of the Young Child in the City of Meridian and encourage all citizens to work to
support the efforts of Idaho AEYC by supporting and investing in early childhood care
and education in our community. Dated the 7th day of April 2026. On behalf of the City
of Meridian I will present this proclamation to you and say thank you and turn the mic
over to you.
Criner: Thank you, Mayor and City Council of Meridian. I just want to say my name is
Nicole Criner. I'm the executive director of Idaho AEYC. We support families and
children here across the state of Idaho. Meridian is one of 50 cities and including the
state of Idaho, who is proclaiming next week as the Week of the Young Child. We
appreciate the city's focus on young children, the focus on early learning and making an
impact on the future of Idaho. So, thank you.
Simison: Dr. Bub, I know this is not in your -- do you have any comments you would like
to add to this? We are blessed to have the superintendent with us this evening and I
think he could very much appreciate what you all are trying to do. So, thank you and
congratulations. We will take a picture if we can.
2. Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day
Simison: If there is anybody outside in the -- waiting to come into the lobby. Come on
in, guys. There is a few of you; right? All right. I think for some this will be a football
team in many communities. This is just the -- another state wrestling championship
team from Meridian High School in Meridian and so it's my honor to welcome you here
back to City Hall. Just by raise of hands how many people have done this before? All
right. So we got a good mix of a couple first timers and some -- some repeat offenders,
but we are excited to welcome you back and we will do this proclamation and, then,
invite everyone to come by, say your name, your weight, and your place in state. Does
that make sense from that standpoint? But -- yeah, for me and myself, again, I'm just
glad to have you back for -- as I like to say one for the thumb. But other than the
coaches like don't expect anyone else in the program to ever have more than four. So,
we don't want that fifth championship for any of the wrestlers, unless they are coming up
from younger ages. So, whereas being a Meridian High School wrestler is more than
scoring points, escapes, takedowns, pins and achieving state titles, it is training to build
leadership, character, confidence, teamwork and resilience, all traits needed to succeed
on the mat, in the classroom and in the real world and whereas the hard work and
dedication of the Meridian Warrior wrestling team and coaches resulted in winning the
6-A State Wrestling Championship and whereas their determination racked up 18 state
placers and three individual champions to post 364.5 points topping the previous all
classification scoring record by 26 points and whereas the record setting performance
earned the Meridian Warriors team its fifth state championship in the past six years and
whereas the leadership, training and discipline of their coaches helped team members
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 4 of 34
to focus their talents, passion and fortitude to become a dynasty, each player making
valuable contributions to their victory. Therefore, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby
proclaim April 7th, 2026, is Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day in the
City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in congratulating the Meridian
High Warriors on the remarkable athletic achievement and for representing Meridian so
proudly in the state tournament, dated this 7th day of April 2026. So, on behalf of the
City of Meridian we want to say congratulations on your accomplishment. With that
will invite whatever coaches are kind of come up first, then, we will go to the players.
Muri: Hello. John Muri, assistant wrestling coach.
B.Muri: Oh, yeah. Brad Muri, head wrestling coach. We knew this team was pretty
special coming into the season and, holy smokes, they -- they lived up and surpassed
all expectations. Just really proud and -- and blessed to coach at Meridian High and be
a part of West Ada. That's all I have to say about that. Thank you.
Simison: All right. So, just a reminder, name, year in school and place in state.
Wynn: I'm Brendan Wynn and I'm a junior and I wrestled for 138 pounds.
Klinger: My name is Leo Klinger, I wrestle at 175. I'm a junior. I took second at state.
Hallford: Estate My name's Tre Hallford. I'm a junior. I wrestle 120 pounds.
Beck: My name is Jackson Beck. I'm a junior. I wrestle at 150.
Amoureux: My name Ryan Amoureux. I wrestled 132 and I placed first.
Nevills: My name is Blake Nevills. I'm a sophomore in high school and I won second.
Torres: My name is Gavin Torres. I wrestle 157. I'm a senior. Yeah. Thank you.
Shaver: My name is Logan Shaver. I'm a senior and wrestle 157 and I took third at
state.
Ostoja: I'm Adam Ostoja. I'm a junior. I wrestled 120 and got third.
Williams: Bodee Williams. I'm a sophomore. I wrestled 98 and I took first.
DeGraff: Roddy DeGraff, a freshman, wrestled 98 and I took fourth.
Beeson: Riker Beeson. I took fifth and I'm a freshman.
Vega: Alejandro Vega. I'm a freshman, 113, and I got fourth at state.
Ramirez: I'm Cruz Ramirez. I weighed 138. 1 took fifth at state. I'm a sophomore.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 5 of 34
Case: I'm Darius Case, I'm a junior, I wrestled 144 and I took fifth.
Zitgraf: My name is Ranger Zitgraf, I am a junior and I wrestled 126.
Miller: My name is Draken Miller, I wrestled 144 pounds and I got fourth.
Wynn: I'm Blake Wynn. I'm a freshman, but I didn't place at state.
Emerson: I'm Mason Emerson, I'm a freshman, I wrestled 106 and I took third at state.
Guillen: I'm Tobias Guillen. I'm a -- I'm a junior. I'm a state finalist.
Briggs: My name is Justus Briggs. I wrestled 126, I'm a senior and I -- I'm a state
finalist.
Simison: All right. Thank you. Council, that was great to have them back in here once
again.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND RECOGNITION
Simison: With that do we have anything under announcements and recognition? I will
-- I will just do a quick announcement that the legislature is gone. So, we are excited to
get back to now figuring out how to operate our community with the new bills that have
been passed. So, we will be working on that. But I digress.
PUBLIC FORUM
Simison: Anything under public forum?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody signed up.
DEPARTMENT REPORTS [Action Item]
3. Appointment of David Miles as Director of Community Development
Simison: Okay. Then with that we will move on to Item 3, Department Reports. So,
Council, it's my pleasure to bring forward the official appointment of David Miles to serve
as our director of community development. You know, there is bittersweet things in life
as the best way to say it, but you -- you always want to move your organization forward
and help others also move themselves forward, but the -- making the recommendation
to you all to allow David Miles to continue to work in our Community Development
Department is one of those things where you -- you hate to see someone so talented
leave what they are doing directly with you, but you know that their talents are going to
be going further there and, you know, for -- for the record and those learning at the
home, you know, most people might -- might have known Dave Miles served as my
chief of staff for six years before this, but he has really had a lifetime of service in the --
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 6 of 34
the development world prior to coming to my office and whether that was his time in
another state where he was working directly in community development out in the field
doing work, whether it's working for, you know, in the family business growing up, being
-- being around the industry, I'm more -- when he first came to be at the City of Meridian
and he proved himself doing the work, you know, in our Public Works Department, you
know, building relationships with those people that are so intricate as part of our
development process, whether it be water or others, Dave's proven that he has a
passion for this work. He has ability to execute and is a collaborative -- collaborator and
can work with our community to help move us forward in -- in this area and, you know,
we -- we have phenomenal talent down there and I think Dave just adds to that and so
while I would love to keep him hold up upstairs in my office for -- forever, I think this is
the -- the right way to allow him and the city to grow and prosper and I think you all have
had the opportunity to work with Dave over time and you understand what type of
valuable resource he is to the City of Meridian and maybe this keeps him for longer than
he would have otherwise been with the city. You never know. And so it's with those
words of support and excitement, even though it doesn't sound like it for him, that I'm
bringing forward his appointment to be our Community Development Director and I
would be happy to stand for any questions.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: I have questions as -- more as comments. I have happened to know Dave
since -- not just when he was part of your chief of staff, but I remember working with him
when he worked for Public Works for the city of Meridian and I was always impressed
by his ethic, his knowledge, just the way he came to the job every day and when we first
started talking about Dave as being the next director of Community Development it just
-- it felt right. He has got the right mentality, he has got the right drive, he is all about
Meridian and I'm looking forward very much to seeing him in that position permanently
as of this evening. So, no questions, all praise.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: I will just take a -- a quick moment here. Really no questions. I think this is
probably one of the easier decisions we have all had. We knew when it was -- he was
their interim role it was going to be permanent probably, because he's done such a
fantastic job, but I think one thing Dave's shown is his willingness to look at things
through a new perspective, to learn and grow, that things don't have to always just be
the -- the same way, that there is new ways to do things and think about things and
think that's a perspective that's going to be helpful for the staff, for us and for the
community. So, we are excited to have Dave in that role, so happy to support that.
Whitlock: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 7 of 34
Simison: Councilman Whitlock.
Whitlock: -- echo those comments.
Simison: Is your -- is your mic on? Okay.
Whitlock: I will just echo those comments. We are fortunate as a city to constantly find
ourselves with the right people in the right place at the right time and I think this is the
right time and Dave's the right person and he's in the right place to really benefit the
citizens of Meridian. So, I will be supportive of this motion tonight.
Little Roberts: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Well, I concur with my colleagues, but I can't not say so on the public
record, because I first got to know Dave when he was upstairs as well and I can't
remember what all he was working on, but he was working diligently and working on his
masters at the same time. So, I knew that right then and there he was a person that
was going to grow as our city grew and I think this is a really great fit. So, I concur with
my colleagues.
Simison: With that I would be happy to accept a motion.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: I move that we appoint David Miles as Director of Community Development.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to appoint David Miles as Director of Community
Development. Is there any discussion? Councilman Nary, does this need to be -- or
Counsel Nary, does this need to be a roll call or a voice?
Nary: Either way.
Simison: Okay. With that all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes
have it. It item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Simison: Dave, congratulations. And I apologize, I didn't -- I thought I had turned that
around, but I looked at it and I must have --
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 8 of 34
Miles: I was just going to say I'm really just here to turn the device around, so --
Simison: Yeah.
Miles: Just a quick thank you. Thank you to you, Mayor and Council, for the trust.
look forward to working with you and thank you to the staff for engaging and accepting
me in over the last three months or so. Look forward to working with you all in the
community and the stakeholders and looking forward to it. So, thank you.
Simison: Thanks, Dave.
PUBLIC HEARINGS [Action Item]
4. Public Hearing for Alamar (H-2026-0005) by Midas Corporation,
generally located at the Northeast corner of Black Cat Rd., and
Franklin Rd.
A. Request: Modified Development Agreement to amend the building
elevations and deviate from the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area
Plan design elements.
Simison: Okay. With that we will move on to our work for the evening. First item up is
a public hearing for Alamar, H-2026-0005. Are we -- since it wasn't posted we are not
opening this; is that correct?
Nary: I think, Mr. Mayor, I thought there -- was this a noticing issue. Wasn't that the
problem?
Simison: Correct. I'm just trying to figure out if we should -- should open it or not open
it.
Nary: No.
Simison: Okay. So, staff like to make any comments? Okay. Council, any questions?
Allen: (Inaudible).
Simison: Okay. Council, any questions? Or a motion?
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: I move that we move the public hearing for Alamar, H-2026-0005, by the
Midas Corporation, to April 21 st, 2026.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 9 of 34
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to move this item to April 21 st. Is there any
discussion? If not all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
5. Public Hearing (continued from February 24, 2026) for Latitude Forty
Three Subdivision (H-2024-0059), by Rodney Evans + Partners, LLC.,
located at 675, 715 and 955 S. Wells St.
A. Request: Annexation of 17.27 acres of land with R-8 (13.78 acres),
R-15 (2.42 acres) and C-N (1.07 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat to re-subdivide lots 7, 21 and 22, Magic
View Subdivision, Amended into 79 residential lots, 1 commercial
lot and 11 common/other lots on 15.97 acres of land in the R-8, R-
15 and C-N zoning districts.
Simison: With that we will move on to Item 5, which is a public hearing continued from
February 24th, 2026, for Latitude Forty-Three Subdivision, H-2024-0059. We will
continue this public hearing with comments from staff.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Since the last hearing on
February 24th a revised application information was submitted on March 31st and today
consisting of the following: A revised annexation and zoning exhibit to align with the
reconfiguration of lots and uses on the southern portion of the site. The C-N zoned area
increased by .62 of an acre. A revised preliminary plat, which incorporates a slight
change to the lot lines along the west boundary on the northern portion of the
development to more closely align with the existing abutting property lines in
Woodbridge Subdivision and the addition of an east-west collector street on the
southern portion of the development between the Five Mile Creek and East Wells Circle
and that's Alternative B modified from the study that was discussed at the previous
hearings and reconfiguration of lots in that area with a new local commercial street
between the collector street and Wells Circle for access to the residential and
commercial uses. The number of building lots and common open space area remain
the same and this is the new collector street right here, if you can see my cursor, and
everything south of there is -- is reconfigured. An updated phasing plan was submitted,
which includes the collector street and everything to the north in the first phase of
development as requested by staff. An updated landscape plan and fencing plan
reflecting the changes to the plat. An updated common open space exhibit and an
amenity exhibit reflecting the changes to the plat. A change to the site amenities are
proposed, which include a new dog waste station, a bicycle repair station and another
picnic area. The two sports courts, which were pickleball courts, on the southern
portion of the property have been removed. The amenity points proposed still exceed
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 10 of 34
the minimum points required. Updated conceptual building elevations for the portion of
the development north of the Five Mile Creek were submitted due to the builder
changing for that portion of the development. So, these were the original elevations that
were submitted by the previous home builder and that the Commission reviewed and,
then, these are the revised elevations for the new builder. The elevations on the portion
-- on the southern portion of the development did not change, but they are not
approved, because of the reconfiguration of that portion of the site. The homes on that
portion will be fronting on Wells Street and they will have rear accessed garages, so --
and that's these right here. So, those are not correct and are not approved with this
application. The applicant has not submitted updated elevations for those homes.
Additional updates since the last hearing. An updated report was received from Ada
County Highway District, which states the proposed right of way for the collector street
East -- excuse me -- Equator Drive is adequate, but additional right of way is required to
be dedicated at the Equator Drive and Wells Street intersection to allow for the future
construction of a roundabout or signalized intersection. The applicant met with the
neighbors in Woodbridge Subdivision, as requested by Council, to discuss concerns
and answer questions that were brought up at the last hearing pertaining to home
prices, home heights and fences, trees, drainage area along the shared property line
and setbacks. The city received a letter from ITD stating that after further review of the
project they will no longer require a traffic impact analysis for this development. The
reason is in this particular location there are constraints that make off-site mitigations
disproportionately challenging. Additionally, ITD does not have any planned projects in
this area where they could assess a proportionate share contribution. The City Council
sent a letter to ACHD requesting that they consider closing Magic View Drive near the
intersection of South Woodhaven Avenue and East Magic View Drive, with an
emergency access gate or other appropriate traffic control measures to restrict through
traffic at least until a new collector roadway further to the south is realized. A response
was received stating that the proposal will violate Idaho Code 40-2319. Therefore,
ACHD is prohibited from authorizing the installation of any bollards in the circumstance.
If -- if City Council decides to take action on this application at tonight's hearing staff is
recommending changes to the Commission recommendation in the staff report just to
update the conditions. Mr. Mayor, would you like me to go through all of those
conditions or would you just simply --
Simison: Council, would you like those at this time? Yeah.
Allen: Happy to do that. First one is include a new condition requiring the construction
of South Longitude Avenue to comply with ACHD standards for commercial local
streets. Include a new condition requiring additional right of way to be dedicated at the
intersection of Equator Drive and Wells Street and to accommodate a future roundabout
or signalize intersection as determined by ACHD. Delete Condition A-2-6 pertaining to
the removal of the sidewalk along the west side of Longitude Drive, as it's no longer
applicable with the revised plat. Revise condition A-2-2 to update the lot and block
number to match that on the revised plat. It should be Lot 1, Block 6. Update condition
A-1-3 as follows: The pathway through the common area in the residential portion of
the mixed-use neighborhood designated portion of the site shall extend into the non-
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 11 of 34
residential portion of the site and provide a pedestrian connection to -- and this is the
added text -- each of the main building entrances to promote pedestrian mobility within
the mixed-use development in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. Delete condition
A-3-3 as sports courts are no longer proposed. And update condition A-3-5 as follows:
Depict landscaping within a minimum ten foot wide street buffers adjacent to local
streets on -- this is just the change to the lot and block number. It should be Lot 1,
Block 6, and, then, add the text -- and 20 foot wide street buffers adjacent to the
collector street in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-7C. Written testimony
has been received since the last hearing on February 24th from the following people
and they -- those letters are included in the project file under public testimony. From
Jan McIntyre Bollard, Clayton and Whitney Fike, Catherine Carson, Erin Russell, Valerie
Stefan, Cassandra Peck, Raymond Spencer and Celeste Fox. One other -- actually
one other letter was received and it was from Michelle Seusy I believe her name was
and it just came in just a few minutes ago. Staff will stand for any questions.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like
to come forward?
Semple: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council. Ben Semple with Rodney
Evans and Partners. 1450 West Bannock Street, Boise. 83702. It's good to see
everybody again tonight. Happy to be here to kind of talk through what we have really
worked on over the last couple of months to get to this point. Month and a half I guess.
So, do have a presentation here. So, I will go back to the beginning here. Just to
reiterate where we stand here. Think everybody's well aware where the project site is.
These are kind of a summary of the outstanding items that were identified during the --
the previous City Council hearings. Sonya did a great job of encapsulating those. I
don't feel like I need to go through all of this. Primarily we just wanted to talk about how
we have adjusted phase two to accommodate the future right of way or, actually,
accommodate and build a portion of the future collector roadway east-west and we
understand that we will be making some slight modifications to preserve that right of
way for the intersection at Equator and Wells Street for either a future roundabout or a
signalized intersection, whichever one ACHD directs to occur there. So, we are in
agreement with all of those. We -- we definitely want to be a part of the solution for
getting Touchmark to Eagle Road really established here and feel like we have set the
table for that to occur. You know, looking at our phasing plan, as Sonya mentioned, we
did move our phase line, so that the collect -- east-west collector roadway is constructed
during the first phase of the subdivision. That did necessitate some changes to the
southern portion or phase two. I will -- I will touch on that in a second. This is the
preliminary plat. I just wanted to highlight primarily the lot line -- and I didn't have the
previous one side by side here, but the lot lines adjacent to the -- the Woodbridge
Subdivision lots here, they were offset anywhere from three to seven feet or so in the
last iteration and in this one you can see here we have gotten much closer to that
alignment. We worked with the builder to make sure their model -- the homes that they
plan to build here for the -- the future buyers would fit all of these lot widths. They more
than accommodate them. So, really happy with how that shift worked out. Phase two,
the -- the southern half here -- primarily what I wanted to point out is that we did reduce
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 12 of 34
the number of residential lots here. Previously we had 79 residential lots. There is 59
north in phase one and 20 in phase two. With the change and not being able to front on
the collector with residential lots we actually reduce the southern phase two to ten lots
versus 20. It actually brings it more in line with the percentages looked for in that
mixed-use neighborhood area with residential versus commercial. So, feel like this is a
great mix of uses here. It also retains more of that Five Mile Creek kind of interface and
that collector roadway, because it does come with a ten foot multi-use pathway, we now
have a better pathway along the southern side of the Five Mile Creek. So, both north
and south have a multi-use pathway along the creek. One of the other amenities that
wasn't mentioned -- we -- there is some signage along different canals here in Meridian
that talk about kind of the history of irrigation and what those canals facilitated and so
we anticipate installing one of those along Five Mile Creek just as an additional kind of
educational component of this area. Our separation of our roadways meets ACHD
standards for collector roadway separation and we have -- kind of talking to -- talking
about the open space exhibit, we have kind of adjusted our open space areas here.
While we did eliminate the pickleball courts from the south side, I'm sure that probably
the Council has heard some of the concerns and other local jurisdictions about
pickleball courts in proximity to residential areas. So, while that did eliminate that
amenity, we feel like that wouldn't disproportionately affect the -- the lots on the
southern half here in the future and we do exceed our -- our amenity point total. We still
have seven and a half points. Four would be required for this project. And, again, with
the multi-use pathways that are added in here -- I did add some images here just to
highlight that we do have a tot lot playground space. It's not just kind of an open area
north of the creek there and, then, we do have a shade structure that would be adjacent
to that, just a kind of precedent image here. The two playground structures are actually
from other developments in the valley that the KB Homes builder has installed in their
subdivision. So, that's a real world installation here in Meridian. Anticipate the same
similar playground facilities and, then, the bike repair station and the dog waste station
that we would have along the creek just for -- for pet owners there. It -- it ends up being
a really well used amenity. So, landscape plan, just kind of digging a little bit more into
what -- the changes that we have made really have consolidated this open space and
amenity spaces to the middle of this development, so accessible by all residents of this
project. Again we are in agreement with the conditions of approval that we have
received, as well as the -- the staff reports from any agency. The development
agreement per condition one, we will prepare that and submit it to the City of Meridian
prior to the final plat application. Those final plat revisions that were in condition two
would be incorporated. Landscape plan revised and, then, conditions four through 13
we would agree with. Oops. I think I had one other slide here. Maybe not. One of -- a
couple of the things I wanted to talk about, too, were just the -- working with the
neighbors -- the builder has had a great meeting with the neighbors there. Think that
they have come to an agreement that they are comfortable with the home -- the homes
that will be proposed here and built here. The builder is going to be working directly
with those neighbors for fencing, make sure it's on the property line, make sure it's in
good condition and as we have stated previously any drainage is required to be kept on
site directed to on site facilities, not go over onto neighboring properties, which will
continue to occur as well. One of the other items that they talked about at that meeting
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 13 of 34
was the western -- see if I can get back to this plat here. Sorry. Phase one. Along the
western side of phase one against Woodbridge there was some concern about
setbacks. So, the -- the builder has committed to 17 foot setback to the main body of
the home. A 12 foot setback is required in R-8 and the R-4 zone adjacent in
Woodbridge is 15 foot rear yard setback. So, the homes will be at 17 feet. They would
like to retain the option of putting a covered patio or covered porch space in the
backyard up to that 12 foot setback, but enclosed living space would be held back to 17
feet. We feel like that does -- or gives those neighbors a little bit more privacy,
especially because it allows for some more landscaping in that area. Talking with the
HOA president we are really looking at the trees on this site, making sure that things
aren't being removed when they shouldn't be removed and that there will be an arborist
report prepared for anything that does get removed. As Sonya brought up, ITD
provided us a memo regarding traffic. They kind of looked back at some traffic studies
that were done when St. Luke's was built and some other developments had gone in
here and they have really identified that, as Sonya stated in the memo, stated there
really isn't a mitigation method that they can apply to this development that would affect
the immediate -- immediate area here for traffic and so they have determined that they
are not going to require that traffic impact analysis. We feel like with that east-west
collector that we are facilitating at least the first portion of the construction that will really
help maybe encourage the future or expansion of that and -- and really looking at how
this gets west and east from this location. You know, we really do feel confident that this
project will be a high quality addition to the area, bring some great new homes to -- to
Meridian, as well as another commercial space for some new business owners to move
into this area. We also, you know, about a year into our conversations here at City
Council, while it, you know, has taken a little bit longer than maybe some of us have
anticipated, we really are glad to be part of the solution here. You know, we really feel
like this is -- you know, we have gone the extra mile to really talk to the neighbors,
address some of the concerns there, work with City Council and ACHD to find what is
the right alignment for this east-west collector that really works for everybody. You
know, we were supportive of the efforts on Magic View. It sounds like ACHD had a
different opinion on what they could allow there. But, really, you know, trying to continue
to work to make this a reality to -- to create that Touchmark to Eagle Road connection
for the city and -- just to alleviate some concerns for all the neighbors and just the City
of Meridian in general. You know, again, appreciate the feedback that we have received
at all the previous council hearings and stand for additional questions and, you know,
how we can help make this a reality.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very
much.
Semple: Thank you.
Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up on this item tonight?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor. Yes, Mr. Mayor. First Robin McCulley representing an HOA.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 14 of 34
Simison: Okay. Good evening, Robin. You will be recognized for ten minutes.
McCulley: Good evening, Mayor and Members of the City Council. My name is Robin
McCulley. I live at 728 South Woodhaven Avenue. I'm here tonight as a representative
of the Woodbridge Homeowners Association and first I would like to clarify that for the
record I am not the president of the HOA. I am a member. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak regarding this proposed annexation and the development of
Latitude Forty-Three. Let me begin by saying that Woodbridge is not opposed to
growth. We understand that Meridian is a thriving city and with that growth comes
change. As you yourselves have stated, Woodbridge is not about saying no to future
projects, but about being fair to its residents. We agree with that sentiment. However,
what is currently being proposed is not fair to our residents and I would like to explain to
you why. First I want to address the issue of planning transparency and consistency.
Initially this project was presented as a single cohesive development. Now, it has been
divided into two separate phases we are calling phase one and phase two. This change
is not minor. It fundamentally alters how the project should be evaluated, especially by
those of us who will be directly impacted. Yet despite this shift there has been sufficient
-- insufficient information provided about phase two. Woodbridge residents who will be
adjacent to this development have not been given enough time or detail to properly
review or understand what phase two will entail. We are being asked in effect to
support a project where -- when half of it still remains undefined. That is not a complete
proposal. That is not transparency and that is not fair. Second I want to address traffic.
Not Just in terms of volume, but in terms of impact. We have heard discussion, ideas,
and possibilities from the Council regarding traffic mitigation. But to date no meaningful
resolution has been reached. The plans have been discussed, but remain conceptual.
They are not finalized, enforceable or guaranteed. Third and perhaps the most
concerning is the issues of the amenities -- or rather the lack thereof in phase one of
this development. The current plan includes 59 homes, which conservatively translates
to approximately 118 adult residents, not including children. Yet the amenities provided
for these residents are minimal to the point of being ineffective. We are told there will
be a waste dog station, but no pathway connecting to it. A bike repair station, but,
again, no pathway that would make it practical. These are not functional amenities.
They are symbolic at best. There will be a pathway within their development, but it will
not connect to Woodbridge's pathway system at this time. Our pathways are privately
owned by our HOA, which means they are not accessible to nonresidents. So, while it
may appear on paper that connectivity exists, in reality it does not. What does this
leave for the residents of phase one? Essentially grass, a few picnic tables and a small
tot lot for children. This tot lot is expected to serve what could be dozens of children,
depending on the makeup of these 59 households. It is simply not adequate. When a
development lacks sufficient amenities residents naturally seek them elsewhere. In this
case the closest and most attractive option will be Woodbridge. Our community has
invested heavily in maintaining high-quality amenities, including our pathways, pool,
little library and common areas. These are funded and maintained by our residents
through HOA dues. They are not public facilities. If this annexation proceeds as
proposed we will face increased pressures on these amenities from nonresidents. This
creates several problems. First overcrowding. Our facilities are designed for the size of
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 15 of 34
our community, not for an expanded population that includes neighboring
developments. Second, cost. To manage this increased usage we will likely be forced
to implement additional security measures. That can include hiring security personnel,
installing access controls or increasing monitoring. These are real costs that will fall
entirely on Woodbridge residents. Third, fairness. It's not equitable for one community
to bear the burden of providing amenities for another, especially when that outcome is
the direct result of insufficient planning in a new development. Finally we must consider
the broader implications of creating a neighborhood with limited resources and
engagement opportunities. Communities thrive when residents have spaces to gather,
recreate and connect. When these opportunities are lacking it can lead to frustration,
disengagement and in some cases increase undesirable activity. While we are not
making direct accusations, it is reasonable to be concerned that a development with
minimal amenities and limited infrastructure for community engagement may experience
challenges that could spill over into adjacent neighborhoods. This is not just about
inconvenience, it's about long-term community health, safety and cohesion. In
summary, this project has changed from a single proposal to a two phase development,
yet critical details about phase two remain unavailable. Traffic concerns have not been
meaningfully resolved. Current discussions remain conceptual, rather than actionable.
Phase one lacks adequate amenities to support its projected population. This
deficiency will place an unfair burden on Woodbridge residents who will be forced to
absorb the impact through increased usage of our private amenities and the associated
cost of protecting them. The overall plan as it stands does not reflect the standard of
fairness that has been expressed by this Council. We are not asking the Council to
reject growth, we are asking for responsible, complete and fair planning. Woodbridge
residents choose our -- chose our neighborhood because of its safety and amenities.
Its direct arterial connection and its sense of community. We have invested time,
money and trust into maintaining that standard. We are simply asking that new
developments be held to that same standard and that existing communities are not
asked to sacrifice what they have built in order to accommodate incomplete planning.
Again, Woodbridge is not about saying no, but fairness must go both ways. I would just
like to add I came straight from work today, which was at Cloverdale, Spaulding
Elementary, 4.2 miles. It took me 36 minutes to arrive in the parking lot. An average
mile can be run in nine minutes. So, technically, I could have run here in the same
amount of time that it took me to drive here. That is something that I ask you to think
about before we increase anymore homes in our area and add to our traffic problems
that we have currently. Thank you for your time and your consideration.
Simison: Thank you, Robin.
McCulley: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any questions?
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 16 of 34
Taylor: A quick question, Robin, and thank you for coming. So, one thing I think is
really important -- we, as Council and the city, prioritize -- you also prioritize
transparency, fairness. I -- I totally agree with you on that. I think in some respects as a
city we have kind of imposed changes on the applicant over time. This -- I can't
remember another application that we sort of drug on for quite as long. I mean this -- at
some point last year, I don't even remember when, we met and we said, hey, we are
going to -- we need to look at a long-term plan here, some -- an east-west connection,
so we asked them to wait. We studied the area. We had a workshop. We discussed
different routes and in many respects some of the -- the changes that I see reflected
tonight were to try to accommodate what we have asked them to do was to say, hey, we
-- we need to kind of figure out what our connection is going to be here, in large part
because we want to get people out of your community. We don't want them cutting
through. We want to find that sort of east-west connection. So, we have kind of
imposed that I think. That's how I view it. Does that -- and so their plans are kind of
new, you are sort of seeing sort of new proposals, the new phases, but I feel like we
have sort of put that upon them. Do you -- does that feel transparent or does that feel
fair to you? Because I don't know that I see what they have proposed tonight as being
sort of trying to be sneaky, but as much as trying to respond to what the city's asked
them to do as we try to solve a really complicated connectivity issue through that -- that
area, which you know better than everyone how tricky that is. Does that -- hopefully
that makes sense. I mean does that feel fair to you, knowing that we kind of impose
that on them?
McCulley: Absolutely. Absolutely. If -- if -- I understand what you are saying, but I also
have been tracking this as a resident myself at home and seeing these things come in
day of the Council meeting, that makes it very very difficult to reach out to our, you
know, 289 homes and make them aware of what's going on. Not everyone has the
ability to sit in front of their computer to see the updates coming in on the day of the
Council meeting to be present for all. I mean I can honestly say I'm very proud of the --
the community to show up every time. There are a lot of these faces that show up
every single time and as you say we have been dragging it on a long time, but at the
same time we believe in our community and we want the very best for it. We want the
best for the city, the City of Meridian, and so it's important to us to be here and to follow
it. But as far as the -- the six weeks, it was a short amount of time. It was a short
amount of time to get a lot of things together. You know, we were deemed with getting
the information from our community regarding the bollards and they were to do the
things for their phase one, phase two. We did -- we were able to meet with the builder.
I'm finding out tonight that they are saying that they would work with us regarding the
fence line. According to the plan it still says it -- that -- it's pulled up right now. It says
existing where it is -- where the fence line is. If you look on your plan it says existing
fence to remain. That has not changed. As far as I know that was new information to
me tonight. The other thing was when he said that they were going to work with us
regarding property lines, as far as -- I was point blank told that my fence has been there
for over 20 years and it is now the new property line regardless of the survey,
regardless of where the pins are. So, the eight inches that I spoke of the last time
stood up here are no longer mine according to them when we met with them. And so --
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 17 of 34
and I just heard that tonight. So, unfortunately, it wasn't in my speech, because that's
what I just heard this evening. So, it's ever changing.
Taylor: Yeah. Thank you.
McCulley: I just don't think we are there yet. We are just not there yet.
Simison: Council, any other questions? Okay. Thank you very much.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, next we have Celeste Fox.
Simison: Good evening. State your name and address for the record and you will be
recognized for three minutes.
Fox: Celeste Fox. 582 South Woodhaven Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. Council and
Mayor Simison, I believe I have attended every P&Z meeting and every Council meeting
for the last 20 plus years about that piece of dirt that's right next to me to the east.
really do think so. I have written a lot of letters to you. I -- whatever. Worked hard on
trying to ensure that Woodbridge remains the beautiful community that I really love. On
February I wrote to you asking you to deny this project, because we really worked very
long and well with specific style homes. That's what we thought we were going to get.
But subsequent to February we have had a chance to meet with KB Homes. We had a
neighborhood meeting, then, we had a really good time to talk to them at the -- at their
studio, look at their finishes, talk to them more about setbacks. They provided an
elevation showing setbacks of their very largest homes and their very largest home their
setback to us was 17 feet and I asked them would you put that in the development
agreement. I mean February I asked for 20. You can't always get what you want.
Seventeen I will fight for every foot. So, if it's in the development agreement for 17 feet
definitely appreciate that. So, I'm here tonight because I'm in support of this
development and let me tell you why. Some of the reasons. I talked to a KB owner and
she loves her home. She's not too happy about the elevations on the outside, the way
they look. Neither am I. 1 think they could do more to enhance the -- the look of them to
look more unique, kind of like Woodbridge looks like, but the inside of the home she
said -- the quantity and quality of the finishes were so good. She just loves her home.
She was able to customize it in a way that just really makes her happy in her home and
that's what KB told us. The other thing is that that's an R-8. We could get an R-15. You
know, I would really -- oops. Anyway, that's one of the reasons that I think, you know,
their -- their lots face up to ours now. They blend with our lot lines. I'm happy about
that. I just think -- also I understand from the Mayor development drives the road. We
need a road now. We needed it yesterday. And I don't want to impede that. That's why
I'm supporting this. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you.
Johnson: And, Mr. Mayor, that was everyone who marked that they wanted to speak.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 18 of 34
Simison: Is there anybody else who didn't sign up that would like to come forward and
provide testimony? Come on up. And if you are online, please, use the raise your hand
feature so we can also invite you to testify if you would like. State your name and
address for the record.
Nelson: My name is Marilyn Nelson. I live at 732 South Truss in Woodbridge and
have lived in Woodbridge since July 2002 and before Overland Road was even an
overpass. In the past probably 15 years we have seen big growth in our area, which
eventually we knew we would. We have had umpteen developers want to develop the
land back there. One was wanting low income apartments, which didn't match our
subdivision. Then there was others who were going to put over a hundred homes back
there and as the traffic has increased it's absolutely crazy. There is almost a wreck at
the Woodbridge Drive, Thornwood and Bowstring almost every day, because people
absolutely run the stop sign. We tried to pull out of our pod the other day and
somebody went by at 37 miles an hour. We have a speed sign at -- off of Locust Grove.
This development does really not match our subdivision. I believe that our home values
will go down with this development. From what I understand the owners have to put
their yards in. Security is a big deal at our pool and trespassing. In fact, I just called our
wonderful police department a couple days ago, because people pulled into our parking
lot at our pool, which was private, and opened the door and just let their dogs run loose
and so I called the police, because they were trespassing. There are signs up. This
development I think has zero amenities and we have a big security problem at our pool
that our residents pay for and I think we will have a bigger one when this development --
if this development is approved. Thanks.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions? Thank you very much. Mr. Clerk, want
to go online?
Johnson: Yes. There is somebody named K. Rice. You should be able to unmute
yourself.
Rice: Hello. This is Karen Rice. I am a member of the Woodbridge Subdivision. I live
at 2324 East Bowstring Street and I'm so sorry that I was not able to attend the meeting
in person tonight, but I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to you over Zoom, so
thank you for that. I want to speak to the relational task that KB Homes was asked to
provide with Woodbridge. They did schedule one meeting with us. Well, they did
schedule two meetings with us. The first one they met our request to hold it at City Hall,
which is physically closer and easier for people that live in our subdivision to get to,
rather than trekking across town. It took a lot of coaxing to get them to change the
meeting, but we were able to come to that agreement and we met there and, then, they
sent a follow up with an e-mail saying you can e-mail this girl named Wendy at this e-
mail address and she can answer your questions. I personally sent her one e-mail with
two questions. I got the auto response, as I should, because it's spring break and her
auto response said -- signaled that she was on spring break. So, two days after her
auto response, you know, was done where it said I will be back on this day from spring
break, I responded to her again and I said I look forward to your response. I never got a
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 19 of 34
individual response from her, but rather I was included in the invitation to attend another
meeting. I wrote her back and said something along the lines of -- I really wish that you
could just answer my simple questions, rather than asking me to attend a meeting,
because you were the one that provided us the opportunity to e-mail you with questions.
So, my questions to my a-mails have yet to be answered over them planning and
developing phase one, phase two -- they have no plan of buying, but phase two is
where most of the amenities will be housed. I understand listening to the meeting
tonight that there is some changes in that plan yet again for them tonight. So, I don't
feel like the relational piece is there yet either with the KB Homes and our subdivision
based on my personal experience with that. And, then, my second is I'm so I guess
disappointed to hear that ACHD denied the bollards. I would like to hear if there is any
other actionable items to address our traffic concerns at this time if you guys are able to
request police to sit and monitor it. It's just so bad and we will have a death of a child
on our hands and I understand the development of Latitude Forty-Three would allow for
road development to begin, which is the best part of this situation and I know these are
two separate issues, but they have connectivity; right? These two things are separate,
but they are together. Thank you for your time.
Simison: Thank you, Karen. Council, any question? Okay. Thank you very much. Is
there anybody present that would like to provide testimony this evening? Okay. Then
invite the applicant to come forward to close.
Semple: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council. Again Ben Semple with Rodney
Evans and Partners. 1450 West Bannock Street. Yeah. So, to address some of the --
the comments -- yeah, I'm -- I just assumed that Robin was the president. I was -- I get
that she's the representative that's here. I appreciated the conversation before the
hearing, so I apologize for mislabeling you. So, looking at some of the comments here
-- so, the amenities that we are proposing -- this -- I want to go back to our amenity plan
here. It's not really representative here. I mean we are -- a typical development of this
size would be required to do four amenity points. What that looks like is some -- you
know, a tot lot gets you I think one point. You know, bike repair station is a point. Multi-
use pathway depending on the length is a point and, you know, if you would put -- a
picnic area is four points. So, we have two picnic areas. One of which is in phase one.
Actually, everything other than one other picnic area is in phase one. So, we have our
950 linear feet of multi-use pathway. We have located that based on the City of
Meridian's pathway plan. We were told where to connect our -- our pathway. If that's
gated or blocked at the Woodbridge I guess property line there on the west. That's kind
of news to us, because we were, again, told to connect our pathway there. We also do
have another pathway stubbed to the property that's immediately to the west adjacent to
our large amenity area. So, that if that redevelops and development occurs along the
south side of Five Mile Creek, there would be a multi-use pathway that goes through
there as well that would redirect that traffic away from Woodbridge. We are not
proposing that any residents of this property or this project use Woodbridge's amenities.
We do have a larger kind of playground area with multiple kind of structures within it.
Again all of our amenities, other than a small picnic area that you see kind of adjacent
here in this -- I don't know if you can see this, but the picnic area kind of there at Wells
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 20 of 34
Street and Wells Circle on the south side, that's the only part that's in phase two. All of
the other amenities would be built in -- in phase one. The dog waste station and the
bike repair stations are located along those multi-use pathways, so people walking their
pets or riding a bike would have access directly to those if they needed to use them.
When we got -- I guess moving on to the traffic. ACHD and ITD did not require changes
to our plan and has indicated that the adjustments that we have made and including
some additional right of way at Equator and Wells Street be dedicated, that that will
meet all of their standards for -- for what their roadway networks would require. I was --
I got a text message from KB Homes. They were listening in and they indicated that the
fence line can stay where it is if that is better for those neighbors. We have remained
as is on our plans, because we don't ever want to propose removing somebody's fence
with our proposal. If the neighbors -- you know, if it was off the property line and we
wanted to move it back to the property line we could do that. If there is an adverse
possession process that has been undergone where that property line has been moved,
that's great. I think KB, again, has indicated that if that's where the rear property line is
they will hold that fence line. That's not a problem for them. A lot of these changes that
we are talking about are these additions. We are kind of in response to staff questions
and some stuff that we needed to kind of pull together here regarding a staff report from
ACHD. You know, some of those additional items that came through to us sort of last
minute as well, so we were working real hard to get these plans turned around as
quickly as we possibly could. Phase one has -- other than having more amenities and
the east-west collector roadway added to it, the north side of Five Mile Creek has
remained unchanged, other than I guess also we aligned the property lines with the
neighbors to the west, which was a request from those neighbors. And so we feel like it
has been very transparent about what this north phase one portion looks like. I also
know that we have had conversations about this being phase one and phase two from
our first hearing in February of last year was the first time that we were in front of you
with this project. Yeah, the second phase -- again, the second phase amenities are
adjacent to those. We -- we appreciate Celeste's support on this project. We have
worked very closely with her. I know we haven't been able to answer every one of her
phone calls, but have tried to get back to her as quickly as possible to try to work
through some of these items. She's been really great in kind of working together with
the owner and the developer just to try to work through some of these items. I -- I just
want to highlight -- there is a lot of conversations about the amenities. We have a lot of
amenities in here. I think that this, you know, Five Mile Creek presents an opportunity
for a really nice natural kind of walking active area. There is also some other active
areas, open lawn spaces for kids to play, play areas, areas for the adults to -- to sit and
spend time with their friends and neighbors and their kids while they play as well. You
know, one thing about ACHD and the traffic calming within Woodbridge. So, within the
ACHD staff report that we received ACHD actually in December of 2024 opened an
investigation that found that Bowstring Street, Woodhaven Avenue, both met ACHD's
criteria for traffic calming. Thornwood Way and Woodbridge did not meet the criteria.
ACHD, according to their staff report, sent mailers to the impacted area residents and
the reporting party declined the option for petition and requested to close the
investigation. It does say that ACHD is aware of the issues associated with cut-through
traffic and is committed to working with the neighborhood and city on reasonable traffic
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 21 of 34
calming solutions. So, we have done what we can to try to get to a point. We were
supportive of what the city sent to ACHD. We were trying to find ways to mitigate for
traffic cut-through at Woodbridge by not having a direct vehicular connection to Magic
View Drive from our development here and it sounds like that ACHD has tried to look
into some traffic calming within Woodbridge themselves, but it maybe fell through the
cracks. I'm not sure how that happened. But ACHD has identified that and it sounds
like there are some traffic mitigation -- or some traffic calming measures that could be
put in place through coordination with the Woodbridge Neighborhood Association. So,
we -- we feel like we have done everything we can. We have really worked hard to
make this a good plan for this project, for the neighbors and to set aside what we can
for the City of Meridian to be able to realize the east-west collector roadway network
that really does need to occur here, including moving that into our phase one. So, with
that I would stand for any additional questions you might have. Happy to answer them.
Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: This might be a question for Sonya and Bill maybe a little bit. I'm -- I'm thinking
about the pathway question where you sort of brought it up. I guess the question would
be do we have the pathways -- are they aligned? I'm just not --just because I can't see
a bigger holistic picture, but with Woodbridge pathways in this are they aligned on the
map or what does that sort of future connectivity of the pathway in this development
look like as it's trying to connect with other communities? Just trying to understand a
bigger context here.
Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, happy to at least shine some light on that
particular topic. I think all of you are aware we do have a -- a master pathways plan and
we do identify those on our GIS mapping system. So, in this particular case it has
identified that it would run along the Five Mile Creek in this particular area and, then,
along the southern boundary of Woodbridge is an irrigation facility or dirt road currently
today. So, the intent is at some point I would imagine the city would petition
Woodbridge to say, hey, can we extend the pathway through your site or would it
happen with future development. But currently this developer is just expected to build
and pave the pathway to their -- their property and, then, ultimately that -- that
responsibility would fall on either the city coordinating or maybe some future capital
improvement plan or if the properties to the west further develop they may entirely
reroute it some way differently to an on-street network, but we do have a pathway
expert here to -- to answer that question if you have anymore questions for the Parks
Department. But that's typically how it works. That dashed line on a map isn't the exact
location for a pathway. The city does have some -- some discretion to allow that to
move and meander through developments and we have done that quite regularly
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 22 of 34
throughout all the developments in Meridian, so -- happy to expand on it anymore if you
-- if you need me to.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor, since Bill phoned a friend and Steve walked in I would like to hear
his comments on that. Did you catch -- did you get the question, Steve? Do you know
what we are talking about?
Siddoway: I think the question was are these -- is the location of their pathway
designed to connect to where the plan envisions? The short answer is yes. This is
exactly what we would want. So, that's kind of the short answer. I could -- I'm going to
use the -- the mouse. What's important to me is to see that it connects both at this
location and this location. So, the stubs in those two spots are a good thing. The
pathway through Woodbridge does follow the -- the Five Mile Creek. There currently is
no pathway that connects up through this easement, which I think is a water and sewer
easement. Our plan does -- it shows it in that location, but it was never conditioned.
There is a condition on the Woodbridge pathway that it needs to be open to the public
when it connects to the larger system. So, the two ways that that could happen is, one,
if we can work with the -- with Woodbridge and get it there that would connect. If that
doesn't happen, then, when these adjacent -- when these properties eventually annex it
could continue following the route along Five Mile Creek and connect to this stub
location. So, what they have provided gives us the two options that we need to connect
it in the future and I will stand for any questions.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: Just kind of I guess a -- a quick follow up. I -- I think it's a valid concern when
there is proposals and it seems like a phantom, you know, you stick in a pathway and
where does it connect to? We know that the plan is that those will continue to connect
on. So, you are -- you are satisfied that with the current proposal the future connectivity
is going to be where we are going to probably need it and you are not concerned about
having these island or orphaned pathways in the middle of this development?
Siddoway: No, I'm not.
Simison: Council, any other questions for the applicant?
Taylor: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, if I might?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: Just speaking to the -- the -- the phase one, phase two timeline, what's your
expected time frame when you think you would begin phase two? I mean I know there
is a lot of factors that could go into that. Is this something we are looking at -- it's at
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 23 of 34
least two years out or it could be five years out? I mean do you have any sense when
you actually might -- maybe it's driven by market conditions, but can you speak to that?
Semple: Mr. Mayor, yeah, Council Member Taylor, yeah, I mean I think the short answer
is it's kind of market driven. I know that phase one we have people on board ready to
go on this portion, so -- but it's pretty extensive with that collector roadway construction
south of Five Mile Creek. I couldn't commit to a timeline. I could bring my developer
client up here to see if he has a better idea. I think it's probably a two to three year
before phase two starts. You know, if something ramped up significantly or if other
areas adjacent to here developed, then, potentially it could move up, but I think we are a
year to get to starting to build phase one anyway with platting and everything.
Minert: Mr. Mayor, Member of Council, Ryan Minert, 359 East Palermo, Meridian. I can
speak to that a little bit. It is market driven, but we have different absorption for the
commercial piece. So, I would think it would be fairly soon. It's tough to gauge, but
would say two years after phase one is finished. Final plat.
Taylor: Okay. Mr. Mayor, maybe a quick follow up, then, on -- could you give me a
sense of -- of timeline on phase one and kind of when are you going to build that
collector street versus when you are going to be, you know, building out the -- the
homes. Is that simultaneous, collector street first, then, the homes? Homes, then, the
collector street? What -- can you give me a sense of the timing in phase one, how you
see that unfolding?
Minert: Yeah. Absolutely. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Taylor. We did put the collector into
phase one. So, I think that has to be done with phase one in order for us to get a final
plat. And as far as our timing on phase one, last year we would have loved to have
gotten started, so, yeah, just as soon as we can.
Taylor: Maybe, Mr. Mayor, a little finer point on the question. Do you -- is phase one
going to take -- how long do you envision it taking? Is that -- is that like a year or two
years kind of--
Minert: Less than a year --
Taylor: Okay.
Minert: -- depending on what it starts with weather --
Taylor: Okay.
Minert: -- nine months with good weather.
Taylor: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 24 of 34
Semple: Mr. Mayor, if I could follow up a little bit, just to touch -- just another follow up
on that. The infrastructure will have to be built or bonded for, which in this situation
probably isn't likely before we can get our final plat recorded, which would have to occur
before we can file for building permits to go vertical. So, roadways would get built,
infrastructure, utilities built first, then, the homes. So, yeah, that's kind of the sequence
of events.
Simison: Council, additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you very much.
Semple: Thank you.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: I know we probably need some discussion on this, but we have had this public
hearing open for quite a while. I think we have considered quite a bit, so I would be
prepared to close the public hearing to move to discussion, unless Council Members
have any other questions that they would like to ask anybody here, just so we can move
this process along. All right. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we close the public hearing
on File No. H-2024-0059.
Whitlock: Second.
Lorcher: Have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it
and the public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: We will just kind of kick off some of my -- my thoughts on this. This has been
one of the more interesting proposals we have -- we have had in the last little bit just
with the time frame, the back and forth we have had with -- as we have looked at the
connectivity between Eagle and -- and Locust Grove. I can tell you I no longer cut
through Woodbridge. Never. I have not done it in the last six months and I commit to
never do it again. So, at least you got that. But I'm -- but I'm sensitive to it, too,
because I had a development close to me that opened up the connectivity and I was
very concerned with -- with young children what that would do and so I certainly think
those are valid concerns and -- and I'm very sympathetic to -- to that and maintaining
the character of communities that people invest a lot of money and time in wanting
those to stay as much as they -- they can and keep the integrity of that and growth is
hard. It's difficult. I -- I -- I get that and I -- I definitely respect that. What's interesting to
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 25 of 34
me as I kind of look at this -- it has to get worse before it gets better kind of. I mean I
think we know we have a -- a real big connectivity problem through this area. We know
that a lot has to happen to build a -- a road -- infrastructure through there to take the
pressure off the Woodbridge community and even with the develop -- or if this proposal
-- or this application is approved and some of this infrastructure is put in place we still
have a long long way to go with all those county parcels south of Woodbridge to kind of
build that connectivity. So, this is a very challenging part of town and it's -- it's a very
large in-fill piece is -- is how I kind of look at it and I can only imagine, Celeste, how
many meetings you have gone through and how many different versions you have
seen. It would be kind of interesting to know how many hours you have spent sitting
through meetings and you -- you probably don't want to know the answer to that
question. A lot of your life. But I appreciate your -- your comments. I do think that the
applicant has done a -- has done their best to accommodate the city's demands of it in
terms of trying to find a pathway forward here. We don't set aside money to build roads.
ACHD barely has enough money to hit our top three or four priorities that we have as a
city and if you look at our spreadsheet there is 60, 70, 80 projects on it and we get three
or four or five a year maybe. So some of these challenges are really really hard and --
and that's why development helps to pay for growth, that we -- we can't pay for that
infrastructure and, then, let the development come. We have to rely on our -- our
partners to help us to -- to build that out. So, in many respects I -- I look at this and see
-- the only way we are going to fix this problem long term is to figure out a way to put
that infrastructure in place, which is why I started out with the -- the -- the sense -- of the
statement of it's -- it might get worse before it gets better, but it will get better at some
point. I appreciate the comments on the pathways. Steve, thanks for coming down and
-- and clarifying. I was kind of concerned about that. I think one thing as a city that we
need to commit to whatever happens tonight is that we need to as a city be very
aggressive working with ACHD and I appreciate Justin being here to work with the folks
at Woodbridge to figure out how can we mitigate the -- the impacts of traffic, the speed,
whatever we can do? I think -- I think, obviously, we -- we send a letter on asking for
some --ACHD to -- to work with us. I know they are good partners and so I -- whatever
the result is tonight I -- I hope that we can be very aggressively working with ACHD to
figure out better solutions and not just to leave it alone and ignore and pretend it will go
away, because it's not going to go away. I think we need to be aggressively working on
it. But I think I'm supportive of this application with a lot of reservations, but agreeing
that this is probably the best way to move it ahead to get the solution that we are -- we
have been looking for for a long time. Years before I even came on Council we have
been -- this -- the city's been trying to solve it. I don't want to continue to kick the can
down the road, because if we do we are just not going to solve -- solve the issue that we
have. The cut-through traffic with Woodbridge will only continue to get worse as the
valley continues to grow. We need to find a way to create those -- those pathways
through there that are different. So, I -- I am supportive of that. I -- I appreciate the
recommendation from staff to add some additional clarification to the application we
have before us tonight and I will -- I will end with this one last kind of comment. When
we have competing interests between property owners, I -- I have to ask myself sort of a
fundamental question about the -- the rights that individuals have that are tied to their
property and those who are living there currently and those who have the rights to the
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 26 of 34
property that are seeking to develop it in the application, you have the right to
enjoyment, you have the right to develop it, there is -- there is legal rights associated
with owning property and we have to respect that as Council and when an application
comes before us and they meet the requirements that we have imposed as a city, it's
hard for me to say no when they have the right to present this to the public, ask for
consideration and to develop that property. Those rights don't -- cannot be -- cannot
supersede those of the neighbors to the east or the west or the north, but we have to be
respectful of that and so when we get into these really tough situations where we have
these tough applications where there is a lot of concern about what it may be, we have
to really understand what our role is in Council. What -- what I think is our legal role to
be respectful of all the parties involved, but to understand while we can be objective,
think it's really important that we follow our own rules that we have set aside -- set up as
a Council with zoning, land use application -- or the land use map, everything that we
have, I -- if the applicant's following it I feel like we have an obligation to work with that
application. So, sorry for kind of wandering. That was a longer response than I usually
like to give, but this is a really challenging one. But I -- I think we have a -- an
application in front of us I think will get us to where we want to go eventually.
Simison: Thank you. I'm going to piggyback off of your comments just for one second,
because I -- I'm not going to be sky is falling, but the legislature has passed some pretty
interesting bills this year. They are going to become in July and this piece of property
has been through this process many times. We have seen many different owners. We
have seen many different costs. I don't -- as a city I don't know how we are going to
apply those new bills that were passed, how they will come forward, but -- but they
basically gave developments some carte blanche exceptions to build whatever they
want you irregardless what this body or the residents think. This is -- I would say if I
was the neighbors in this area this is a great place to be at today compared to what you
could see if this did not move forward with maybe another owner in six months and not
knowing what the city could or couldn't have any say about this, because it meets the
criteria for what the new law is allowed for developments as small as 1 ,500 square feet
per lot and with no limitations that appear to be there from the city's perspective. So, it's
been many years to get to this place, but I think that we can come out with a -- a victory
for everybody this as close as we can get for start one, but, unfortunately, come next --
come six months from now I can't say what the next piece of property might try to look
like under the laws -- new state laws, but this is one of the larger pieces that it applies
to. I don't know how many are over four acres. That's the magic thing. If it's over four
acres there is a lot of things that they can do with -- with limited -- limits on what cities
can and can't do and he -- you know, bringing in his hands. And good developers are
not going to say -- that's not what they are going to want to do, but if people don't see
an opportunity to get a good development through the process I'm more fearful about
who will buy it and they won't go through the good development process. They will
come in with what they are legally allowed to put in and stuff. So, I'm glad that we have
been able to work collectively as far as we can to this point, but this is one of those
parcels that's gone through so many people's hands, if it doesn't move forward I would
be more fearful about what comes next.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 27 of 34
Whitlock: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Whitlock.
Whitlock: First let me just thank those who come tonight and shared their thoughts,
those who have been here over the last 14 months and shared their thoughts. It's been
a long process. Great input and I -- I think we have an opportunity tonight to -- to be
able to move something forward. There is some comments made tonight that are just
still ringing in my ears and -- and Robin made one of them. She said we are not there
yet. So, I'm hearing that and, then, as Celeste was talking about that collector, she said
we need it yesterday. I find myself sitting in this seat saying we are not there yet, but
we needed it yesterday, so I have got this -- this conflict here ringing in both of my ears.
Council Woman Strader is not here, but I think anytime we have an annexation request
she reminds us that this is our opportunity as a city and as -- as a City Council to get
what's most important for that area, for that development, for that parcel and I think we
would all agree that what's important in this part of town is to get that collector street
moving. Just to be honest with you, if we are doing true confessions, my wife and
went out to dinner and we plugged in the -- the address of the restaurant -- the new
restaurant that we wanted to go through and I found myself driving through Woodbridge
and I said what the heck. So, we have got a fixed GPS. That's probably our next -- our
next task. But, candidly, I -- you know, I -- I agree with that statement wholeheartedly
that we -- we need that collector in yesterday and this is our opportunity and
appreciate the fact that the applicant has moved that up into phase one, that laterals at
all of the infrastructure will go in before we start to go vertical and to me that's -- that's
significant and that's important and it begins us down that path of -- of ultimately finding
a solution. I agree wholeheartedly with Councilman Taylor, it may have to get worse
before it gets better, but I -- I see this as an opportunity for it to get better. So, we have
asked a lot of the applicant and we -- I appreciate personally that you have addressed
many of the concerns. I appreciate -- I'm going to be candid, though, I -- I -- I know it's
been six weeks and I -- I get a little frustrated with the 11th hour materials being
submitted and e-mailed and, you know, during the work day, just like the residents
having to go and find it and -- and understand it. I get it. But we asked you to do it and
you worked hard to get it done and -- and under the deadline. So, I appreciate that.
And I appreciate the willingness to meet the conditions that staff has recommended.
So, I think overall, even though I'm -- I'm hearing we are not there yet in one ear, I'm --
I'm probably leaning more towards we needed this yesterday and we need to get a
resolution to this and move forward.
Little Roberts: Mr. -- excuse me. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Pardon me. It's allergy season. This has definitely been an interesting
one. I think Councilman Taylor mentioned that we had gone back and forth on this one
so many times. We have had one other that we have gone back and forth on a lot and
the last time we continued it we continued it for six months and I think with what the
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 28 of 34
legislature has put forth in front of us we do not want to do that on this one. The
developer has been great. We have appreciated all the back and forth that has
happened with the Council, with the neighbors and the things that we have got listed
that seem to work for everyone. I know nothing is perfect, but it seems like just inch by
inch we have worked toward at least getting as close as we possibly can. I don't know
that if we continued we would get any further than -- than where we are, which to me is
a pretty good solution, especially getting that collector started and -- and making a
difference in that area. So, I really feel like you will continue to work with the neighbors
and I trust that that's going to happen as it moves forward and so with that I am
supportive of-- of where we are in moving forward tonight.
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: So, I cut through Woodbridge every day. That's because I have lived there for
24 years and I have listened to my friends and neighbors testify tonight. I have sat in
many meetings with Celeste out there in the chairs, with the president, with Sue, you
guys have all sat there for years, but we always had an understanding as we looked at
developments, we had to make sure that we weren't saying no to the best one that was
available and I can't understate one of the things that's happening right now that we
have all had to grasp within the past 14 days when our legislators pass some laws that
are not favorable to a single city in this entire state. They were opposed by the
Association of Idaho Cities. Didn't matter. It removes a lot of our power as a city for
how we are going to see some developments in the future and it worries me greatly that
-- Celeste, as you said we could see an R-15 or worse going in behind us and have no
say so whatsoever. We have a say so right now to come together and choose what's
right. Next point. We will never get the road built unless development occurs. When
we are looking for a transportation solution it doesn't happen except through
development. This is one piece of that puzzle and I need to make sure -- and I -- I
spoke to a few members of the board already only on the transportation piece, that it
gets stated loud and clear there is going to be a vote on a project tonight. It does not
end the ongoing journey to fix the transportation issues. No matter what happens
tonight that transportation issue continues. It's been a long running goal of the Mayor's
to work from Touchmark all the way back to Meridian Road, If not all the way to Linder
and work through solutions that will get traffic through. It's a priority of our planning
staff. It's a priority when we are looking at developments. It isn't something -- and I
want to make sure everyone understands it -- while it has a relationship with this project
they are separate and it's ongoing and I was probably the least excited by the letter we
got from ACHD, but we knew when we wrote that letter -- because as an entire Council
and Mayor we supported the idea of the bollards. It was frustrating to get that letter, but
kind of expected that would happen. Now, at a prize fight there is 15 rounds, that was
round one. That doesn't mean we are going to pack up and go home. We still have
strategies, arguments and we still have a working relationship. Justin from ACHD is in
the house. I consider him a friend, a colleague and we work together as we come up
with solutions and we are going to continue to work with them for solutions for
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 29 of 34
Woodbridge. But at some point we, as Woodbridge homeowners, own a little bit of the
failure that we can't get our traffic calming installed and it's frustrating. We have had
multiple opportunities over the years and we keep falling short and you keep going at it
and I appreciate it and I think we are going to have to keep going at it again to come up
with traffic calming measures in some form or fashion in Woodbridge to help with the cut
through traffic, because when I talk about the traffic in Woodbridge, it's a way bigger
Item to me than a project. I think down the road to an entire university going in across
the street, as well as expanding medical school, as well as expanding high school. We
have got some major players on Locust Grove that I would like to make sure they have
an alternative route to get the heck through town, but the only way that will happen is
through development of those areas where that roadway will be built and we have to
remember that as we look through it. It's a hard pill to swallow, but if I was still sitting on
the board I would be sitting on the side of this needs to happen, because this is a first
positive step towards getting it done right. One of the things I was very very happy to
see -- and I appreciate that from the applicants -- is that all of the backyards facing
Woodbridge are almost lined up fence to fence. We had some bad applications in the
past where you had one and a half homes or almost two homes behind every
Woodbridge home and they were really really close to the fence line. The setbacks
were really short and I think Celeste said it very well, 17 feet, I will take it, because I
think it's the best offer we have had in all the applications that have been done. So, it --
it hurts me in some manners, because I feel like I'm failing where I have called home,
but it's a bigger picture down the road on how we fix this traffic issue and we need
development like this to pass to get that final solution. I would have told you -- 15
minutes ago I would have said no, because I want Mayor Tammy de Weerd's medical
corridor and I want everything behind us to be medical related as we were told 20 years
ago. But we can only do what development wants and we haven't for those 24 years
been able to get a medical corridor to snap up all those properties. I wish we could
have. So, we get the first piece done tonight and we are definitely marching on our way
towards that final solution and it's going to take time. But, again, as I said this is just
one piece in a much bigger puzzle that doesn't go away. It's still on our board, it's still
something we are working on with any of the developments in this area. So, I will be
standing in support of this project.
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: Just a couple of quick questions for staff. I think we are at a point I'm prepared
to make a motion here. All of the changes suggested in the document Sonya you
provided tonight, I'm in agreement with all of them. I'm wondering was there anything
that we wanted to add that wasn't already captured in what you provided us from what
we heard from the applicant tonight for conditions we want to put in this development
agreement? Is there anything missing?
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 30 of 34
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council -- Councilman Taylor, the only thing I would suggest is
consideration of the developer's commitment on setbacks -- rear setbacks along the
west property line --
Taylor: Which was -- we said 17 feet. I believe it was a 17 foot rear -- rear building
setback with the allowance of a 12 foot setback for patio covers on lots along the west
property line. Did that differentiate between single and two story or -- no differentiation
he's indicated.
Taylor: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion -- after considering -- well,
there is another really important question. Is it legally permissible to add a condition
requiring Councilman Whitlock to not cut through Woodbridge? Can we do that or is
that not allowed? I -- maybe we will just ask him to, please, behave. We will see how
far that goes. Mr. Mayor, after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony,
move to approve File No. H-2024-0059 as presented in the staff report for the hearing
date of October 21, 2025, and -- and add the additional modifications that we add a new
condition requiring the construction of South Longitude Avenue to comply with the
ACHD standards for commercial local streets. That we include a new condition
requiring additional right of way to be dedicated at the intersection of Equator Drive and
Wells Street to accommodate a future roundabout or a signalize intersection as
determined by ACHD. That we delete Condition A-2-6. That we revise Condition A-2-2
to update the lot and block number to match that on the revised plat, which should read
Lot 1, Block 6. That we update condition A-1-3 to read as follows: The pathway through
the common area in the residential portion of the mixed-use neighborhood designated
portion of the site shall extend into the nonresidential portion of the site and provide a
pedestrian connection to each of the main building entrances to promote pedestrian
mobility within mixed-use development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
That we delete Condition A-3-3. And that we update Condition A-3-5 to read as follows:
Depict landscaping within minimum ten foot wide street buffers adjacent to local streets
on Lot 1, Block 6, and a 20 foot wide -- and 20 foot wide street buffers adjacent to the
collector street in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C. And that the
setbacks along the west boundary of the application require 17 foot setbacks with an
allowance for 12 feet with patio covers. That's it.
Whitlock: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Would the clerk like to repeat the motion? Is
there discussion on the motion? If not, clerk call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, absent; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
yea; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: Four ayes, zero nays, the item is agreed -- the item is approved and passes.
So, thank you. Good luck. We will look forward to seeing how this area continues to
change and evolve and that's what it's going to have to do to help solve these issues, so
thanks. Okay. And, Justin, we will be in touch.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 31 of 34
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
ORDINANCES [Action Item]
6. Ordinance No. 26-2120: An Ordinance (Tong H-2025-0049) annexing
land located in the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of
Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit; rezoning 0.496 acres
of such real property from the R1 (Estate Residential) zoning district
to the R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) zoning district;
directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well
as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the
boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in
accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this
ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada
County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances;
and providing an effective date.
Simison: Next item up is Item 6, which is Ordinance No. 26-2120. Ask the clerk to read
this ordinance by title.
Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance annexing land located in the
northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1
East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit; rezoning 0.496
acres of such real property from the R1 zoning district to the R-4 zoning district;
directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning
maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City
of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance
shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County
Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing
conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Thank you. Council, you heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody
that I would like it read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion?
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: Move that we approve Ordinance No. 26-2120.
Whitlock: Second.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 32 of 34
Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance 26-2120. Is there
discussion? If not, clerk call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, absent; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
yea; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
7. Ordinance No. 26-2121: An Ordinance (Driftwood Townhomes H-
2025-0051) for rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of the
southwest quarter of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West,
Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map
exhibit, rezoning 5.01 acres of land from the C-C (Community
Business) zoning district to the TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood
Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code; directing city
staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official
zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the
boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in
accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this
ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada
County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Next up is Item No. 7, which is Ordinance No. 26-2121. Ask the clerk to read
this ordinance by title.
Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an ordinance for rezone of land located in the
southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1
West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit,
rezoning 5.01 acres of land from the C-C zoning district to the TN-R zoning district in the
Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well
as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and
the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing
that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada
County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as
required by law; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this Ordinance read by title. Is there
anybody that would like a read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion?
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 33 of 34
Taylor: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 26-2121.
Whitlock: Second.
Simison: Have a motion and a second to approve Item 7, which is Ordinance No. 26-
2121. Is there discussion on the motion? If not clerk call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, absent; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
yea; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
8. Ordinance No. 26-2122: An Ordinance (Farrington Heights H-2025-
0016) for rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East,
Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in
the map exhibit, rezoning 2.9 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium
Low-Density Residential) zoning district to the R-15 (Medium High-
Density Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code;
directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well
as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting
the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in
accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this
ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada
County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Next item up is Item 8, which is Ordinance No. 26-2122. Ask the clerk to read
this ordinance by title.
Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance for the rezone of land located in the
southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1
East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map
exhibit, rezoning 2.9 acres of land from the R-4 zoning district to the R-15 zoning district
in the Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps
as well as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the
boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this
ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County
Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance for by title. Is there
anybody that would like it read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion?
Meridian City Council
April 7,2026
Page 34 of 34
Taylor: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Taylor.
Taylor: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 26-2122.
Whitlock: Second.
Simison: Have a motion to approve Item 8, which is Ordinance No. 26-2122. Is there
discussion on the motion? If not clerk call the roll.
Roll Call: Cavener, absent; Strader, absent; Overton, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Taylor,
yea; Whitlock, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or is there a motion to adjourn?
Overton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Overton.
Overton: Move that we adjourn.
Little Roberts: Second.
Simison: Motion and second to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed
nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:08 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
John Overton, Council President 4-21-2026
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK 4-21-2026
(:� !WENIDAN�--
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Week of the Young Child
(::�WIDIANI-
, ____01
I DAHO
9'he Office of the Mayor
PROC1 A .9W ATION
WHEREAS, the City of Meridian in conjunction with the Idaho Association for the
Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYQ are celebrating the Week of
the Young ChildTM, April 11-17, 2026; and,
WHEREAS, Idaho AEYC is working to promote and inspire high-quality early
childhood experiences for our state's youngest citizens, that can provide a
foundation of learning and success for children in Meridian; and,
WHEREAS, early childhood educators and those who work with or on behalf of young
children birth through age eight, who make a meaningful difference in the
lives of young children deserve our thanks, support and recognition; and,
WHEREAS, public policies supporting early learning for all are crucial to young
children's futures and to the prosperity of our society and economy; and,
WHEREAS, this is a time to recognize the importance of children's earliest years in
shaping their development and to recommit ourselves to ensuring that each
and every child experiences the type of environment— at home, at child
care, at school, and in the community—that will promote early learning.
THEREFORE, I, Mayor Robert E. Simison, proclaim April 11-17, 2026 to be
The Week of the young ChiCd
in the city of Meridian and encourage all citizens to work to support the efforts of Idaho AEYC
by supporting and investing in early childjlood care and education in our community.
Dated this 7' day of April, 2026
R bert . Si ison, Mayor
John Qv rton, City Council President
Anne Little Roberts, City Council Vice-President
Brian Whitlock, City Council
Liz Strader, City Council
Doug Taylor, City Council
Luke Cavener, City Council
1t
a
3
.'O 74i +
J fJ 0
IN
x _
7M �. _
�.
WL
. 10
rI
11
lt
wF
c
♦'k
1 ►
4 r,
(:� !VENIDAN�--
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Meridian High School Wrestling State Champions Day
E IDIAN:---
IDAHO
91he Office of the .Mayor
PROC1 A '4VlA411"'1" ON
Whereas, being a Meridian High School wrestler is more than scoring points, escapes,
takedowns, pins and achieving state titles. It is training to build leadership,
character, confidence, teamwork and resilience— all traits needed to succeed on
the mat, in the classroom and in the real world; and,
Whereas, the hard work and dedication of the Meridian Warrior Wresting team and coaches
resulted in winning the 6A State Wrestling Championship; and,
Whereas, their determination racked up 18 state placers and three individual champions to
post 364.5 points topping the previous all-classification scoring record by 26
points; and,
Whereas, the record-setting performance earned the Meridian Warriors team its fifth state
championship in the past six years; and,
Whereas, the leadership, training and discipline of their coaches helped team members to
focus their talents, passion, and fortitude to become a dynasty, with each player
making valuable contributions to their victory.
Therefore, I Mayor Robert E. Simison, hereby proclaim April 7th, 2026 as
Meridian High SchooC^Wrestling
State Champions Day
in the City of Meridian and call upon the community to join me in congratulating the Meridian
High Warriors on their remarkable athletic achievement and for representing Meridian so
proudly in the state tournament.
Dated this 7`h day of April, 2026
goert E Sim'son, Mayor
John Overton, City Council President
Anne Little Roberts, City Council Vice-President
Brian Whitlock, City Council
Liz Strader, City Council
Doug Taylor, City Council
Luke Cavener, City Council
w g__
too
t
4
E -
RIN
� -
T o7771 � -
AftillI, Mill
s►
-
o
room
M � Ivnuum
maN
MERIDIAN � � WRERiUNG k
— _ WNEMINI
b �\ WRE�cMon
1 WpEg7LINf
low —
� -
f
Ion
.+
u! ' Idol49 11 .
Ir
�s
/%% = \�
I
. r
I =AN
IZ ; �..
t
x2�
r .
E IDIAN;---
/hl R
AGENDA ITEM
Public Forum - Future Meeting Topics
The Public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at
www.meridiancity.org/forum to address elected officials regarding topics of
general interest or concern of public matters. Comments specific to an active
land use/development applications are not permitted during this time.
By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public
Forum. However, City Council may request the topic be added to a future
meeting agenda for further discussion or action. The Mayor may also direct
staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC FORUM SIGN - IN SHEET
Date : April 7 , 2026
Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and
provide a brief description of your topic . Please observe the following rules of
the Public Forum :
• DO NOT :
o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning
and Zoning or City Council
o Complain about city staff, individuals , business or private matters
• DO
o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first
o Observe a 3 = minute time limit ( you may be interrupted if your topic
is deemed inappropriate for this forum )
Name ( please print ) Brief Description of Discussion Topic
E IDIAN�-
)AH
AGENDA ITEM
Department Reports
C� E IDIAN
Planning and Zoning Department Presentation and Outline
h2
City Council Meeting, 2026 th April 7
FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map
My Meridian Specific Area Summary Concepts-
Alternative Development Concept C, D, E & Other Opportunities–
Alternative Concept D Central Drive Extension
Applicant’s ED D & E–Concepts Proposed
Changes to Agenda: Item #4: Alamar MDA requires a continuance due to the applicant not posting the site. Staff talked with
st
the applicant and agreed that a continuance to April 21 would be best.
Item #5: Latitude Forty Three (H-2024-0059)
Application(s):
Annexation
Preliminary Plat
st
Since the last hearing on 2/24, revised application information was submitted on March 31 & today consisting of the
following:
A revised annexation & zoning exhibit to align with the reconfiguration of lots/uses on the southern portion of the site - the C-
N zoned area increased by 0.62-acre
A revised preliminary plat, which incorporates a slight change to the lot lines along the west boundary on the northern portion
of the development to more closely align with existing abutting property lines in Woodbridge Subdivision & the addition of an
east/west collector street on the southern portion of the development between the Five Mile Creek & E. Wells Circle
(Alternative D modified from the study) & reconfiguration of lots in that area with a new local commercial street between the
collector street & Wells Circle for access to the residential & commercial uses. The # of building lots & common open space
area remain the same.
An updated phasing plan, which includes the collector street and everything to the north in the first phase of development as
requested by Staff.
An updated landscape plan & fencing plan reflecting the changes to the plat.
An updated common open space & amenity exhibit reflecting the changes to the plat. A change to the site amenities is
proposed, which include a new dog waste station, a bicycle repair station, and another picnic area – the (2) sports courts
(pickleball) on the southern portion of the development have been removed; the amenity points proposed still exceed the
minimum points required.
Updated conceptual building elevations for the portion of the development north of the Five Mile Creek due to the builder
changing for that portion of the development. These elevations are not approved due to the reconfiguration of the residential
lots – the homes on these lots will front on Wells with rear garages.
Additional updates:
An updated report was received from ACHD, which states the proposed ROW for the collector street (i.e. Equator Dr.) is
adequate but additional ROW is required to be dedicated at the Equator Dr./Wells St. intersection to allow for the future
construction of a roundabout or signalized intersection.
The Applicant met with the neighbors in Woodbridge Sub as requested by Council to discuss concerns and answer questions
that were brought up at the last hearing pertaining to home prices, home heights and fencing/trees/drainage along the shared
property line.
The City received a letter from ITD stating that after further review of the project, they will no longer require a Traffic Impact
Analysis for this development. The reason is in this particular location, there are constraints that make off-site mitigations
disproportionately challenging. Additionally, ITD does not have any planned projects in this area where they could assess a
proportionate share contribution.
The City Council sent a letter to ACHD requesting they consider closing Magic View Dr. near the intersection of S.
Woodhaven Ave. & E. Magic View Dr. with an emergency access gate or other appropriate traffic control measures to restrict
through traffic, at least until a new collector roadway further to the south is realized. A response was received stating that the
proposal will violate Idaho Code 40-2319; therefore, ACHD is prohibited from authorizing the installation of any bollards in this
circumstance.
th
If City Council decides to take action on this application at the April 7 hearing, Staff recommends the following changes to
the Commission recommendation:
Include a new condition requiring the construction of S. Longitude Ave. to comply with ACHD standards for commercial local
streets.
Include a new condition requiring additional right-of-way to be dedicated at the intersection of Equator Dr./Wells St. to
accommodate a future roundabout or signalized intersection as determined by ACHD.
Delete condition #A.2.vi pertaining to the removal of the sidewalk along the west side of Longitude Dr. as it’s no longer
applicable with the revised plat.
Revise condition #A.2.ii to update the lot & block # to match that on the revised plat (i.e. should be Lot 1, Block 6).
Update condition #A.1.iii as follows, “The pathway through the common area in the residential portion of the Mixed Use –
Neighborhood (MU-N) designated portion of the site shall extend into the non-residential portion of the site and provide a
pedestrian connection to each of the main building entrances to promote pedestrian mobility within the mixed-use
development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.”
Delete condition #A.3.iii as sports courts are no longer proposed.
Update condition #A.3.v as follows, “Depict landscaping within minimum 10-foot wide street buffers adjacent to local streets on
Lot 14 1, Block 5 6 and 20-foot wide street buffers adjacent to the collector street in accord with the standards listed in UDC
11-3B-7C.
Written testimony since the last hearing on 2/24: Jan McIntyre Bollard, Clayton and Whitney Fike, Catherine Carson, Erin Russell,
Valerie Stefan, Cassandra Peck, Raymond Spencer and Celeste Fox
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2024-0059, as presented in the staff
report for the hearing date of October 21, 2025: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2024-0059, as presented during the
hearing on October 21, 2025, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2024-0059 to the hearing date of _____________ for the following reason(s): (You should state
specific reason(s) for continuance.)
(:� !WENIDAN�--
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Alamar (H-2026-0005) by Midas Corporation, generally
located at the Northeast corner of Black Cat Rd., and Franklin Rd.
Application requires a continuance
A. Request: Modified Development Agreement to amend the building elevations and deviate
from the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan design elements.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C� V L E I�
DEPARTMENT REPORT
HEARING 4/7/2026 Legend
DATE: Project Location
TO: Mayor&City Council Area of Impact
�- City Limits -
FROM: Nick Napoli,Associate Planner 0 Analysis
208-884-5533 —
nnapoli@meridiancity.org -r-�-
APPLICANT: Jessica Stewart,Midas Corporation
SUBJECT: H-2026-0005
Alamar --
LOCATION: Generally located at the Northeast corner
of Black Cat Road and Franklin Road in
in theE 1 4 f the 1 4 f tin S / o e SW / o Section
10, Township 3N,Range 1 W.
I. PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
Development Agreement Modification to amend the building elevations and allow deviations
from the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan design elements such as garage setback
requirements, front porch requirement, and garage door configuration.
B. Recommendation
Planning Division: Approval with amended development agreement
C. Decision
City Council: Pending
D. Table of Contents
CommunityMetrics.............................................................................. II
StaffAnalysis..................................................................................... III
City/Agency Comments and Conditions...................................................... IV
Action.............................................................................................. V
Exhibits............................................................................................ VI
City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview
II. COMMUNITY METRICS
Table 1: Land Use
Description Details Map Ref.
Existing Land Use(s) Residential -
Proposed Land Use(s) Residential -
Existing Zoning TN-R VI.A.1
Proposed Zoning TN-R
Adopted FLUM Designation Medium High Density Residential VLA.2
Table 2:Process Facts
Description Details
Preapplication Meeting date 12/19/2025
Neighborhood Meeting 12/30/2025
Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments& Conditions for comments received or see the public
record.
City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics
III. STAFF ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC)
A. History
Alamar Subdivision was annexed and received preliminary plat approval in 2022, followed by
final plat approvals in 2023 and 2024. Phase 2 of the subdivision is currently under review for the
City Engineer's signature and is expected to be completed soon.
As part of the annexation process,the applicant entered into a Development Agreement that
included approved building elevations and specific site design provisions consistent with the Ten
Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. Since that time,the project has been acquired by a new
home builder who is requesting modifications to the approved building elevations, garage setback
standards, front porch requirement, and garage door configuration.
B. General Overview
The applicant is requesting to modify the design standards in the development agreement. The
applicant's narrative states the modifications are intended to maintain and reinforce the
architectural intent,neighborhood character, and pedestrian oriented design that was originally
approved. In addition,the proposed changes uphold the original developments intention to avoid
repetitive housing forms and to create a visually engaging neighborhood through varied
architecture,materials,rooflines, and color palettes. The exhibit below shows the applicants
models on different lots throughout the subdivision.
Alamar Exteriors by Lot
Ingrid II B
Copenhagen B
Tvoli 8 Stockholm B Erikson A
Stockholm B
Copenhagen A
/_ Copenhagen A
Tricom Black Fascia—Stucco Frame/Wood Acceni
• r • s • • to n ra a
T A: 7RIn
ATHlR RRISA AVfAi7
I —_ Copenhagen _
s
Ingrid AA—
�� 8- Erikson e
o
Tivoli B Bjom B Bjorn A [LIE I01
Oslo B
Erikson B u
MA
BI iom A I
The design changes the applicant is requesting include amending provision 5.1 f to reduce the
garage setback from living area from 16 feet to 12 feet, eliminate the requirement for front
City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis
porches to be fenced or enclosed to help it integrate better with the primary residential facade,
and allow garage doors to utilize either 2 single garage doors or 1 double garage door. The design
standard for the porch and garage door are in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan,which
the development agreement requires compliance with. In addition,the 16 feet garage setback
from living area was a requirement of the development agreement,which was intended to provide
a varied profile for housing; however,with the size of the lots in the subdivision,fitting some
models of the different home types cannot fit on the property and meet all the setbacks.
Due to the exhibits the applicant has submitted with their request, staff is supportive of the design
changes. While some of these changes will alter the TMISAP design elements, staff believes the
intent behind these elements will still be upheld with the proposed changes. In addition,the
applicant has provided detailed information on how the rest of the subdivision will build out.
C. Development Agreement Modifications
Existing 5.1£ All garages shall be set back at least sixteen(16)feet behind the living area facade
of the home.
Proposed 5.1£ All garages shall beset back at least twelve 12 feet behind the living area facade
of the home. This standard shall apply to all lots within the subdivision.
Existing 5.lc: Future Development of the residential units shall be generally consistent with the
required design elements outlined in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan and include
second story decks on at least 25%of the future residential units to better comply with the design
standards.
Proposed 5.lc: Future development of the residential units shall be generally consistent with the
required design elements outlined in the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan with the
following exceptions: Front porches shall be architecturally integrated with the primary
residential facade, garages may utilize either two(2) single garage doors or a single-plane double
garage door, and include second story decks on at least 25% of the future residential units to
better comply with the design standards.
IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Meridian Planning Division
1.1 The amended Development Agreement shall be signed by the property owner(s)and
returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council approval of
the Findings. The addendum shall incorporate the following:
a. Modify Provision A: Future Development of this site shall be substantially consistent
with the approved plat, landscape plan,phasing plan,and updated building elevations
and floor plans included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein, except
that phase I may be modified to include additional building lots on the 1-acre east leg
of the project should a public road connection to W. Atomic Street occur.
b. Modify Provision C: Future development of the residential units shall be generally
consistent with the required design elements outlined in the Ten Mile Interchange
Specific Area Plan with the following exceptions: Front porches shall be
architecturally integrated with the primary residential facade, garages may utilizes
either two (2) single garage doors or a single-plane double garage door, and include
second story decks on at least 25%of the future residential units to better comply
with the design standards.
City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions
c. Modify Provision F: All garages shall be set back at least twelve 12 feet behind the
living area fagade of the home. This standard shall apply to all lots within the
subdivision.
V. ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested Development Agreement Modification per the
conditions of approval included in Section IV.
B. City Council:
VI, EXHIBITS
A. Project Area Maps
1. Zoning Map
Legend � RB
Project Location L-u r:H �.`
Area of Impact �—
OAnalysis
R1 M-E _TN-R ,
C-N
R-15 R-40
C-G
City of Meridian Department Report V.Action
2. Future Land Use
r-:H��� ® CIV
Legend m-D.enslty
Project Location WentICQI,�„�
Area of Impact1IB �—
Analysis
MU-C
FF
Iffin
- I High
Density
Residential
Mixed Employment
low I Med-High Density
Density Residential
Employment
I
3. Planned Development Map
Legend
Project Location L-o
T=' City Limits 11
Planned Parcels 0
Area of Impact
OAnalysis
1 �
City of Meridian Department Report VL Exhibits
B. Subject Site Photos
C. Site Plan(date: 10/16/2024)
'� ` b "`" •°"' ALAMAR SUBDIVISION NO. 1
--- &v' e.o w N w w r,,%o ar A! ee 1/6 w 7rcfzw re
.� :S N.R i w�.W"OF e@eputi/ilA CYILTl TT;a%
awl
of
r;. v
i. —— - - — — —— - —— rI' ..�,.�ww tom. .=J��'S 1l.4��i ' •-
d
- _
�� r — _— r + t �7�_ s F .,•� "^�:: '�>�. ,tip y�'� •
Icwr r �
.4• i �[L /'�'��� R �w .� � 1f Gcllro o.auwr w m u avw
� �-- ...... .P,—,n. ..� r __—��Pw�2�Par- w�i7titlf•° -.w�v-.r
. r'vuw�v tale �� cru,r..r
95 is
Sipm.�_ �� =zssm
�f...
% m om w
�rx�._ ��I�is�?'•'_ �` "` I . „o .. rwcreuR swr who ruc.
aaee7 w,rxn.�rr.n morn wrsK xmsa aai.ua ru,str.�rcm�vs5:mr�siu.al.�ry.w.faoo...n.e
Yec� r:i
City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits
A Building Elevations and Placement(date: 2/17/2026)
Alamar Exteriors by Lot
Ingrid II B mm
, Wt ta
0
Copenhagen B
Tnroli B Stockholmy:EriksonStockholm e
These colors
Tricorn Black Fascia—Stucco Frame/Wood Accents
we
m . • • a • • ro n tt ro
White'
® a li .4: lhA1NlF>Fif1 AVIT4T.
Copenhagen
Ingrid A � R 4
vp Erikson e
Tivoli B Bjorn B Bjorn A _
Oslo B
IT9M
Erikson B r-7-11""IF I_
Bjorn A
City of Meridian Department Report VI. Exhibits
Alamar Exteriors by Lot
Lot 16/1
Bergen II B
Rear Balcony
Lot 14/15 _
Bergen II A
REAR Balcony -
n
_ tea• ,; _ 1111111111 ® 111
Ar'FJ6L
r I . .°° ?d9
I
t Lot 2/1 Bergen
viv - a �l I A Front
Balcony
Lot 4/3
Bergen I B
Lot 5/6 Front Balcony
Bergen I A
Front Balcony a
City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Exhibits
Development Application Transmittal
Link to Project Application: Alamar MDA H-2026-0005
Hearing Date: April 7, 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�meridian city.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(a-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 reauest, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
(:� !VENIDAN�--
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing (continued from February 24, 2026) for Latitude Forty Three
Subdivision (H-2024-0059), by Rodney Evans + Partners, LLC., located at 675, 715 and 955 S.
Wells St.
A. Request:Annexation of 17.27 acres of land with R-8 (13.78 acres), R-15 (2.42 acres) and C-N
(1.07 acres)zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat to re-subdivide lots 7, 21 and 22, Magic View Subdivision, Amended
into 79 residential lots, 1 commercial lot and 11 common/other lots on 15.97 acres of land in the
R-8, R-15 and C-N zoning districts.
I-, tG 00 V ( 1 U7 W N I-, D
O �
oA�
�1
—�1 r+
� �n
o � z CL
m
n fD MM
O
r+
w< m
S cr
—
'� n
v, M
v 4�-i N M
D
c o � r Gq
o �
'w N O*QLn
LW
m
� r+
h� N
0 O
r O
77 � Mdj
7-
oX
O .�
HT � o �
(
� °
D = ((D
�
�l � _„
� oo � cD
7
Et 3
c *
u,
G l0 00 V (n U7 .p W N N D
.a
� N
N
C)
� � r
rD
(D T
L
(D
z �.
m
rD T
O
r+
ft< m
cr
CCL G4
rD
Mob
N
O
rD
r O
a) �
� rt
O X V
O %*m /
C
j ((D
UQ
rDD = (�D
O �O - n (D
C �
mo O
.�j UQ U
vi
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �---
DEPARTMENT REPORT
HEARING 4/7/26 Legend
DATE: Continued from: 516125, 8112125, Project Location 0
9116125, 1113126, 2124126 Area of Impact
TO: Mayor&City Council += City Limits
OAnalysis L
FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner
208-884-5533 4 {,
sallen@meridiancity.org _
APPLICANT: Rodney Evans+Partners,LLC
+,T-
s-
SUBJECT: H-2024-0059 � - --
Latitude Forty Three Subdivision—AZ, e e
PP
LOCATION: 675, 715 and 955 S. Wells St., in the east �.
1/2 of Section 17, T.3N.,R.IE.
I. PROJECT OVERVIEW
A. Summary
Annexation of 17.27-acres of land with R-8 (13.78-acres),R-15 (2:42-TBD-acres)and C-N(1-.07-TBD-
acres)zoning; and Preliminary Plat to re-subdivide Lots 7,21 and 22,Magic View Subdivision
Amended into 79 residential lots, 1 commercial lot and 11 common/other lots on 15.97-acres of land in
the R-8,R-15 and C-N zoning districts.
Note:Since the original submittal, the plat was revised to include all public streets—private streets are
no longer proposed; and the number of building lots were reduced from 81 residential lots, I
commercial lot and 12 common/other lots to 79 residential lots, 1 commercial lot and 11 common lots.
The latest plan revisions on 3131126 include a future east/west collector street through the site between
the Fivemile Creek and Wells Circle; updated conceptual building elevations for Phase I (north of the
creek); and an updated open space&amenity exhibit.
B. Issues/Waivers
Per UDC 11-3A-6C.1, fencing along all natural waterways (i.e. Fivemile Creek) shall not prevent
access to the waterway. In limited circumstances and in the interest of public safety, larger open water
systems may require fencing as determined by the City Council,Director and/or Public Works Director.
The Fivemile Creek bisects this site.A cross-section and photo of the creek is included below in
Section VII.I,which depicts the approximate existing and finished grade on both sides of the
creek,the slope and a 4' tall retaining wall on the south side of the creek. The slope on the north
side is approximately 3:1,which meets the accessibility and maintenance standards for
stormwater facilities in UDC 11-313-11C.6 of a 3:1 slope or less—Staff recommends the north side
remain open and not be fenced. The slope on the south side is approximately a 4:1 slope,which
exceeds acceptable accessibility and maintenance standards—Staff recommends the south side is
fenced with a 6' tall wrought iron fence for public safety in accord with UDC 11-3A-6C.3, unless
the slope can be modified to 3:1 or less,in which case the creek should be accessible and not
fenced.Council should consider Staffs recommendation and determine if it is appropriate.
City of Meridian I Department Report
C. Recommendation
Staff: Approval with the provisions included below in Section IV.
D. Decision
Council: Pending
II. COMMUNITY METRICS
Table 1: Land Use
Description Details Map Ref.
Existing Land Use(s) Vacant/undeveloped land -
Proposed Land Use(s) Single-family residential detached dwellings -
Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County VILA.2
Proposed Zoning R-8(Medium Density Residential)(13.78-acres),R-15
(Medium High-Density Residential)(2.42-acres)and C-N
(Neighborhood Business)(1.07-acres)
Existing Future Land Use Map Medium Density Residential(MDR)&Mixed-Use VILA.3
Designation Neighborhood(MU-N)
Table 2: Process Facts
Description Details
Preapplication Meeting date 8/20/2024 PREAPP-2024-0128
Neighborhood Meeting 10/7/2024
Table 3: Community Metrics
Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference
Ada County Highway District
• Comments Received Yes
• Commission Action Required No
• Access Access is proposed via E.Gentry Ln. and E.Wells Cir.,
local public streets;an emergency access only is proposed
via E.Magic View Dr.through a common lot/driveway at
the north end of the development.Public streets are
proposed internally.
• Traffic Level of Service Meets ACHD's planning thresholds
Traffic Impact Study(Y/N) No(not required by ACHD)
ITD Comments Received Yes—ITD requests a Traffic Impact Analysis(TIA)be
provided as the development size and proximity to SH-
55 will impact the State Highway system.
Meridian Fire No comments received
Meridian Police No comments received
Meridian Public Works Wastewater Sewer is available from Wells St.;located in the Five Mile
sewer shed(see conditions)
Meridian Public Works Water Water is available at site;each phase will need to be
modeled to verify minimum fire flow pressure is
maintained(see conditions).
See City/Agency Comments and Conditions Section for all department/agency and the public record for
comments received on this application.
City of Meridian I Department Report
III. STAFF ANALYSIS
Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC)
A. General Overview
Comprehensive Plan:
Thirteen(13) acres of the subject property is designated on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) in the
Comprehensive Plan as Medium Density Residential(MDR)and the remaining 4.4-acres is designated
Mixed Use—Neighborhood(MU-N).
The MDR designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three(3)to eight(8) dwelling units
per acre.
The purpose of the MU-N designation is to allocate areas where neighborhood-serving uses and
dwellings are seamlessly integrated into the urban fabric. The intent is to avoid predominantly single-
use developments by incorporating a variety of uses.Land uses in these areas should be primarily
residential, comprising between 30%and 60%of the development area with gross densities ranging
from six(6)to 12 units per acre(of the residential area),with supporting non-residential services.
Multiple residential product types are desired within a single-mixed use area(see pp. 3-20& 3-21 in the
Comprehensive Plan for more info).Non-residential uses in these areas tend to be smaller scale and
provide goods or services that people typically do not travel far for and need regularly. Employment
opportunities for those living in the neighborhood are encouraged. Connectivity and access between the
non-residential and residential land uses is critical in these areas. Tree-lined streets are also encouraged
to be designed according to the conceptual MU-N plan depicted in Figure 3D in the Comprehensive
Plan(see pp. 3-20 through 3-21 for more information on mixed use land uses and specifically MU-N
uses in the Comprehensive Plan).
A total of 79 single-family residential detached homes on the property—59 in MDR and 20 in MU-N—
at an overall gross density of 4.85 dwelling units/acre in the residential areas of both designations. A
gross density of 4.50 dwelling units/acre is proposed on the 13-acre MDR designated portion of the site
and a gross density of 6.06 dwelling units/acre is proposed on the 3-acre residential portion of the MU-
N designated area of the site,which is consistent with the density desired in the Comprehensive Plan for
both designations.
Residential uses are proposed over 75%of the MU-N designated portion of the site with narrow 30-foot
wide building lots with an average lot size of 2,791 square feet. A commercial pad is proposed on the
remaining 25%of the MU-N designated area. Only one housing type(i.e. single-family detached)is
proposed in the MU-N area,which Staff supports due to the small size of the site. A street pattern grid
is proposed with blocks below 600-feet in length as desired. Staff recommends tree-lined streets are
provided along local streets within the MU-N designated area in accord with the Comprehensive
Plan.Although the percentage of proposed residential uses is 15%higher than desired in the MU-N
area, Staff feels it's appropriate for the site as Staff envisions the area to the east of Wells St. and along
Magic View Dr. developing with a higher percentage of commercial uses,which should average out.
Office uses exist to the south across E.Wells Cir. and an assisted living facility exists northeast of the
site in the MU-N designated area. As only a small portion of the MU-N designated area has developed,
Staff anticipates more of a variety of uses being provided in this area in the future when the remainder
of the larger MU-N area develops or redevelops.
Annexation& Zoning:
Annexation of 17.27-acres of land is requested with R-8 (13.78-acres),R-15 (2.42-acres) and C-N
(1.07-acres)zoning districts per the legal descriptions and exhibit maps included below in Section
VII.C.
The area proposed to be zoned R-8 is mostly located in the MDR designation with a small portion
where the creek is located in the MU-N designation;the area proposed to be zoned R-15 and C-N is
located entirely within the MU-N designation.
City of Meridian I Department Report
Preliminary Plat:
A Preliminary Plat is proposed to re-subdivide Lots 7,21 and 22,Magic View Subdivision Amended
into 79 residential lots, 1 commercial lot and 11 common/other lots on 15.97-acres of land in the R-8,
R-15 and C-N zoning districts. The plat is proposed to develop in two(2)phases as shown on the
preliminary plat in Section VII.D.
The minimum lot size proposed in the R-8 district is 4,646 square feet(s.£)with an average lot size of
5,629 s.£;the minimum lot size in the R-15 district is 2,730 s.f.with an average lot size of 2,791 s.f.
The C-N zoned lot is 29,634 s.f.
The proposed plat layout provides a good transition in lot sizes/widths to Snorting Bull Subdivision No.
2 (aka Woodbridge)to the west with some lots only being slightly off-set; Staff recommends the
Applicant consider revising the plat so that lot lines entirely align with adjacent lot lines as
requested by abutting property owners.
The proposed development is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Goal#3.07.01A which states,
"Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through
buffering, screening, transitional densities, and other best site design practices."
Table 4: Proiect Overview
Description Details
History This property was included in Magic View Subdivision Amended plat as
Lots 7,21 and 22.An annexation request was previously approved for this
property in 2019, but the development agreement wasn't signed and
consequently the property wasn't annexed(H-2019-0127 Andorra Senior
Living).Another annexation request, which included a preliminary plat
and a conditional use permit for an assisted living facility, was denied by
Council in 2021 as it was deemed to not be in the best interest of the City
[Wells Street Assisted Living/Andorra(H-2021-0024)].
Phasing Plan 2 phases
Physical Features The Five Mile Creek crosses the southern portion of this property.
Acreage 15.97-acres
Lots 79 single-family residential building lots, 1 commercial lot and 11
common/other lots
B. Site Development and Use Analysis
1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1):
There are no existing structures on this site,all previous structures have been removed. There are
existing trees on the site that may require mitigation in accord with the standards listed in UDC I I-
3B-10C.S; the landscape plan should be revised to include mitigation information, as applicable.
2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2):
Single-family residential detached dwellings are listed as principal permitted uses in the R-8 and R-
15 zoning districts,per UDC Table 11-2A-2. An end-user has not yet been identified for the C-N
zoned lot; allowed uses are listed in UDC Table 11-2B-3 for the C-N zoning district.
3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2):
See UDC Tables 11-2A-6 and 11-2A-7 for dimensional standards of the R-8 and R-15 zoning
districts, and UDC Table 11-2B-3 for dimensional standards of the C-N zoning district.
City of Meridian I Department Report
C. Design Standards Analysis
1. Structure and Site Design Standards (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-19):
Compliance with the structure and site design standards in UDC 11-3A-19 is required for the non-
residential portion of the development. The pathway proposed through the common area in the
residential area on the southern portion of the site should extend into the non-residential
portion of the site and provide a pedestrian connection to the building entrance to promote
pedestrian mobility within the mixed use development.
The proposed commercial structure is required to comply with the non-residential design standards
listed in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM); the proposed single-family detached structures
are exempt from design standards.
In accord with the Comprehensive Plan,non-residential buildings should transition to and
compliment adjacent residential buildings in mass and form; and transitions between
different land uses should include highly connected open space.
2. Qualified Open Space&Amenities (Comp Plan, UDC I1-4-3-27):
The proposed development is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies and goals:
• Plan for safe, attractive, and well-maintained neighborhoods that have ample open space,
and generous amenities that provide varied lifestyle choices (policy#2.02.00); and
• 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. (pg. 3-18)
Compliance with the open space and site amenity standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3 and 11-3G-4 is
required.
A minimum of 15%(or 2.28-acres)qualified open space is required to be provided within the
development based on 15.18-acres of land in the residential area. Open space is required to comply
with the quality standards listed in UDC 11-3G-3A.2 and the qualified open space standards listed
in UDC 11-3G-3B.
The Applicant proposes a total of 2-.47-2.51-acres (or 16.5%)qualified open space consisting of
active and passive areas that include open grassy areas exceeding 5,000 square feet in area with a
natural waterway(i.e. the Fivemile Creek) and linear open space as shown on the open space
exhibit in Section VII.I.
Amenities totaling a minimum of three(3)points are required to be provided based on 15.18-acres
of residential development area. Site amenities totaling 4-2 6.5 points (pts.) are proposed from the
Quality of Life,Multi-Modal and Recreation Activity categories as shown on the exhibit in Section
VII.I as follows:
• Quality of Life: (2)picnic areas on a site 5,000 s.f. or greater in size(4 points total); and a
dog waste station(0.5 point.
Per UDC 11-3G-4C.5,a picnic area is required to include tables,benches,
landscaping,and a structure for shade.
Per UDC 11-3G-4C.10,a dog waste station is an installed in the ground fixture with
waste disposal bags and trash receptacle.
• Recreation Activity Area: tot lot(1 point),
pew}and approximately 704-950-feet of 10-foot wide multi-use pathway [under 1/4 mile
(1,320 ft.)=0 points).
City of Meridian I Department Report
Per UDC 11-3G-4D.3,the tot lot is required to have commercial grade play equipment
scaled and designed for the use and safety of younger children; benches for seating
shall be provided nearby.
• Multi-Modal: bicyclepair station(point)
The bicycle repair station is required to be a fixed installation with tools and an air
pump per UDC 11-3G-4F.2.
i. The proposed common open space and site amenities meet and exceed UDC standards for such.
ii. Landscapin is s required to be provided in common open space areas in accord with the
standards listed in UDC 11-3G-5B and maintained in accord with the standards listed in UDC
11-3G-5C.
The first phase of development consists of the land north of the Fivemile Creek and will include the
picnic,playground and multi-use pathway amenities; the second phase consists of the land south of
the creek and will include the two(2)pickleball court amenities.
3. Landscaping (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3B):
Attractive landscaping and pedestrian friendly design is proposed within the development in accord
with Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.02G.
Landscaping is required to be provided within the development in accord with the standards listed
in UDC 11-3B.
i. Landscape buffers alongst
A 10-foot wide street buffer is required along local streets(i.e. S.Wells St.,Wells Cir., and S.
Longitude Dr.) on the C-N zoned lot(i.e. Lot 14,Block 5)per UDC Table 11-2B-3;
landscaping is required to be installed within the buffer in accord with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3B-7C with development of the subdivision. The landscape plan
submitted with the final plat application should include landscaping and calculations that
demonstrate compliance with these standards.
An 8-foot-wide perimeter street buffer is proposed along E. Magic View Dr. and S. Wells St.,
local streets. Although street buffers aren't required along local streets in residential
districts,a minimum setback of 10-feet is required for fences along streets.Therefore,the
buffer should be widened as needed to provide a minimum 10-foot wide setback for the
fence as measured from the property line in accord with UDC 11-3A-7C.3.
All street buffers are required to be in a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer
easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's association or business
owner's association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a and should be depicted on the plat.
ii. Storm inte rag tion
Stormwater integration is required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-11 C.
A Geotechnical Recommendation Report was submitted with this application and is included in
the project file.
iii. Pathway landscaping
Landscaping is required along all pathways in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
12C.A 5' wide landscape strip is depicted on the landscape plan along both sides of the
proposed multi-use pathway; a mix of trees, shrubs,lawn, and/or other vegetative ground
City of Meridian I Department Report
cover should be provided within the landscape strips next to the pathway. A minimum of
one(1)tree is required per 100 linear feet of pathway. Staff recommends the required trees
are spread out more evenly for shade purposes at approximately one(1)every 100'. A
calculations table should be included on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat
application that demonstrates compliance with the aforementioned standards.
iv. Common open space
Common open space areas are required to be landscaped in accord with the standards in UDC
11-3G-5B and maintained in accord with the standards in UDC 11-3G-5C. Calculations
should be included on the landscape plan submitted with the final plat application that
demonstrate compliance with these standards.
4. Parking (UDC 11-3C):
Off-street parking is required to be provided for each dwelling unit based on the number of
bedrooms per unit in accord with the standards for single-family detached dwellings in UDC Table
11-3C-6. On-street parking is available along both sides of internal public streets.
Off-street vehicle parking is required to be provided for non-residential uses in accord with the
standards in UDC 11-3C-6B.1. Bicycle parking is required per the standards in UDC 11-3C-6G.
5. Building Elevations (Comp Plan,Architectural Standards Manual):
Several conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed single-story and 2-story
single-family detached residential homes for each of the lot sizes proposed, included in Section
VII.H below. A variety of materials are proposed including vertical and horizontal lap siding,board
and batten siding, shake siding, smooth panel siding, and fenestration with masonry accents in a
variety of colors and design elements/features with varying roof profiles and wall modulation that
demonstrate the quality of development proposed. Single-family detached residential structures are
exempt from the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM).
Conceptual elevations were not submitted for the commercial structure on Lot 14,Block 5. The
commercial structure is required to comply with the non-residential design standards in the ASM.
Staff is of the opinion the proposed conceptual building elevations are in accord with
Comprehensive Plan Policy#5.01.02L: "Support beautiful and high-quality development that
reinforces neighborhood character and sustainability.
6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
All fencing proposed on the site should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6 and 1I-
3A-7. A variety of fencing types are proposed as shown on the landscape plan in Section VII.F
below.All existing perimeter fencing will either be retained and protected or replaced;the
developer will coordinate with all affected neighbors.
Per UDC 11-3A-6C.1,fencing along all natural waterways shall not prevent access to the
waterway.In limited circumstances and in the interest of public safety,larger open water
systems may require fencing as determined by the City Council,Director and/or Public
Works Director.A cross-section and photo of the creek is included below in Section VII.I,
which depicts the approximate existing and finished grade on both sides of the creek,the
slope and a 4' tall retaining wall on the south side of the creek. Approximately a 3:1 slope is
shown on the north side of the creek.Because the slope on the north side meets the slope
requirements in UDC 11-3B-11C.6 for accessibility and maintenance of stormwater facilities
of 3:1 or less, Staff recommends this side remain open and not be fenced in accord with UDC
11-3A-6C.1 but recommends a 6' tall open vision wrought iron fence is installed along the
south side of the creek for public safety since the slope in that area exceeds acceptable
City of Meridian I Department Report
standards for accessibility unless the slope can be modified to be 3:1 or less—Council may
determine otherwise.
Fencing depicted along S.Hickory St. on Lots 6 and 7,Block 3 and Lots 5 and 6,Block 2 and
along E.Magic View Dr.and S.Wells St. is required to be setback a minimum of 10' from the
street side property line per UDC 11-3A-7C.3. The maximum fence height in the required
front yard including the front and side yard property lines shall be 3-feet for a closed vision
fence and 4-feet for an open vision fence per UDC 11-3A-7C.2. The fencing plan and
landscape plan should be revised accordingly to comply with UDC standards.
Side yard fences that follow the side yard property line are only allowed where the side
setback is five or greater per UDC 11-3A-7C.5.This restriction applies to the R-15 zoned lots
if a 3' setback is proposed.
7. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17):
No parkways are proposed;however, Staff is recommending detached sidewalks with parkways
for tree-lined streets are provided in the MU-N designated portion of the site in accord with
the standards for such in UDC 11-3A-17.
D. Transportation Analysis
A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was not submitted for this development as ACHD did not require one.
Due to the development size and proximity to SH-55,impacts to the State Highway System are
anticipated. The SH-55 corridor is already congested and this project will increase the number of
vehicle trips. Therefore,the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) has requested a Traffic
Impact Analysis(TIA)be submitted for this development and may make further comments upon
review of the TIA. The developer is working on this request.
Residents in Woodbridge Subdivision to the west have expressed concern pertaining to the high
volume of traffic currently passing through their neighborhood between S.Locust Grove Rd. and
E.Magic View Dr.via E.Woodbridge Dr.for access to S. Eagle Rd.and the negative impact the
proposed development will have,which will exacerbate an already challenging situation. To
alleviate this,the Applicant is not proposing public access via E.Magic View Dr. to discourage cut-
through traffic.
Capital Improvements Plan(CIP)/Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP): The bridge(#1224)
over the Five Mile Creek on S. Wells Street is scheduled in the IFYWP to be replaced in 2029. The
bridge is currently designed to match existing facilities,which do not include bicycle lanes or
pedestrian walkways; however,the width of the bridge will accommodate these improvements in the
future when adjacent properties redevelop and provide these facilities. ACHD will require a road trust
from the developer for the cost of these improvements and include them in their project if this
development goes forward.
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
"*Magic View Drive 712-feet Local 80 NA
Commercial
"Wells Street 1,575-feet Local N/A NA
Commercial
"Wells Circle 344-feet Local N/A N/A
Commercial
**ACHD does not set level of service thresholds toy local streets_
Access (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4):
City of Meridian I Department Report
1. Access is proposed for the site via existing and proposed local public streets. Access to the northern
portion of the development is proposed via S.Wells St. from E. Gentry Ave.,existing unopened
right-of-way. An emergency only access is proposed via E.Magic View Dr. at the northern
boundary of the site via a common driveway on Lot 22,Block 1. Access to the southern portion of
the development is proposed via S. Wells St. and E. Wells Cir.
Two(2) stub streets are proposed to the west to be extended with future development for access and
interconnectivity with adjacent developments;no stub streets exist to this property.
Local street connectivity is proposed within the development in accord with 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. "
2. Multiuse Pathways (UDC 11-3A-5):
Multi-use pathways are required to be provided with development in accord with the Pathways
Master Plan. A 10' wide segment of the City's multi-use pathway system is proposed from S. Wells
St. to the west along the north side of the Fivemile Creek and to the north and west property line for
connection to the existing pathway in Woodbridge Subdivision, in accord with the Plan.A pathway
stub is also provided to the property to the west(Parcel#R5443010202) for future extension.
3. Pathways (Comp Plan, UDC I1-3A-8):
All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 and in
accord with the site specific geotechnical report for light duty paving per UDC 11-3B-12C.3. In the
case where no geotechnical report is available pathways shall be built using two and one-half(2.5)
inches of asphaltic concrete over four(4)inches of crushed aggregate base over ten(10)inches of
structural subbase over compacted subgrade. Materials and methods shall conform to ISPWC
standard specifications.
Pathways are depicted on the landscape plan through the internal common areas for pedestrian
access to amenities and the commercial pad on the south end of the site. A multi-use pathway is
stubbed to the west boundary of this property from Woodbridge Subdivision.
4. Sidewalks (UDC 11-3A-17):
All sidewalks should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17. Five-foot
wide attached sidewalks are proposed along all local streets within and adjacent to the development.
As noted above, Staff recommends detached sidewalks with landscaped parkways are
provided in the MU-N designated portion of the site in accord with the Comprehensive Plan.
in the interim of the bridge being r-eplaeed aer-ess the Fivemile Gr-eek, Staff r-eeefliffiefids a
alongside the existing read-.ACHD confirmed there isn't adequate area for the pathway
5. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6):
Compliance with the subdivision design and improvements standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3 is
required.
Common driveways: Three(3)common driveways are proposed,which are required to comply
with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. Common driveways should be paved with a surface
with the capability of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. A common driveway exhibit is
included in Section VII.E below that depicts the setbacks,building envelope and orientation of the
lots and structures.
Block face: All of the proposed block faces comply with the required standards.
The subject property should be subdivided prior to submittal of any building permit applications
for the phase of development in which they are located.
City of Meridian I Department Report
E. Services Analysis
See Service Accessibility Report in Section VII.B below.
1. Waterways (Comp Plan, UDC 11-3A-6):
All waterways, except natural waterways, are required to be piped unless used as a water amenity
or linear open space,in which case they may be left open as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6.
The Fivemile Creek, a natural waterway,bisects this site within a 100' wide easement and should
remain open and be protected during development. Building lots do not and should not encroach
within the easement.A cross-section of the creek is included in Section VII.I below that shows the
approximate existing and finished grade on both sides of the creek, slope and a 4' tall retaining wall
on the south side of the creek.
A portion of this site is located within the floodway in zones X and AE. A floodplain permit is
required before any grading in the floodplain begins.Floodplain permits are required for
each building in the floodplain along with elevation certificates certifying lowest floor
elevation is 2 feet above base flood elevation.
2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-I5):
Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided in each development as set
forth in UDC 11-3A-1 S.
3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18):
An adequate storm drainage system is required in accord with the adopted standards, specifications
and ordinances; design and construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the
City per UDC 11-3A-18.
4. Utilities (Comp Plan, UDC I1-3A-21):
All utilities for the proposed development are required to be installed in accord with the standards
listed in UDC 11-3A-21.
Water service is available at the site and sewer service is available from S.Wells St. Each phase of
the development will need to be modeled to verify minimum fire flow pressure is maintained.
5. Topography
This property slopes down to the center from the north and the south ends of the site as shown on
Sheet 3 of the plat.
6. Hazards
Staff is unaware of any hazards that exist on this site other than the Fivemile Creek,which may
present a danger to young children.
IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS
A. Meridian Planning Division
1. A new Development Agreement(DA) shall be required as a provision of the Annexation and
Zoning application.
Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance,a new DA shall be entered into between the City of
Meridian,the property owner at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A
final plat application shall not be submitted until the annexation is finalized. The DA shall be
signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the
date of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact,Conclusions of Law and Decision&Order
for the annexation request. The new DA shall incorporate the following provisions:
City of Meridian I Department Report
i. Future development of the subject property shall be generally consistent with the prelimipAa
plat,phasing plan, landscape plan, open space and site amenity exhibit and conceptual building
elevations included below in Section VII,the conditions contained herein and the standards in
the Unified Development Code(UDCZ
ii. The subject property shall be subdivided prior to submittal of any building=permit applications
for the phase of development in which they are located.
iii. The pathway. through the common area in the residential portion of the Mixed Use—
Neighborhood(MU-N)designated. portion of the site shall extend into the non-residential
portion of the site and provide a pedestrian connection to the main building entrance to promote
pedestrian mobility within the mixed-use development in accordance with the Comprehensive
Plan.
iv. Tree-lined streets with detached sidewalks shall be provided in the MU-N designated portion of
the development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for MU-N designated areas.
v. Administrative design review shall be required for the commercial structure in accord with the
non-residential design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. The non-residential
building shall transition to and compliment adjacent residential buildings in mass and form in
accord with the Comprehensive Plan. Since-family detached structures are exempt from desip_n
standards.
2. The final plat shall include the following revisions:
i. Graphically depict the 14-foot-wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway
the recorded instrument number of the easement.
ii. Depict a 10-foot-wide street buffer along S.Wells St.,Wells Cir.,and S. Longitude Dr. on the
C-N zoned lot(i.e. Lot 14,Block 5)per UDC Table 11-2B-3, in a common lot or on a
permanent dedicated buffer easement,maintained by the property owner,homeowner's
association or business owner's association per UDC 11-3B-7C.2a.
iii. Depict detached sidewalks with parkways in the MU-N designated portion of the site in accord
with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and the Comprehensive Plan.
iv. Perpetual ingress/egress shall be required for the common driveways either by a recorded
easement or as a note on a recorded final plat as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3D. The easement or
plat note shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting
fire vehicles and equipment.
v. Widen the street buffer along E. Magic View Dr. and S. Wells St.to allow for a 10-foot wide
minimum setback from the property line for perimeter fencing along streets in accord with
UDC 11-3A-7C.3.
vi. Remove the sidewalk along the west side of S.Longitude Dr. and provide right-of-way to the
west propeM line.
3. The landscape plan shall include the following revisions:
City of Meridian I Department Report
i. Depict tables,benches, landscaping, and a structure for shade for the picnic area amenity,in
accord with UDC 11-3G-4C.5; include a detail for these items.
ii. Depict commercial grade play equipment scaled and designed for the use and safety of younger
children for the tot lot; benches for seating shall be provided nearby in accord with UDC 11-
3G-4D.3, include a detail for these items.
1 r h 1 ,1 1 ,1 b 1
ii�. ��� .JS, S��S-E91�S-E1�2��c�criiccc cozrcr`v�ci�ui�'cii�� ccncrii-rcr'ua�ocicc��cszor
iv. The 5-foot-wide landscape strips along pathways shall include a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn,
and/or other vegetative ground cover as set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C; trees should be spaced
out more evenly for shade purposes at approximately one (1)every 100 linear feet, additional
trees beyond the minimum number may be provided.
v. Depict landscaping within minimum 10-foot wide street buffers adjacent to local streets on Lot
14,Block 5 in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C.
vi. Fencing along S. Hickory St. on Lots 5 and 6,Block 2 and Lots 6 and 7,Block 3 shall be
depicted a minimum of 10-feet from the street side prope . line per UDC 11-3A-7C.3.
vii. The maximum fence height in the required front yard including the front and side yard d property
lines shall be 3-feet for a closed vision fence and 4-feet for an open vision fence per UDC 11-
3A-7C.2;revise accordin ly.
viii.Include a calculations table that demonstrates compliance with the standards for landscaping
within street buffers(UDC 11-313-70, along=pathways(UDC 11-313-12C) and within common
open space areas(UDC 11-3G-5B).
ix. Depict detached sidewalks with parkways for tree lined streets in the MU-N designated portion
of the site in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-17 and the guidelines in the
Comprehensive Plan.
x. Widen the street buffer along E. Magic View Dr. and S. Wells St. to allow for a 10-foot wide
minimum setback for perimeter fencing from the property line in accord with UDC 11-3A-
7C.3.
xi. Remove the fencing depicted along the north side of the Fivemile Creek and depict 6-foot tall
wrought iron fencing along the south side of the Fivemile Creek for public safety,unless
otherwise modified by City Council.
xii. Depict a minimum 5-foot wide temporary asphalt pathway along Wells St. if there is adequate
area alongside the existing road.ACHD confirmed there is not adequate area for a pathway
xiii.Include mitigation information for existing trees on the site that are being removed with
development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-1OC.5, as applicable.
xiv.Remove the sidewalk along the west side of S.Longitude Dr. and provide right-of-way to the
west propeLly line.
xv. Include a detail of the dog waste station installed in the ground with waste disposal bags and
trash receptacle in accord with UDC 11-3G-4C.10.
xvi.Include a detail of the bicycle repair station that depicts a fixed installation with tools and an air
pump per UDC 11-3G-4F.2.
4. The common driveways shall be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-6C-3D
and building setbacks shall be as shown on the common driveway exhibit in Section VILE.
City of Meridian I Department Report
5. All pathways shall be constructed in accord with the site-specific geotechnical report for light duty
paving per UDC 11-313-12C.3. In the case where no geotechnical report is available pathways shall
be built using two and one-half(2.5)inches of asphaltic concrete over four(4) inches of crushed
aggregate base over ten(10)inches of structural subbase over compacted subgrade. Materials and
methods shall conform to ISPWC standard specifications.
6. Submit a 14-foot-wide public pedestrian easement for the multi-use pathway on this site prior to
submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature.
7. Off-street parking shall be provided for all single-family residential dwellings in accord with the
standards for such listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6.
8. The Fivemile Creek shall remain open as a natural amenity and shall not be piped or otherwise
covered in accord with UDC 11-3A-6 and shall be protected during development.
9. All waterways, except natural waterways (i.e.the Fivemile Creek), intersecting,crossing or lying
within the area being development are required to be piped unless used as a water amenity or linear
open space,in which case they may be left open as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. If left open, fencing
may be required in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C.
10. Wayfinding address signage shall be provided at the public street for homes accessed via common
driveways(i.e. Lots 6-8 and 19-20 and 31-32,Block 1).
11. A floodplain permit is required before any grading in the floodplain begins. Floodplain permits are
required for each building in the floodplain along with elevation certificates certifying lowest floor
elevation is 2 feet above base flood elevation.
12. Side yard fences that follow the side yard property line are only allowed where the side setback is
five or greater per UDC 11-3A-7C.5. This restriction applies to the R-15 zoned lots if a 3-foot side
setback is proposed.
13. Approval of the preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city
engineer's signature on the first phase final plat within two(2)years of City Council's approval of
the preliminary plat; or a time extension may be requested as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7.
Other Agency comments may be accessed in the project file in the public record. Copy and paste the
following link into your browser:
https:llweblink.meridianciC .or lWebLink/browse.aspx?id=367307&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCiCE
V. FINDINGS
A. Annexation(UDC 11-5B-3E)
Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the
public hearing,review the application.In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall
make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment and development plan generally complies with
provisions of the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to transition in density, residential densities and
compatibility with adjacent uses.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically
the purpose statement;
The Commission finds the proposed amendment to the R-8 and R-15 zoning districts is consistent
with the purpose statement of the residential districts in that it contributes to the range of housing
opportunities in this area consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
City of Meridian I Department Report
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare;
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment will not be materially detrimental to the
public health and safety.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school
districts; and
The Commission finds the proposed map amendment will not result in an adverse impact upon the
delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services, including the school
district based on 2024-2025 student enrollment numbers.
5. The annexation(as applicable) is in the best interest of city.
The Commission finds the proposed annexation with the recommended conditions of approval is in
the best interest of the City.
B. Preliminary Plat(UDC 11-611-6)
In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-
making body shall make the following findings:
1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified
development code;
The Commission finds the proposed plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and is
consistent with the UDC with the conditions contained herein.
2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the
proposed development;
The Commission finds public services are available to the site and will be adequate to
accommodate the proposed development.
3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital
improvement program;
ACHD is planning to construct a new bridge across the Fivemile Creek in the CIP; no other
improvements are planned. Other than that, the Commission finds there are no scheduled public
improvements that affect development of this site.
4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development;
The Commission finds there is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed
development.
5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and
The Commission finds the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or general welfare.
6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features.
The Commission finds the Fivemile Creek, which crosses this site, should be preserved and
protected during development of this site. The Commission is unaware of any other such features
that exist on this site but if any others exist, they shall be preserved.
VI. ACTION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed AZ and PP requests with the requirement of a development
agreement and the conditions of approval included above in Section IV.
City of Meridian I Department Report
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard these items on April 3,2025.At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ and PP requests.
1. Summary of Commission public hearing_
a. In favor: Ben Semple,Rodney Evans+Partners,LLC
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting: Robin McCulley
d. Written testimony: Ben Semple,Rodney Evans+Partners,LLC; Robin McCulley
Cassy Peck; Celeste Fox,Kathleen Lewis; Tanya Bader;Erin Russell; Ram
Spencer
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s) testimony
a. The existing fence along Woodbridge's east bounden(the site's west boundary,)is
crooked and doesn't lie on the property line in many places due to the location of
existing trees&poor construction,request for details on what the plan is for fencing
along the west boundary of the site—desire for vinyl fencing not to be an approved
material in this area;
b. The high volume of traffic goingthough Woodbridge subdivision between Locust
Grove&Eagle Roads,which will worsen with more homes beingdped in this
area; long wait times at the intersection of Eagle/Allen at the traffic signal and safety_
concerns—request for this area to be rezoned for non-residential uses;
c. Privacy issues with 2-story homes being built next to single-story homes; and question if
2-story homes will have windows facing adjacent rear yards;
d. Request for the developer to provide details in writing of their planned building setbacks
on lots next to Woodbridge to be included in the DA-,
e. Request for the developer to address what future builders can do to prevent drainage
issues on abutting lots in Woodbridge due to the higher elevation of the subject
ro e
f. Ms. McCulley expressed concern about a tree located along her rear property line and
how it would be impacted by a new fence.
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission:
a. General consensus the proposed development will fit in well with the existing residential
development to the west(i.e.Woodbridge);
b. Recognition of the traffic issues in this area;
c. Agreement with Staff's recommendation pertaining to fencing along the Fivemile Creek.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. At Staff s request,the Commission included new conditions requiring mitigation
information to be included on the landscape plan for existing trees on the site that are
being removed with development in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-
1 OC.5, as applicable; and removal of the sidewalk along the west side of Longitude Dr.
with provision of ROW to the west property, line.
5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council:
a. Council should determine if the fencing recommended by Staff along the Fivemile
Creek is appropriate as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6C.
C. The Meridian City Council heard these items on May 6, August 25 and September 16,2025 and
January 13,February 24 and April 7,2026, At the public hearing on February 28! ,the Council
moved to continue the subject AZ and PP to April 7'in order to allow additional time for the
Applicant to update their development plan to alien with the plan to provide collector street
access through this area between Locust Grove&Touchmark
1 Summary of the City Council public hearing:
a. In favor: Ben Semple,Rodney Evans+Partners.LLC: Ian Connair.Kimlev-Horn
City of Meridian I Department Report
b. In opposition:None
c. Commenting: Robin McCulley,Treg Bernt,Tanya Bader,Janet McDougal.Afton
Pieper,Karen Rice,Philip Bode,Mike Seaman,Raymond Spencer,Kyle George.
Deborah Henderson. Celeste Fox
d. Written testimony: Celeste Fox,Robin McCulley, Cassandra Peck, Raymond Spencer
e. Staff presenting application: Sonya Allen. Caleb Hood
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. Requests the developer provide details of their planned building setbacks next to
neighbors on Woodhaven St. that will be part of the DA: requests clarification about
what the builders can do to prevent drainage issues on lots that abut homes in
Woodbridge that are at a lower elevation: and concern pertaining to the perimeter
fencing along the east boundary of Woodbridge.
b. Concern pertaining to the existing fence along the east boundary of Woodbridge—the
developer hasn't vet discussed the matter with neighbors.
c. Concern pertaining to the increase in traffic in an already congested area and lack of a
fencing solution along the shared property line with Woodbridge: and concern
pertaining to lack of privacy with 2-story homes abutting her single-story home.
d. Concern pertaining to the proposed scale&building setback of homes along the west
boundary of the site abutting homes in Woodbridge and lack of privacy—request for
20' setback for single-story homes&30' for 2-story homes. Concern pertaining to the
quality of homes built in this development if the current builder drops out—request for
the opportunity for the City&the public to review any future changes to the elevations
in the event the home builder and/or ownership changes to avoid a potential"bait&
switch".
e. Request for Council to consider if the proposed development is a good fit for this area.
f. The need for more connectivity in this area.
g= Not in favor of the updated elevations proposed by the Applicant for the first phase of
development.
h. Request for Council to deny the proposed development without a solution to the traffic
issues in this area, specifically the cut-through traffic through Woodbridge Subdivision.
before approving more development which will exacerbate the issue.
i. Concern pertaining to the safety of children within the Woodbridge development with
trafficspeeding, though the subdivision.
j- Request for the Traffic Impact Analysis requested by ITD to be com 1p eted prior to any
final decision being made on this development.
k. Concern pertaining to the grade difference of the proposed project,which is higher than
the elevation of Woodbridge subdivision—request for a greater setback of at least 20'
be required.
1. The developer committed to a 20' setback for 2-story homes with the allowance of a
covered patio with a 12' setback to sin lele�story homes as a DA provision.
3- Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council:
a. Opinion Council doesn't have the right information before them to make a decision on
this application at this time—the traffic issue in this area needs to be resolved before
approving a development plan for this prop
b. Discussion about continuing the project to a later hearing date in order to allow
additional time to gather information in hopes of finding a path forward on the
transportation issues in this area. One solution might be allowing the northern portion of
the development abutting Woodbridge Subdivision to move forward with development.
while delaying development of the southern portion until a solution to the traffic issue is
identified in case revisions to that portion of the development plan are needed.
City of Meridian I Department Report
C. The possibility of closing off the main thoroughfare through Woodbridge at the east
entrance via E. Magic View Dr.with bollards or a gate for emergency access only—
Councilman Cavener requested HOA President Robin McCulley discuss the possibility
with the Woodbridge neighborhood and report back at the next hearing. Planning Staff
was also directed to send a letter to ACHD (Caleb Hood.Deputy Director sent letter to
ACHD on 3/27/261,
d. Council directed the Applicant to submit updated conceptual building elevations with
materials: meet with the neighbors to work through some of the questions and concerns
brought up at the hearing:provide an update on the Traffic Impact Analysis—if it's
been completed and submitted to ITD:re-design residential along future collector street
(alternative D modified between the creek&Wells Cir. —330' offset from collector to
local street)
4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation.
a. None
City of Meridian I Department Report
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Project Area Maps
to Project Overview)
1. Aerial
Legend
Project Location
■■■ /\
Area of Impact
2.
FRANKLIN
. :, a D ■
:r,4 ■;�:.� 1, � _ �- �..� �W�
Zoning Map
Legend
��r�■■ J
Q
Project
• of •• FRANKL•IN W
C-Nw ■■■■■ ■■■■■
'moo,' ■■■■��=���r
_ I AJ
OYE'RL-AND
City of Meridian I
..
Departmentp.
• -• • •• FRANKL-IN ,,,,,,,,,,,� -
W
lu I n■■■► a���■ �nn.�llmme
it �.�■ � �■■■■■..
- o Y
i111111`i �`r�`I■■■�
o III ��■ _ - �r
OVERLAND Q
• • •• FRANKL-IN — � v ��
�'�.... ■�■NINE �11�■
I NONE
I loss
xaml
illll,■■■■■■■■■ �_Di11 Ill■::: aainw�_.. ~_ ■■�
H� �_`:un
is ���:.� =1•e_c�`� �d��4��■y;- 111'`
�� tom' 11111►�■■■■►��� .�
n■�,�� i ���:�: some No ■ lu
B. Service Accessibility Report
PARCEL RS"3010220 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY
Overall Scare: 26 121 st Percentile
Location Within 112 mile of City Limits YELLOW
Ex6ension Sewer Trunkshed mains < 500 ft,from parcel
Floodplain Either not within the 100yr floodplain or> 2 acres
Emergency Services Eire Response time 5-9 min. YELLOW
E me,g ency Services Police M eets response fti me g oal s most of the ti me
Pathways Within 114 mile of current pathways
Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route
Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration(#of lanes in master streets
plan) matches existing(4 of lanes)
School Walking Proximity Within 112 mile walking
Eithera High School or College within Z miles CR a
School Driwability Middle or Elementary School within 1 nilie Jrivino
(existing or future)
Park Walkability No park within walking distance by parktype
Re xxt gerernRd nn 42-21-202;b}-h#ERIE3'.51 sAen
City of Meridian I Department Report
C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map—TO BE REVISED
I iml >)) Horn
October 10, 2024
Zatrfude Forty Three
Annexation Description
Lots 7,21 and 22 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision,filed ire Book 52 of Plats at Pages
4445-4446,Ada County Records. being located in the East Half of Section 17,Township 3
North.Range 1 East.Boise Meridian, City of Meridian,Ada County. Idaho.being more
particutorly described as follows:
Commencing at the Center Quarter of Section 17,Township 3 North. Range 1 East, Boise
Meridian,from which the North Quarter Corner of said Section 17 bears{oral 6002T48" East.
2,657,09 feet; said Commencing Paint being the Southwest Corner of said Lot 22:
Thence along ttie Lot Lines of said Lots 7,21 and 22 the following nine(9)courses and
distances;
1. North 00'23'48"East.a distance of 901.42 feet:
2. South 80'09'03" East.a distance of 419.00 feet;
3. North 09050'57" East,a distance of 25.00 feet;
4. South 80009'03" East.a distance of 312.19 feet;
5. South 16°49'09"West, a distance of 802.30 feet;
6. South 09'36'26" East.a distance of 324.91 feet;
7. North 89'15'33"West, a distance of 373,45 feet;
8. North 0001'21"West, a distance of 773.67 feet;
9. North 89'57'50°°West, a distance of 252.88 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this
description.
Containing 752.265 square feet or IT.27 acres of land,
LAB
�n
of
DP&:
Idahoi e
City of Meridian Department Report
NORTH QUARTER
SECTION 17.
CP&F 11)1161IN%
LINE TABLE ; +
NO. BEARING LENGTH �t.` L2
LS N00°2349'E 901.42'
L2 S84°09'93'E 409.0IY 00
L3 H1M'50"57'E 25-00'
L4 S80°C9WE 312-19'
L5 S1$=49T@ W E02-34' }i
a L15 SCrV38U2TE 824.91' r
L7 N99`IT33'W 373AT f
t
t LB NQ4°flT'21-W 773.97' 1
L9 NW5T50-W 252.BO' f
I
L9 _
CENTER QUARTER A � EAST QUARTER
SECTION 17. SECTION 17.
CPBF 102099257 CPBF 111D554175
4
ti�11
ti 1
� � t
� - L7 - -
LEGEND
LAAO
S r : BOUNDARY LINE
SECTION LINE NORTH
— — — REGHT-of-WAY LINE
QUARTER CORNER
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
l 0 15D 300 600
D
4
19 4
x
'PROJECT: T:ZE ke W: 10130m0
rimleyMorn LATITUDE 43 SrM-E 1"=3w
1tC0&M210�T EXHIBIT "B" onTE: fWfQ21724
ow IOAIId&WO A NNEXA TION SHEET:
�wMr#`wn ears SHEET 2 OF 2
City of Meridian I Department Report
I imley) Horn
October 10,2024
La&ode Eo*7?�roo
R-8 Zone UGscrapor�
Lots 7,21 and 22 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision,filed in Book 52 of ats at Pages
A45 4+145 Ada County Rerflniis being lwated in the East Half of section 1 flxmsh 03
korlh,Ranga 1 East,Boise Merman, i City of Merk dan,Ada County,Idaho, ing rnare
particularly described as follows:
Gonrnencing of UM Center quarter a 5ecdion 17,Towrisho 3 Nortl-L. nge 1 Easf,Boise
Meridian,frown which this North quarbu Comer of said Section 17 rs North U0-23'48"East,
2,657JOS Pbut;said Canunencirrg'Foint being the Southwest Corn said Lot 22;
Timmm akmg the Lot Linens orsaid Lori 7.21 and 22 the Follow- g seven M ccursas and
:
f- North 00'23-4$-'Eosi,a distance of X1.4Z fccl;
Z South WrOg'03"East,a distancr*gf 409-00 feet;
3- North 09"60'57"Eatl,a ditlanea of 25.00 rout;
4. South a '09'03"East,a distance of 312.19
S- South 16149'091'Wes#,a distance of 802.34 Fc
$- south 49'36'2G"East,a dlstwicp of 3M-90 t:
7- North 99"15'4+4"West,a dishu cis uF 296-6
Thence Forth 00*0 V2 1"West.a distance of -03 feet to the Westerly Lint line of said Lot 21;
Thence along said Lot line North 09°57'50' est,a distance of 252.88 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING of this description,
Conlaining 504,279 square feet or 13- acres of land-
L+fy
a
ljl�
City of Meridian Department Report
l imley))) orn
October 10,2024
LaMiude Forfy Throo
R-15 Zone Dascriadan
A portion of Lot 21 of the Arnen ded Magic Yew Sutrdiuision,fiEed in E3oo 2 of Plats at Pages
4445-WE Ada Ccwnty Records,being located in the East Half of Sect' 17,Township 3
North,Range 1 East Boise Meridian_City of Meridian,Ada county,f o,being more
particuEarly described as follows:
Commencing at the Centar Quarter of Section 17,Township 3 M Range 1 EavL Boise
Meridian,from which the North Quarter Corner of said Section bears North DO'2348"East,
2_657.O9 feet;Thence South 324.19 feet,and East 253.41 feet the POINT OF BEGIN MING:
Tnence South 89`15'44" East,a distance of 29fi_67 feet to a Easterly Lot line-of said Lat 11:
Thence alarm said Lot lime South 49'36'26"-East, a dl-s „�e pf 3;4 X ("t-,
Thence North-09'15'44'Wast,a distance of 351.60 et t4 ih-u YVar-Wrly Lot Iirtc<ii sald Lot 21:
T hir,cr along said Lot Plnt Hof#h d0°01'$1-Oyes a disfanl;e of 325.03 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING of this deacF*fiorL
Containing 105,356 square feet or 2A2 ac of land.
1.+4+
r
5
0
t �
City of Meridian Department Report
I imley- Horn
Gdobff 10.2024
Lafitudc FarlyT�utCc
C,N Zone Dowffpdorr
A portion QF Lot 21 of the Amen ded M ayic Yew Subdivision,Hied in Boa 2 of Plats at Pages
4446-WI5,Ada County Records,being located in the East Half of 5e�ti 17,Ti wnsh 0 3
Forth,Range 1 East,Boise Meridian, City of Meridian,Ada County,I o,being more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Center I3uarter of Section 17,Township 3 N Range 1 East Boise
h4eridia n,from which the North Quarter Corner of said Section bears North 00'2348"East,
2,$57.09 feel;Thence South 645.22 feet,and East 253_14 Feet the POINT OF BEGINNING;
ThtLrw L Srrurll A9'15'44"Easl,a distance-oF 351.68 feet to a Easterly tot line of said Lot 21;
Thence along the Lvt Lines of said Lot 21 the hAlowin ree(3)courses and d istanres=
1_ Theme Soutli 09=36'2$"East a distance of 1 _75 feet;
2_ Thence North 99'15'33"Wast, a distance of 3,45 feet;
3_ Then North 00*01-2V West. a distance 125_61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of
this description_
Containing 46,531 square feet or 1.07 ac of land_
� 5 1
4{'
City of Meridian Department Report
NORM C&MRq ISI
scff ON 17.
CP#F 1851619M
LIME TABLE
Na BEARING MIGM --
L7 Np]'23'46"1= 991.42" � O
F -
L2 Sb+a-oqw:�-F� aa9.00' L ,
L3 ND9'S3'5T E 25.W LL
m
LA :$K•ua+331r 312.14' �
ff
L5 S16'4nVW OEM �1
r
LB F,IpW7-21•* a2LpS +
L9 F$95TW-W 25LOC RaZONE'
{ L74 5%'3626"E =3T
L11 351.M'
L12 MOM'21'W =Jn'
L13 SO N-J$'E 1W.75• CENTER e3LI+yR71 y
EA ST C UARTFR
Lid NaIrf5'331W 313.45, S{CTION 17, }4 SECTION t7.
CP$f"1 42w W 4 CPSf 1IDD54175
L15 wju.,}i21-W 126A1' A y�1
$ 1 y
4
LT
JR-15 ZOFC
� — L14� —
M1
J
V LE ND
[.Vp
BOUNDARY UNt
' — SLAT ION I-IML NO T ri
S - — — — FRACH f-OF-WAY LNE
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
CF a 15fl 30a $UO
F'RJJC4i TIM I. 1931saoou
1HDCt� LA TITIDE 43 =CALE i•=3W
210 LW-Akl%
i#7-7i� EXHIBIT 'r '+ rS>EV; iororamu
som i SHEEIr 4 OF 4
City of Meridian I Department Report
D. Preliminary Plat&Phasing Plan—REVISED
UJO
(((AajWj)j
_ pHVfll'NHIflIb3W _
33ayir,xaoe3flnLln g �
a� nN
°a Fl `w � � gw"wad
Z �ii i {III "® tj a❑DODO❑
Pg^�E�S'a o�S
smxB 9gFh Z o -
�a pep¢ ea aa� 0 0 s � s���
' `S
ca
�OLea --.-- SN E
LU
w o 5 sRaba
LL
V_L
OW
~ w:E
w
L� 0 0 0 i N
0 � ��° ag�gy� �
O Q Q'Ill N 3 ¢dY°s+s _ ¢ B55aaaaa�
C7 Q O aaa=aeeeri�`a
`L Z Z ❑
❑ N V 5 aff fr$fifi vifiF
W S 7
LLJ
mow/ OrOw
P � GG� �a�
j 2
QLU
o 2j
U)
9.1
a e s a'= ow' sog a %
e
a -aa�Y �a �S9 1111pli
r`S "�d Ys F¢�
WR
oo.a assa.
as ��
Mft
s
City of Meridian Department Report
UJON@|�I .mom mOHVUJ'\ \
!
«° :<
,
.
; \ (
] \
$ ;
u =
2 §
�
u «
\ : (
\
In
In
B (
( !.
/ j GW
§� _
§/
_ §
�
k � !
` $
LLJ
L11
��� m
� ��
\: _ E
.,
$
City of Meridian Department Rep ort
I
z
ill
110
aa$ El
Iz off "
El
�� r_ ❑ m
El.
i ❑ - I.
I
I r
4
I
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ f -
❑
1 s ❑ 1❑ Iv -
El
r �y
I J ❑ e
I I
0
° o o000000000000�'
❑❑
❑ °° ° a 11 � � � � ' Y 4 aR m � � � °z
I i ❑,1 S � _ � � € � g� � � m m m
D I ❑ � a o � A Q B � � � " 9 r7i
I ,
o I � 4 g�4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Ll 1-1 El
r
s 9
F11-.
As
8 LATITUDE FORK THREE SUBDIVISION Kidep Horn
w EXISTING CONDITIONS
�lalw
g ruEro wi, MERIDIAN,IDAHO
Fo
City of Meridian I Department Report
^i
ypPz Bgk s
NCE ��6 �n• `—^ pyOp
Z�
R I
'�w' a "j sN '�ti _
I ..ice I I �� �,5
�I�
W o
ml
'vim
�7
W nr n�r --- ''
C PEG r. '
i
r
n
r ,
I � fil
TJ�a a�
L�
�TI}GEMRY AVE.
V�
_ d d
➢4
MATCHLINE SEE SHEE05
8
o Wn+wT�. w w.em LATITUDE FORTY THREE SUBDIVISION Kimlep>>Horn
PRELIMINARY PLAT „
MERIDIAN,IDAHO
rrurn:wn n..ta..
City of Meridian Department Report
FIVEMLECREEK
-----------
-----------
J
o-
R
I L
L
11
pa has
pax use
HIN NNW ,,
WNmm
TDE FORTY THREE SU�"' ISION KimleylMorn
PRELIMINARY PLAT'v
111 M rrU
!k
xueVp IAA MERIDIAN,IDAHO
City of Meridian Department Report
E. Common Driveway Exhibit
--------- ------------�
II 2 J—� CIO i-TATION� Hit• ,� �
Y I,'�AFIENTAnpN
rl
-
�I m s�
I `eon_ �3 •_I
ca
uj
z — olRl(MTAON � reu°7,.28
J
{--- -
f�
•
LU
LU
I. IJ
[ J <j
f .
LL
z' -------
r I I oui
!! r l acre aac i I s � a z
I 1 ! NT4 TIpry �-- m F-
I
0
3WpN !Jlrr NO'l1Vi k3,� �,.� ILL �� — I'I I Sim
iw L Q
City of Meridian Department Report
F. Landscape Plan& Fencing Plan(dated: 3/12/2025)—REVISED
� L1
dpg e �
[� 4 I 1 j
137
s _ 1
$ s - I m
r _
-
I� :.
91 Nil
E °
x
--------------
i xy,
�-�
...
...3
I
LATITUDE FORTY THREESUB13-1— Kimley*Horn
RALL LANDSCAPE
o VE PLAN COLD
MERIDIAN,IDAHO M
xarm�w.
City of Meridian Department Report
e m
_
�' w �� —I
I CD
1 AM
9 � � n _ 1
of m
-u
. z
� rC
3 C C S 6 C € 6 6
h I z z
'.mR.,. O
O
m x
;O�m D
6 I � 0� + 7M
� � � ; � R � I � r I no OM
�.. I m an
cn a ll9 M n
y e I 3 ® 11 I Q O D C
m
m 0m
D I ; r <
z � i zO
- - - - - - - - - - - - - a Z
1.11B It
Mill 14
vq. Jig
s W�� LATITUDE FORTY THREE Si18DNI51DN Kimley*Horn
E n z� w�Iwnr OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN
MERMAN. O
City of Meridian Department Report
4 S
—._.. __------ e.' r
6 1
r I
f
�o
adz --------- r
o f e Do
-------------
L wr
I �
� g N
c
... ..
�I
az
,
V
J*
MATCHL INE SEE SHEET 0
LATR GOEFa RTY THREE$J6)NISIQN
LANDSCAPE PLAN
K., imiey» Horn
ME RID W N,I�AHO
weFlw.wn r�xnv-
City of Meridian Department Report
jj-&&,k
Stzp3r
3�¢i9s
>z
kl`` ' MATCH L I NE SEE SHEET 02 1
11
B nA
JmNI
`N E.EouATCH oF,
Tt
1
~ !:9 2
1
1
1
I
I t
v Ll
�
R
N
101000001
9
� 6
W �g
fl
Kimsey>>>Horn
'a.,'•r LATITUDE FORTY THREE SUHUNI510N
LANDSCAPE PLAN
MERIDIAN,IUAHO
acucla w
City of Meridian Department Report
IJ cvlEW
E.MAGJ
` ae.
aIRS I _ —
1
f4Bll q /
f�
fi I I
I
r
_ I I
1
I �.• 1
y I I 141
' I 1
I T 1I
1
I
I 1
I jiii `s I
r' 1
O I I �'Ipy
Y.!
I
I 1
WELLSOR.
s
LATITUDE FORTY THREE SUBDIVISION Kiy>>>Horn
v x In A FENCE LAYOUT mle
q j MERIDIAN.IDAHO w�
rw�w:w
City of Meridian Department Report
G. Open Space& Site Amenity Exhibit-REVISED
6
°.�, I
; r: DODO 0 P 9
_
IMP
W= kid
Ij z
1
a j h
b r,
—7\
a$ f'
jc¢euinv w.
Ap
D� N
1 N
�^
II L7, .
h �
WELT c Gi R.
p LATITUDE FORTY THREE SUBDIVISION Kimley»>Horn
OPEN SPACE PLAN
_ s MEROAN,IDAHO
City of Meridian Department Report
H. Conceptual Building Elevations
Phase 1 -REVISED
JA
+-
City of Meridian Department Report
Phase Ii:
24-foot-wide product for lots in Phase 2 (optional garage width does not apply):
J
GENERAL NOTES '
vxeEnvseweEwnmwwn i ii 3°`a§FE F
swffuu�neu�.reieFina� /-
BOILOING AREAS ® eTja
8 _
o 0 o e- --
®®®[ME®® - -
FRIXJT ELEVATION('B"CRAFfGMAN) E
LEFTELEVATION VH-CEiAF fSMANI
A4 00
SfF ,
SF$ I
-.µ.«EvnnoN ra�rsrwN�
i
-v -________-___-
EJ
--------
RIGTf ELEVATION�'9'CRAFISNVW�
— A4.O1
City of Meridian Department Report
GENERAL NOTES a i�Ea
xou�xmsaswee.os}m WasE 1
u�xeEreoeEmvau�rre,:mcx ��� a f';
DUILDINGAREASKE
6}iyf,
p
)
--- -- -----
--- -
FRONT ELEVATION("D"MODERN FARMHOUSE)
,wA
now
off. l 4
LEFT ELEVATION("D"MODERN FARMHOUSE)
�e Aa.10
Ala_
qqF
� 1
i �
=- a
3
t �
"--`—` - - ` - _-- _-------- -----------Aw
c
a 4
REAR ELEVATION C'D"MODERN FARMHOUSE)
L-.
A--------------
w
rr. Ili �a
T� C7 z
Om
--- n o
RIGHT ELEVATION("D"MODERN FARMHOUSE)
A4.11
City of Meridian Department Report
GENERAL NOTES
BUILDING AREAS
------------------
- ------------
FRONT ELEVATION(-F'PACIFIC NORTHWEST MODERN)
L
A
-------------------
0 z
0
U L6
0>
-------- CA
LEFT,ELEVATICIN ff-PACIFIC NORTHWEST MODERN)
MEa
IN
"H'Il
BIB
---------------------------
71
14f ---------ni- ------ -----------REAR ELEVATION('F'PACIFIC NORTHWEST MODERN)
L
A
PTL z
L)g
0>
F-IWO
it
7:
RIGHT ELEVATION(-F-PACIFIC NORTHWEST MODERN)
A4 21
City of Meridian Department Report
GENERAL NOTES Cob�Ee
BUILDING AREAS
..vmec msso- d
® - -_-------------
-
mo 9
e q
5 +�
FRONT ELEVATION'G"(SLEEK CONTEMPORARY)
L
A�
w
co o
0
D`z
a
nod
-----------------
I I mymn
LEFT ELEVATION-G"(SLEEK CONTEMPORARY)
W.„ A4.40
aga��8
all
l��p�•
IE
. a f
REAR ELEVATION'G'(SLEEK CONTEMPORARY)
L
A
v N�
o Z,Z
�I L)Ln
.�.a...�..,,.,. o
aF�
RIGHT ELEVATION'G'(SLEEK CONTEMPORARY)
City of Meridian Department Report
GENERAL NOTES
BUILDING AREAS r�gIIB
T------------ —
m
L
FRONT ELEVATION"N"(MODERN) A
W
VJ M
022
Q
7 O
Y1 —�_s-ems r IAA
II
LEFT ELEVATION"H"(MODERN)
� 'w A4.5Q
a4c1�1
8
REAR ELEVATION"H"(MODERN)
L
A
-- [A p
Z4Z
Pra ..........".�.., O
N O
RIGHT ELEVATION (MODEM)
A4.51
City of Meridian Department Report
I. Fivemile Creek Cross-Section& Photo
k• li yy S Al is B:
8
• �- tlQ xDltlls63 3 i
—_. —.— .......
� I
� I I I I dydy
- L .:L_.�- -.
+ - 4y .
it ......
1 � IIII
i,• � xNw
10
�1 1
LL
a I/
City of Meridian Department Report
y. •:r
1
6= '�.
r
A
�..!' ' al it %``P t'y"eh`C+�, 1`f.,o �I4� \ ��.•` ..
�. of
Development Application Transmittal
Link to Project Application: Latitude Forty Three Subdivision AZ, PP, PS H-2024-
0059
Hearing Date: March 6, 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: 208.888.44331Email: cit clerk meridiancit�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.
C i E IDIAN.;---
Agenda Item
Applicant Presentation
LATITUDE 43 SUBDIVISION Meridian, ID 83642675, 715, & 955 S. Wells St.Meridian, ID 83642675, 715, & 955 S. Wells St.CITY COUNCIL HEARING APRIL 7, 20260059-2024-H-PP-AZLATITUDE 43 SUBDIVISIONCITY
COUNCIL HEARING APRIL 7, 20260059-2024-H-PP-AZ
Revised Phase 2 Plan AT PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL HEARINGSSUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING ITEMS IDENTIFIED y.and ACHD is prohibited from authorizing the installation of bollards in this circumstance.
This memo was submitted to the Cit 2319-40 would violate Idaho Code Dr.ACHD indicated in a formal memo to the City that the installation of bollards or other restriction/obstruction
on Magic View –Limit Magic View Dr. to emergency access (ACHD) he City.o tthere are no planned projects in this are where we could assess a proportionate share contribution. This memo
was submitted tportionately challenging and -longer requiring a TIA for the project. They have identified that this area has constraints that make offvision proposal, ITD is no bdiITD
indicated that based on previous studies of the Eagle Rd./Highway 55 corridor, and a further review of the Latitude 43 Su–Traffic Impact Analysis (ITD) re Latitude 43 residents alike.utuinstalled
in the rear yards of homes as they are built, which will protect privacy of the existing Woodbridge neighbors and ftofor the homes along the west portion abutting Woodbridge Subdivision
will be in the Development Agreement and will be adhered. Setback language 15’setback line. Required rear setbacks of the adjacent Woodbridge Subdivision are 12’ the option of building
a covered patio up to the setback to the main body of the home but would like to retain 17’ builder of the project has provided information and plans that they are comfortable with
a minimum, as allowed by the zone. The 12’ ) that abuts the Woodbridge Subdivision will be 1 zoning area (Phase 8 -Rear setbacks within the proposed R–Setbacks line/fencing discrepancy.rtyalignment
issues will be resolved. The surveyor is gathering additional topographic information to fully understand the propes been surveyed, and any fence haneighbors, as there are a variety
of materials and conditions, and the fence may not be on the lot line. The overall propertycoordinated with affected beFencing within the development is proposed to be installed along
all perimeter lot lines. The existing fence to the west will–Fencing area.1 r the Phase founderstanding that after that meeting, the neighbors were more comfortable with the builder’s
proposed elevations/homes . It is our 1 Subdivision Phase 43 The builder (KB Homes) met with the neighbors of Woodbridge to discuss the homes they plan to build within the Latitude
–Meeting with Neighbors Builder .condition of approval, which would be submitted prior to the Development Agreement. We have included this in our presentationormalize that change as
a o fresidential lots fronting on Wells St. to be rear loaded. We think that revision improves the design, and we would be happy twere adjusted accordingly. Additionally, we received
a suggestion from staff at the end of last week to reorient the 2 and residential portions of Phase plan was adjusted to accommodate that alignment. The commercial 2 west collector
roadway, the Phase -r the eastfoBased on the City’s preferred alignment –Revised Phase 2 Plan y.and ACHD is prohibited from authorizing the installation of bollards in this circumstance.
This memo was submitted to the Cit 2319-40 would violate Idaho Code Dr.ACHD indicated in a formal memo to the City that the installation of bollards or other restriction/obstruction
on Magic View –Limit Magic View Dr. to emergency access (ACHD) he City.o tthere are no planned projects in this are where we could assess a proportionate share contribution. This memo
was submitted tportionately challenging and -longer requiring a TIA for the project. They have identified that this area has constraints that make offvision proposal, ITD is no bdiITD
indicated that based on previous studies of the Eagle Rd./Highway 55 corridor, and a further review of the Latitude 43 Su–Traffic Impact Analysis (ITD) re Latitude 43 residents alike.utuinstalled
in the rear yards of homes as they are built, which will protect privacy of the existing Woodbridge neighbors and ftofor the homes along the west portion abutting Woodbridge Subdivision
will be in the Development Agreement and will be adhered. Setback language 15’setback line. Required rear setbacks of the adjacent Woodbridge Subdivision are 12’ the option of building
a covered patio up to the setback to the main body of the home but would like to retain 17’ builder of the project has provided information and plans that they are comfortable with
a minimum, as allowed by the zone. The 12’ ) that abuts the Woodbridge Subdivision will be 1 zoning area (Phase 8 -Rear setbacks within the proposed R–Setbacks line/fencing discrepancy.rtyalignment
issues will be resolved. The surveyor is gathering additional topographic information to fully understand the propes been surveyed, and any fence haneighbors, as there are a variety
of materials and conditions, and the fence may not be on the lot line. The overall propertycoordinated with affected beFencing within the development is proposed to be installed along
all perimeter lot lines. The existing fence to the west will–Fencing area.1 r the Phase founderstanding that after that meeting, the neighbors were more comfortable with the builder’s
proposed elevations/homes . It is our 1 Subdivision Phase 43 The builder (KB Homes) met with the neighbors of Woodbridge to discuss the homes they plan to build within the Latitude
–Meeting with Neighbors Builder .condition of approval, which would be submitted prior to the Development Agreement. We have included this in our presentationormalize that change as
a o fresidential lots fronting on Wells St. to be rear loaded. We think that revision improves the design, and we would be happy twere adjusted accordingly. Additionally, we received
a suggestion from staff at the end of last week to reorient the 2 and residential portions of Phase plan was adjusted to accommodate that alignment. The commercial 2 west collector
roadway, the Phase -r the eastfoBased on the City’s preferred alignment –
PHASING PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT(PHASE 1)
PRELIMINARY PLAT(PHASE 2)
OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT
LANDSCAPE PLAN
IN AGREEMENT WITH THE TERMS AND 13. Agreed.-Condition 4Condition 3. Landscape Plan revisions will be completed and submitted with the future Final Plat application.Condition 2. Final
Plat revisions will be incorporated prior to submittal.Condition 1. Development Agreement will be prepared and submitted to the City of Meridian per the staff report.13. Agreed.-Condition
4Condition 3. Landscape Plan revisions will be completed and submitted with the future Final Plat application.Condition 2. Final Plat revisions will be incorporated prior to submittal.Condition
1. Development Agreement will be prepared and submitted to the City of Meridian per the staff report.AGENCY COMMENTSCONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND IN AGREEMENT WITH THE TERMS AND
AGENCY COMMENTSCONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT AND
WE IDIAN:---
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 26-2120: An Ordinance (Tong H-2025-0049) annexing land
located in the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 19, Township 3 North,
Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit; rezoning 0.496
acres of such real property from the R1 (Estate Residential) zoning district to the R-4 (Medium
Low-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area
maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the
zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies
of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the
Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing
conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date.
Ada County Recorder Trent Tripple 2026-024275
Boise,Idaho Pgs=4 vbailey 04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM
CITY OF MERIDIAN IDAHO$0.00
Electronically Recorded
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 26-21.20
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON
STRADER, TAYLOR,WHITLOCK
AN ORDINANCE (TONG — H-2025-0049) ANNEXING LAND LOCATED IN THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 19,
TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A"; REZONING 0.496 ACRES OF
SUCH REAL PROPERTY FROM THE RI (ESTATE RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT
TO THE R-4 (MEDIUM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT;
DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO ALTER ALL APPLICABLE USE AND AREA MAPS AS
WELL AS THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS AND ALL OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE
BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA
COUNTY TREASURER,THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER,AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX
COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Meridian received a written request from property owner Dara M.
Tong to annex and rezone the land described in the legal descriptions attached hereto as Exhibit "A"
and the map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" ("Subject Property"), which exhibits are incorporated
herein by reference;
WHEREAS,the Subject Property is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian,
Idaho;
WHEREAS, the City of Meridian is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-222 to annex the
Subject Property;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO:
SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby annexes the Subject
Property.
SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby rezones 0.496 acres of
such real property from the R1 (Estate Residential) zoning district to the R-4 (Medium Low-Density
Residential) zoning district.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—TONG H-2025-0049 Page I
Instrument # 2026-024275
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 2 of 4
SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all applicable use and area maps as
well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts
of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance.
SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance
and its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder,
and the Idaho State Tax Commission, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this
ordinance.
SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are
hereby repealed.
SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publication, in
accordance with law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO,this 7th
day of April, 2026.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 7th
day of April, 2026.
MAYOR RdBERT E. SIMISON
ATTEST:
CHRIS JO SON,. f CLERK
STATE OF IDAHO )
) ss:
County of Ada )
On this 7th day of April,2026,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally
appeared Robert E.Simison and Chris Johnson known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,respectively,of the City
of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed
the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first
above written.
Notary Public T"
CHARLENE WAY Commission Expirat' 3-28-2028
COMMISSION No. 67390
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF IDAHO
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—TONG H-2025-0049 Page 2
EXHI %�ment # 2026-024275
/ 2,04:37:30 PM Page 3 of 4
ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION
FOR
DARA TONG
A parcel located in the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 19 Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise
Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the northeasterly corner of said NE 1/4 of the
NW 1/4,from which a brass cap monument marking the northwesterly corner of said Section 19
bears S 89°43'29"W a distance of 2444.43 feet;
Thence S 89°43'29" W along the northerly boundary of said NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 a distance of
946.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing S 89`43'29" W a distance of 120.00 feet to a point;
Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0*1329" W a distance of 180.00 feet to a point;
Thence N 89°43'29" E a distance of 120.00 feet to a point;
Thence N 0°13'29" E a distance of 180.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
This parcel contains 21,600 square feet(0.496 acres).
LA
Prepared by: Kyle A. Koomler, PLS
Civil Survey Consultants, Incorporated
November 6, 2025
.AO
Irk-
Of
A 4 KO
E HI
SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY ANl �,12"MVorEpSMPTION FOR
DARA TONG LOCATED IN THE NE 114 OF THE NW 114
OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE I EAST,
BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
I3 18 E OVERLAND ROAD BASIS OF BE4R/NG — 114
S 89'43 29" W 2444.43'
24 71 g y 1378.43' 120.00' 946.00' PLS
PLS 5291
7729
O DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY
a INST. NO. 102140625
•PLS
THE MERIDIAN GREENS UNIT NO 18350
BLOCK 2
1
o DARA M TONG p
PARCEL S1 1 192 124 10 °o
485 E OVERLAND RD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642
3 W
� N
2 O p OUITCLAIM DEED p RECORD OF SURVEY
p INST. NO. 2016-040129 p = NO. 14354
PLS
•18350
N 89'4329' E 120.00' •PLS
18350
I,ECEND ;- �
FOUND BRASS V s
CAP MONUMENT
O FOUND 5/8" IRON P/N
ANNEXATION BOUNDARY .g�
— — — SECTION LINEA.` 'D' �`"
PROPERTY LINE
CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC.
0 15 30 60 2893 SOUTH MERIDIAN ROAD
MERIRIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208)888-4312
SCALE: 1"=30'
CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY :
William L. M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary
below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public .
6"1Q1 y_ , . ')"
William L. M. Nary, dity Attorney
SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 2&2120
An ordinance (Tong — H-2025 -0049) annexing land located in the northeast quarter of the northwest
quarter of Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as
depicted in the map exhibit; rezoning 0 .496 acres of such real property from the RI (Estate Residential)
zoning district to the R4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) zoning district; directing city staff to
alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting
the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance ,
providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County
Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law;
repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance is
available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho .
This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary.
[Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .]
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — TONG H-2025-0049 Page 3
VE IDIAN:---
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 26-2121: An Ordinance (Driftwood Townhomes H-2025-
0051) for rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section
36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted
in the map exhibit, rezoning 5.01 acres of land from the C-C (Community Business) zoning
district to the TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City
Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning
maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the
City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall
be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and
the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date.
Ada County Recorder Trent Tripple 2026-024276
Boise,Idaho Pgs=6 vbailey 04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM
CITY OF MERIDIAN IDAHO$0.00
Electronically Recorded
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 26-2121
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON,
STRADER, TAYLOR, WHITLOCK
AN ORDINANCE (DRIFTWOOD TOWNHOMES SUBDIVISION H-2025-0051) FOR
REZONE OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 36,TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH,RANGE 1 WEST,BOISE MERIDIAN,
MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT
"A," REZONING 5.01 ACRES OF LAND FROM THE C-C (COMMUNITY BUSINESS)
ZONING DISTRICT TO THE TN-R (TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL)
ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO
ALTER ALL APPLICABLE USE AND AREA MAPS AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAPS AND ALL APPLICABLE OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE
BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA
COUNTY TREASURER, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE
TAX COMMISSION,AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,
COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO:
SECTION 1. That the property described in the Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit
"A," which is incorporated herein by reference, is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian,
Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for rezoning by Alturas Ustick LLC,
the owners of said property.
SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby rezoned from the C-C
(Community Business) zoning district to the TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) zoning
district.
SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all applicable use and area maps as well
as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning
districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance.
SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance and
its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the
Idaho State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are
hereby repealed.
REZONE ORDINANCE—DRIFTWOOD ToWNHOMES SUBDIVISION H-2025-0051 PAGE 1
Instrument # 2026-024276
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 2 of 6
SECTION 6.That this Ordinance, once passed, shall be in full force and effect upon publication,
in accordance with law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 7th
day of April 2026.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO,this 7th day of
April , 2026.
MAYOR`ROB"T SIMISON
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNON, ChkLERK
STATE OF IDAHO, )
) ss:
County of Ada
On this 7th day of April 2026, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said State,personally appeared ROBERT E. SIMISON and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be
the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within
instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and
year first above written.
CHARLENE WAY
COMMISSION No. 67390
NOTARY PUBLIC Notary Public for Id
STATE OF IDAHO My Commis: 0- s 3-28-2028
REZONE ORDINANCE—DRIFTWOOD ToWNHOMES SUBDIVISION H-2025-0051 PAGE 2
EXHIMttlWent # 2026-024276
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 3 of 6
I DA H O 9939 W Emerald St
Boise, ID 83704
SURVEY
GROUP EXHIBIT A Phone: (208) 846-8570
Driftwood Townhomes
TN-R Rezone
Boundary Description
Project Number 25-018 October 7, 2025
A parcel of land situated in the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section
36,Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian,Ada County,
Idaho, and being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the south quarter-section corner of Section 36,Township 4 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian;
Thence N00°27'20"E, 351.16 feet along the east line of the southeast quarter of the
southwest quarter to the POINT OF BEGINNING:
Thence N89032'54"W, 107.47 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1 of Block
1 of Driftwood Subdivision (Book 130 of Plats at Pages 21530 through 21534,
records of Ada County, Idaho) and the easterly extension thereof;
Thence N00'25'08"E, 4.00 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N89'32'54"W, 57.05 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence S00025'08"W, 4.00 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N89032'54"W, 209.59 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence 52.76 feet on a curve to the left, having a radius of 130.50 feet, a central
angle of 23009'58", a chord bearing of S78052'07"W, and a chord length of 52.41
feet, along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence S67017'07"W, 86.11 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence 28.10 feet on a curve to the right, having a radius of 69.50 feet, a central
angle of 23°09'58", a chord bearing of S78052'07"W, and a chord length of 27.91
feet, along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N89°32'54"W, 9.50 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N00°25'08"E, 3.00 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N89'32'54"W, 40.00 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1;
Thence N00`25'08"E, 36.50 feet along the southerly
boundary of Lot 1; '
o �.
1
3 34
Page 1 of 2 r � ,
�v J ,
Instrument # 2026-024276
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 4 of 6
I DAH O 9939 W Emerald St
Boise, ID 83704
SURVEY
Phone: (208) 846-8570
GROUP
Driftwood Townhomes TN-R Rezone Boundary Description continued...
Thence N89032'54"W, 84.50 feet along the southerly boundary of Lot 1 to the
southwest corner of Lot 1;
Thence N00°25'08"E, 332.84 feet along the west boundary of Lot 1 to the
northwest corner of Lot 1;
Thence S88°47'16"E, 666.24 feet along the north boundary of Lot 1 and the
easterly extension thereof to the east line of the southeast quarter of the
southwest quarter;
Thence S00°27'20"W, 313.50 feet along the east line of the southeast quarter of
the southwest quarter to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above-described parcel contains 5.01 acres, more or less.
CL
j"
1
Page 2 of 2
CAA r S ��
EXHIBIT B
Instrument 2026-024276
04/07/2026 0 0 PM Page 5 of 6
1V Scole: 1"=100' C1/4 S.36
0 25 50 100 200 W.
ai
W.C.
0 i
Woodburn West m
Subdivision No. > I 1
m Woodburn Subdivision 29
\ 1
i
' I
z
S89°14'20"E 637.24'
00
I
— o —oo Block 1 000
Driftwood Subdivision
4.81 Acres
°o 1 0 r�
0 0 00 ai
� 0 0 I (0Q
Z U) I N W
W uB
O
_ C
Point of CD >
Beginning L4 L2 1 0 z
Al—
L11 0 C� L5 L3 L1 i o
C2
L9 L7
N: L8 1
Do_ I
N•
O: �
O I
1 Z: F
1334
;OF
z, + ygEL
N00'01'56'W
S.35 .36 : 48.01' W. Ustick Rd.--- T.4N., R. ) W.
- - - N - - - 1/4
_ _
S.36
S.2 S.1 1996.71' S89'09'46"E 2662.54' T.3N., R. > W. S.1
Basis of Bearings
P:\Driftwood Townhomes Replot 25-018\dwg\25-018 Pre Plot Exhibit DA MOD,dwq 11/4/2025 7:16:42 AM
IDAH®SURVEY j Exh�,iJbit "B" zs o1a
B939W EMERALD DrI1�W000 TOWn�Om�.S Sheet No.
BO8) 4-8570 704 DA MOD Preliminary Plat 1 of 2
r (208)846-8570
GROUP, LLC Situated in the SE1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 36, Dwg. Date
-0T.4N., R.1W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 10/7/2025
Instrument # 2026-024276
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 6 of 6
Line Table
Line Bearing Length
L1 N89'59'58"W 78.47'
L2 N00'01'56"W 4.00'
L3 N89'59'58"W 57.05'
L4 S00'01'56"E 4.00'
L5 N89'59'58"W 209.59'
L6 S66'50'04"W 86.11'
L7 N89'59'58"W 9.50'
L8 N00'01'56"W 3.00'
L9 N89'59'58"W 40.00'
L10 N00'01'56"W 36.50'
L11 N89'59'58"W 84.50'
Curve Table
Curve Length Radius Delta Chord Bearing Chord Length
C1 52.76' 130.50' 23'09'58" S78'25'03"W 52.41'
C2 28.10' 69.50' 23'09'58" S78'25'03"W 27.91'
1
OF
qEl S.6
P,\Driftwood Ta h—Repiot 25-018\dwg\25-018 Pre Plot Exhibit DA MOD.dwg 11/4/2025 7.16:57 AM
IDAHO e� gy Exhibit "B" {� 2s 01s
SURVEY 9939W EMERALD ST Driftwood lwood Town homes
BOISE,IDAHO83704 Sheet No.
IN (208) 46-8570 DA MOD Preliminary Plat 2 of 2
GROUP, LLC Situated in the SE1/4 of the SW1/4 of Section 36, Dwg. Date
T.4N., R.1W., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 10/7/2025
CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY .
William L. M . Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary
below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public .
J W /. j . J
William L. Nary, City Attorney
SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO . 26 -2121
An Ordinance (Driftwood Townhomes 11-2025 -0051 ) for rezone of land located in the southeast quarter
of the southwest quarter of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho , as depicted in the map exhibit, rezoning 5 . 01 acres of land from the C -C (Community
Business) zoning district to the TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) zoning district in the
Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official
zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City
of Meridian in accordance with this ordinances providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with
the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance is available
for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance
shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary.
[Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .]
REZONE ORDINANCE - DRIFTWOOD TOWNHOMES SUBDIVISION H=2025=005I PAGE 3
E NDIAN,----
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 26-2122: An Ordinance (Farrington Heights H-2025-0016) for
rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township
3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the
map exhibit, rezoning 2.9 acres of land from the R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) zoning
district to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district in the Meridian City Code;
directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps
and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of
Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be
filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and
the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date.
Ada County Recorder Trent Tripple 2026-024277
Boise,Idaho Pgs=8 vbailey 04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM
CITY OF MERIDIAN IDAHO$0.00
Electronically Recorded
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 26-2122
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: CAVENER, LITTLE ROBERTS, OVERTON,
STRADER, TAYLOR, WHITLOCK
AN ORDINANCE (FARRINGTON HEIGHTS H-2025-0016) FOR REZONE OF LAND
LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, CITY OF
MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT
"A," REZONING 2.9 ACRES OF LAND FROM THE R-4 (MEDIUM LOW-DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE R-15 (MEDIUM HIGH-DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; DIRECTING
CITY STAFF TO ALTER ALL APPLICABLE USE AND AREA MAPS AS WELL AS THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS AND ALL APPLICABLE OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE
BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA
COUNTY TREASURER, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE
TAX COMMISSION,AS REQUIRED BY LAW;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,
COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO:
SECTION 1. That the property described in the Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit
"A," which is incorporated herein by reference, is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian,
Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for rezoning by Cecyle D. Brock and
The Estate of Kirk A. Brock, the owner of said property.
SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby rezoned from R-4(Medium Low-
Density Residential) zoning district to the R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district.
SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all applicable use and area maps as well
as the official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning
districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance.
SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance and
its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the
Idaho State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are
hereby repealed.
REZONE,ORDINANCE-FARRINGTON HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION H-2025-0016 PAGE l
Instrument # 2026-024277
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 2 of 8
SECTION 6.That this Ordinance, once passed, shall be in full force and effect upon publication,
in accordance with law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 7th
day of April, 2026.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO,this 7th day of
April, 2026.
MAYOR RO"E E. SIMISON
ATTEST:
Kai
CHRKjOH ON, &TYeLERK
STATE OF IDAHO,
) SS:
County of Ada
On this7th day of April, 2026, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally
appeared ROBERT E.SIMISON and CHRIS JOHNSON known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk,respectively,of the
City of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed
the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official sea] the day and year first above
written.
N &ycWM
Notary Public for Ida 3-28-2028
CHARLENE WAY My Commissi, ti �
COMMISSION No. 67390
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF IDAHO
REZONE ORDINANCE—FARRINGTON HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION H-2025-0016 PAGE 2
EXHItment # 2026-024277
7ru26 04:37:30 PM Page 3 of 8
I DAH O 9939 W Emerald St
URVEY Boise, ID 83704
GROUP Phone: (208) 846-8570
Fax: (208) 884-5399
Exhibit "A"
R-4 Rezone Description
For
1100, 1130 & 1180 East Pine Avenue
City of Meridian, Idaho
The following Describes a Parcel of Land being Portions of 1100, 1130 and 1180 East
Pine Avenue in the City of Meridian, Idaho, County Tax Parcel No's R2039261213,
R2039261211 & R2039261302 lying in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho and being more Particularly Described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Southeast Corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 (East
1/4 Corner) of Section 7, Township 2 North, Range 2 West, Boise Meridian; From
which, the Southwest Corner of the Northeast 1/4 (Center 1/4 Corner) of said
Section 7 bears, South 89°07'04" West, 2,647.61 feet; Thence along the Southerly
Boundary Line of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 7, South
89007'04" West, 674.37 feet to the Centerline Intersection of North Aikins Avenue,
the POINT OF BEGINNING:
Thence Continuing along the Southerly Boundary Line of the Southeast 1/4 of the
Northeast 1/4 of said Section 7, South 89°07'04" West, 334.68 feet to the
Prolongation of the Westerly Boundary Line of County Tax Parcel No
R2039261213;
Thence leaving said Southerly Boundary Line, and along with the Westerly Boundary
Line of County Tax Parcel No's R2039261213, and its Prolongation, North
00°02'59" East, 303.13 feet;
Thence leaving said Westerly Boundary Line, and its Prolongation, South 89057'21" East,
334.55 feet to the Centerline of North Aikins Avenue;
Thence along the Centerline of North Aikins Avenue, South 00"02'01" West, 297.72 feet
to the POINT OF BEGINNING:
The above Described Parcel of Land Contains 2.31 acres, more or less.
8251
Of 14 loot
Page I of 1 ~-
EXHI4j f r, en '# 2026-024277
/ 7 26 04:37:30 PM Page 4 of 8
' lDAHO 9939 W Emerald St
Boise, ID 83704
t SURVEY
° Phone: (208) 846-8570
,r. GROUP Fax: (208) 884-5399
Exhibit "A"
R-15 Rezone Description
For
1100, 1130 & 1180 East Pine Avenue
City of Meridian, Idaho
The following Describes a Parcel of Land being Portions of 1100, 1130 and 1180 East
Pine Avenue in the City of Meridian, Idaho, County Tax Parcel No's R2039261213,
R2039261211 & R2039261302 lying in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho and being more Particularly Described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Southeast Corner of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 (East
1/4 Corner) of Section 7, Township 2 North, Range 2 West, Boise Meridian; From
which, the Southwest Corner of the Northeast 1/4 (Center 1/4 Corner) of said
Section 7 bears, South 89°07'04" West, 2,647.61 feet; Thence along the Southerly
Boundary Line of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section 7, South
89°07'04" West, 674.37 feet to the Centerline Intersection of North Aikins Avenue;
Thence leaving said Southerly Boundary Line, and along the Centerline of North
Aikins Avenue, North 00°02'01" East, 297.72 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING:
Thence leaving said Centerline, North 89°57'21" West, 334.55 feet to the Westerly
Boundary Line of County Tax Parcel No's R2039261213;
Thence along the Westerly Boundary Lines of County Tax Parcel No's R2039261213 &
R2039261211, North 00°02'59" East, 376.00 feet to the Northwest Corner of
County Tax Parcel No R2039261211;
Thence leaving said Westerly Boundary Lines, and along the Northerly Boundary Line of
County Tax Parcel No R2039261211, and its Prolongation, North 89°21'51" East,
334.47 feet to the Centerline of North Aikins Avenue;
Thence leaving said Northerly Boundary Line, and its Prolongation, and along the
Centerline of North Aikins Avenue, South 00°02'01" West, 379.97 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING:
The above Described Parcel of Land Contains 2.90 acres, more or less.
8251
Page 1 of I
FXHIRTT R
Instrume # 02 -0242
Legend r I
0 Found Bross Cap --0410-h2d2@00T,W. P1199ge 4F�- scale. ,00'
Zoning Designation Line
0 Found Aluminum Cap Right of Way Line 0 25 50 100 200
IL Calculated Point Lot/Parcel Line of Record
GPlatted Lot Number Section Line
elock I
,Danbury Foir Subdivision N,7
9k 72, Pq 7407 G Unplatted
(D N89*21'51"E 334.47'
-A 25
34
(D
-01 1130 E Pine Ave
Meridian, ID 0y
r'arcel No.R2039261221
2,707 Ac.
A
Ln
p P
0 10 .2
V) V CD
<
0
C;
OD-
'0
0
of 1
S89*57'21"E 334.55'
C
,Zone R 4 '
(D "o,
\3
vp
NL LA
N G
0
>
0
C:
82 qq 1120
T. < P
W I >
ZI I 2i 0
0 r. 0 0 0 0
Z 0 V) 0
H 1�'
W
Z
'20 20 10
0
Point of
-7' —j
Beginning 2�
Zone R_4 674.37' 7 8
CC 4 1638,55' E. Pine Ave
S 7
S89'07'04"W 334.68'
N89*07'04"E 2647.61-
Basis of Bearings
P:\1100 Ew Pine 24 293\dwg\R-4 Rezme.d*g 9/22/2025 1 29;37 PM
Exhibit B Job No.3 IDAHO " " 24—29
9939 W EMERALD ST R-4 Rezone for
BOISE IDAHO$3704 Sheet No.
SURVEY (208184&8570 1100, 1130 & 1180 Pine E. Avenue 1
GROUP, LLC Located in the SE 1/4 NE 1/4 of Section 7, Dwg. Date
T.3N, RAE, B.M, City of Meridian, Ado County, Idaho, 19/22/2025
Instrument # 2026-024277
04/07/2026 04:37:30 PM Page 6 of 8
s89"57'21"e
334.55
Of
n � n
rc
j M C
c
Os.
a
0
1i.
334.68
s89°07'04'W
Pine Avenue R-4 Rezone Description F9/22/2025
Scale: 1 inch= 43 feet File:
Tract 1:2.3076 Acres(100520 Sq. Feet),Closure:n00.0000e 0.00 ft. (11559443),Perimeter=1270 ft.
01 s89.0704w 334.68
02 n00.0259e 303.13
03 s89.5721e 334.55
04 s00.0201w 297.72
EXHIR11 R
InsWume # 02�-002
Legend 2620 Vr M R 4� ��
0 Found Brass Capes IbT .1 g!2 Scal�IOU
Zoning Designation Line , 1�=�
0 Found Aluminum Cap Right—of—Way Line 0 25 50 100 200
A Calculated Point Lot/Parcel Line of Record
(D Platted Lot Number Section Line
Block I
Danbury Fair Subdivision N..7
Sk 72, Pg 7407 24 I Unplatted
N89'2151"E 334.47'
b 11130 E Pine Ave
Meridian, fD
Parcel No R2039261221
2.7'07 Ac.G on I rq
w
0 ,Lo
0 0
10
a
K-4
a.
Z
a to
or'(D
*5 00 F-
00;6u-) 1
0
Point of M
to
ca'a
.Zone tv-10 Beginning
1
(D
0)
N89*57'21"W 334 55'Zone R-15
,Zone R-4 '
(D
610 no (D
.�'
0
NL LA rj C14'
(D el"
>
f4) C'4
912
rn
0 Ld hi
101- 2
825 0) C —vt(: .0
<
(D P
N P
U) 0
0 > 0
'1- 0 r- 0 e�o 0
0 I Z
H
20'20 1 0 0
Ct7�`+__
4 1638.55' — — — 674.37'
/�. S89*07'04"W 334.68' E. Pine Ave
N89*07'04"E 2647.61'
Basis of Bearings
P:\1100 East Pine 24-293\dwg\R-15 Rezone.dwq 9/22/2025 2:05:55 PM
Job No.
tat Exhibit "B" 24-293
9939 W.EMERALD ST R-15 Rezone for
BOISE,IDAHO 81704 Sheet No.
SURVEY (208)84"570 1100, 1130 & 1180 Pine E. Avenue 1
GROUP, LLC Located in the SE 1/4 NE 1/4 of Section 7, Dwg. Date
T.3N, RAE., B.M., City of Meridian, Ado County, Idaho. 19/22/2025
n89"21 rumenM6-024277
334. :30 PM Page 8 of 8
a �
r,
cp
� C
c
id' 6
9izy:s
82 9
0
334.55 .
n89°57'21"w
Pine Avenue R-15 Rezone Description 9/22/2025
Scale: 1 inch= 43 feet File:
Tract 1:2.9026 Acres(126435 Sq.Feet),Closure:n00.0000e 0.00 ft. (1/482903),Perimeter=1425 ft.
01 n89.5721w 334.55
02 n00.0259e 376
03 n89.2151e 334.47
04 s00.0201w 379.97
CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY .
William L. M . Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the summary
below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice to the public .
. J
William L . M . Nary, City Attorney
SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 2&2122
An Ordinance (Farrington Heights H-2025 -0016) for rezone of land located in the southeast quarter of
the northeast quarter of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho, as depicted in the map exhibit, rezoning 2 . 9 acres of land from the R4 (Medium
Low-Density Residential) zoning district to the R45 (Medium High-Density Residential) zoning district
in the Meridian City Code; directing city staff to alter all applicable use and area maps as well as the
official zoning maps and all applicable official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of
the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be
filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho
State Tax Commission, as required by law; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance
is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho .
This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary.
[Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B .]
REZONE ORDINANCE - FARRINGTON HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION 11-2025=0016 PAGE 3