The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-05-28 Special Meeting PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Thursday, May 28, 2026 at 6:30 PM SUMMARY MINUTES ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Commissioner Jessica Perreault Commissioner Matthew Sandoval Commissioner Matthew Stoll Commissioner Dom Gelsomino Commissioner Jared Smith ABSENT Chairperson Maria Lorcher ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] Approved Motion to approve made by Commissioner Gelsomino, Seconded by Commissioner Perreault. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino, Commissioner Smith 1. Approve Minutes of the May 21, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commision Meeting ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA \[Action Item\] ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Durango Subdivision (H-2025-0017) by KM Engineering, LLP, generally located off the northeast corner of the N. McDermott Rd. Bypass and W. Ustick Rd. Recommend Approval to City Council A. Request: Annexation of 37.08 acres of land with R-8 (29.53 acres) and L-O (7.55 acres) zoning. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 127 residential lots and 6 commercial building lots and 14 common lots on 35.88 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and L-O zoning districts. Motion to recommend approval to City Council made by Commissioner Gelsomino, Seconded by Commissioner Stoll. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino, Commissioner Smith 3. Public Hearing for Ustick Commercial (H-2025-0059 & H-2026-0007) by Hawkins Companies, located at 5900 W. Ustick Rd. Recommend Approval to City Council A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map designation on 4 acres of land from Medium Density Residential to Commercial (H- 2025-0059). B. Request: Annexation of 4.31 acres of land with a C-C zoning district. (H-2026-0007) C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) building lots on 4 acres of land in the C-C zoning district for McUstick Subdivision (H-2026-0007) Motion to recommend approval to City Council made by Commissioner Perreault, Seconded by Commissioner Stoll. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino, Commissioner Smith 4. Public Hearing for Starling Ridge Subdivision (H-2026-0009) by Rodney Evans and Partners, generally located 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. Continued to July 16, 2026 Applicant Request Continuance A. Request: Annexation of 61.34 acres of land with R-4 (25.62 acres) and R-8 (35.72 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 211 building lots and 26 common lots on 60.43 acres of land in the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. Motion to continue July 16, 2026 made by Commissioner Stoll, Seconded by Commissioner Perreault. Voting Yea: Commissioner Perreault, Commissioner Sandoval, Commissioner Stoll, Commissioner Gelsomino, Commissioner Smith ADJOURNMENT 8:22 p.m. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To view upcoming Public Hearing Notices, visit https://apps.meridiancity.org/phnotices --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting May 28, 2026. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of May 28, 2026, was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Jared Smith. Members Present: Commissioner Jared Smith, Commissioner Matthew Sandoval, Commissioner Jessica Perreault, Commissioner Dom Gelsomino and Commissioner Matthew Stoll. Members Absent: Commissioner Maria Lorcher. Others Present: Tina Lomeli, Kurt Starman, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE (Vacant) X Jessica Perrault X Matthew Sandoval X Matthew Stoll _X Dom Gelsomino X Jared Smith Maria Lorcher - Chairman Smith: All right. Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for May 28th, 2026. 1 would like to call the meeting to order. Commissioners are present tonight at City Hall and we are joined by staff from the City Attorney's Office, the City Clerk's Office and the City Planning Department. If you are on Zoom we can see you. You may observe, but you will be muted on screen and audio and -- on screen and in audio until the public testimony portion when we will, then, unmute you to comments. We cannot take questions before then. For a process question during the meeting e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as soon as they can. If you are only here to watch you can stream the meeting on the city's YouTube channel at meridiancity.org/live. With that let's begin with the roll call, Madam Clerk. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Smith: The first item is adoption of the agenda. There are no changes to tonight's agenda. But, please, note that Item No. 4, Starling Ridge Subdivision, will be open only for the purposes of a continuance. May I get a motion to adopt tonight's agenda? Gelsomino: So moved. Stoll: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 2 of 35 CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] 1. Approve Minutes of the May 21, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Smith: The next item is the Consent Agenda, which includes to approve the minutes of the May 21 st, 2026, Commission meeting. May I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Gelsomino: So moved. Perreault: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item] Smith: Let me quickly explain the public hearing process. We open each item individually beginning with the staff report, where staff explains how the application aligns with our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. The applicant, then, has 15 minutes to present and respond to staff comments. Next we will open public testimony. Each person is allowed to speak only once. The clerk will call one at a time the names of those who signed up in advance on our website. You may come to the microphone in Chambers or you will be unmuted on Zoom. State your name and address for the record and you will have three minutes. If you sent pictures or a presentation in advance the clerk will display it. If you have been designated to speak for a larger group, such as an HOA, you will have up to ten minutes. After everyone who has signed up has spoken we will invite anyone else who wishes to testify to be recognized. Come forward in Chambers or press raise hand on Zoom or if you are on the phone press star nine and wait for your name. If you are on multiple devices, please, mute the extras, so we can avoid feedback and can hear you clearly. When you finish, if Commissioners have no questions, you will return to your seat or be muted and you will not be called on again. After all testimony the applicant will have another ten minutes to respond. We will, then, close the public hearing and the Commissioners will discuss and make their decisions or recommendations to City Council as needed. ACTION ITEMS 2. Public Hearing for Durango Subdivision (H-2025-0017) by KM Engineering, LLP, generally located off the northeast corner of the N. McDermott Rd. Bypass and W. Ustick Rd. F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 3 of 35 A. Request: Annexation of 37.08 acres of land with R-8 (29.53 acres) and L-O (7.55 acres) zoning. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 127 residential lots and 6 commercial building lots and 14 common lots on 35.88 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and L-O zoning districts. Smith: With that we will get started on Item No. 2, File H-2025-0001, Durango Subdivision, for annexation and preliminary plat. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The first application before you tonight is a request for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat. Excuse me. I need to share my presentation. Just a moment. All right. Let's try that again. This site consists of 35.88 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 5630 West Ustick Road, which is off the northeast corner of Ustick Road and McDermott Road bypass. There has been no other previous development applications on this site. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation is medium density residential, which calls for three to eight residential units per acre and office. You can see that on the map here on the -- on the left-hand side here. The applicant is requesting annexation of 37.08 acres of land with R-8 zoning, which is 29.53 acres of the site and L-O zoning, which is 7.55 acres of the site for the development of 127 single family residential detached homes at a gross density of 4.48 units per acre, six office buildings and associated common open space areas. A conceptual development plan was submitted as shown that depicts the residential development and anticipated site layout for the office portion of the development along the frontage adjacent to Ustick Road, consisting of approximately 51,255 square feet of office uses. Excuse me. I'm on the wrong one there. This is the concept plan. The Comprehensive Plan states future land use map designations are not parcel specific and that an adjacent abutting designation when appropriate and approved as part of a public hearing with a land development application may be used, but may not be applicable to more than 50 percent of the land being developed. The applicant is proposing to extend the office designation at the southeast corner of the site further to the west along the frontage of Ustick for an additional approximate 3.24 acres or 16 percent of the development area. Staff is supportive of this request as approximately half an acre of the site designated office is encompassed by the Sky Pilot Drain easement. That is this area right here. And cannot be developed and an additional 1.7 acres of office designated land to the east will not develop as such with Spring Day Subdivision, due to the location of the collector street and the remaining area not being large enough to develop with office uses and that is this area right here that I was referencing. The proposed density, housing types and office use is consistent with the medium density residential and the office future land use map designations for this property. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown consisting of 127 residential building lots, six commercial building lots and 14 common lots on 35.87 acres of land. A minimum lot size of 5,547 square feet is proposed with a maximum lot size of 8,008 -- excuse me -- 687 square feet and an average lot size of 5,864 square feet. The plat is proposed to develop in three final plat phases as shown on the -- the phasing lines are right here. This is the first phase and F Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 4 of 35 encompasses the residential and the office portion of the development. This is the second phase here and the third phase along the northern boundary. There is an existing home and accessory structures on this site that will be removed prior to development of the property. Access is proposed via West Ustick Road and North McDermott Road bypass. Cross-access is proposed to the adjacent properties to the west and east. Cross-access easements are required to be granted to these properties and internally within the L-O zoned lots. Direct lot access via Ustick Road is prohibited. Landscape street buffers are required along internal and adjacent streets in accord with UDC standards. A minimum of 15 percent or 4.4 acres of the residential area is required to consist of qualified open space. A total of 7.63 acres is provided, which is 25.41 percent of the site, exceeding the minimum standard by 3.23 acres. Site amenities are required totaling a minimum of six points, consisting of -- what's proposed consists of a dog waste station, open space commons and pathways for a total of 11 points. Although amenities exceed the minimum standard, staff is recommending an additional amenity. A covered shelter is provided in Lot 9, Block 3, for the open play areas as a provision of the development agreement associated with the annexation. The Eight Mile Lateral runs along the northern boundary of this site in a 50 foot wide easement and is proposed to remain open. The Sky Pilot Drain also runs through the site and is proposed to be rerouted and piped. The one hundred foot wide easement for the drain will provide a separation between residential and commercial land uses. Sewer service is not yet available to this property. A cooperative agreement exists between the city and the developer of Spring Day and Dayspring Subdivisions to the west -- to the east and south to extend the McDermott Trunk Line south down McDermott Road to Ustick Road and east to serve those subdivisions, which will also provide service to this site. Development is not allowed to commence until sewer service is readily available at the site. The development is subject to the Oaks Lift Station and West Ada School District reimbursement agreements. Water service exists in Ustick Road, which can provide service for up to 50 lots and beyond that a second water connection is required. Conceptual building elevations were submitted as shown that demonstrate the quality of development proposed in the residential and office portions of the development. Final design of the office buildings are required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. Written testimony has been received from Corey Thacker, the abutting property owner to the west and this -- he did submit comments on the original application that was submitted last year. So, just keep that in mind if you read that. Some things have changed since that time with the site layout. He had concerns pertaining to the proximity of his driveway access via Ustick Road to the McDermott Road bypass intersection. It's at 242 feet versus the 300 feet requirement. Water rights, eminent domain and desire for cross-access through the proposed subdivision to his property and just to reiterate cross-access is being provided to his property. Connor Lindstrom, KM Engineering, the applicant, submitted written testimony in agreement with the staff report, but requests a clarification to condition number 1-A to include the cross-access ingress-egress easements are required between all commercial lots in the subdivision. Right now it does not differentiate between residential and commercial. So, we definitely want to do that. Staff is in agreement with this clarification. Staff is recommending approval of the project with the requirement of a development agreement. Staff does have one Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 5 of 35 additional recommendation that wasn't included in the staff report and that's for the requirement of North Del Norte Avenue to be extended as a stub street to the outparcel at the southwest corner of the site for interconnectivity and that is this street right here. So, as I mentioned, Corey Thacker is the owner of the outparcel here and that is also the subject of the next application before you tonight, Ustick Commercial. Staff is all -- staff is finished with the presentation. If you have any questions I will be happy to respond. Smith: Are there any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward and can I have your name and address for the record. Lindstrom: Thank you, Commission. Connor Lindstrom with KM Engineering. Address is 5725 North Discovery Way, Boise. 83713. Here representing the property owner J&J Hess. Mark Hess is here on behalf of the LLC as well. Pull up the presentation. Awesome. And, then, do I just control it by clicking or -- Allen: Yes. Hit the arrows. Lindstrom: Okay. Thank you, Sonya. I think Sonya covered everything very well. This is Durango Subdivision. Our request is for annexation and zoning into the City of Meridian with a preliminary plat. As stated the portion that we are annexing is 37.8 acres, located here on Ustick and McDermott bypass. The actual subdivision itself will be 35.87 acres following right of way dedication and other adjustments. I will note the Sky Pilot Drain, as staff noted as well, does bisect the property in the southwest corner. If you can see my cursor here. Well, it's a little slow. Yep. Here is where the Sky Pilot Drain comes through and, then, goes west it provides a buffer currently between that hard corner parcel that Hawkins application is about and the subject property. We are proposing to pipe and reroute that drain, which I will go into a little more detail here in a second. We are proposing to have two zonings, one being R-8 for the single family residential portion of the development and, then, we have the L-O or limited office zoning. As you can see here the property is currently in the county, RUT zoning, but we are adjacent to Day Spring and Spring Day. I believe it's Spring Day to the east with the R-8 zoning, so we will be seamlessly integrating with that zoning as it moves west and, then, the L-O along the Ustick frontage, which will be a great transition into the commercial that's proposed by Hawkins to the southwest of the subject property. Here is the future land use map. Just kind of clarifying things. Again, the R-8 zoning is looking for a three to eight dwelling units per acre. We are proposing 4.48 dwelling units per acre for the residential R-8 zoning, so that will fall right within that -- that designation. We have 127 residential lots that will be within the development. Here is that preliminary plat layout and, then, I will go into the conceptual L-O building layout. We have those six office lots. Those would be limited office. So, any future uses on those specific lots would have to comply with the zoning designation and dimensional standards. We are providing here -- if I can see my cursor. There it is. Here on the east side we are providing a stub to the east, that outparcel there, just for future cross- access. We think that would be a great idea to have. We don't know the plans for that property, but it is within this L-O designation, so you could probably expect similar type Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 6 of 35 uses there. So, it would make sense to have some additional cross-access. We also have Day Spring Way there. You can see is the main entry into the site from Ustick. That aligns with Day Spring development to the south and their collector roadway. You will notice that we have Lot 1 there, it's the 32,000 square foot lot. That is for the hundred foot wide easement for the Sky Pilot Drain. It's Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. We work closely with them and ACHD to come to a solution as to how we are going to pipe this drain and the direction it's going to take through the development. It was clear that that still needed to be within a hundred foot wide easement, even though it will be piped, but we are able to provide grassy open space there and still have a pathway through it. They also allow for -- as it goes north and, then, heads west towards McDermott bypass we are allowed to have that service drive there to provide cross-access to the southwest corner parcel. They will also allow for shrubs, grass plantings, but just no trees within that -- that easement. We will also have access not just from the service drive to McDermott bypass, but also on Telluride Street there. We are providing an additional access, all of which have been accepted by the highway district. This is just a integration conceptual site plan that shows the McUstick commercial proposed by Hawkins and how it will integrate with Durango as we go from residential to commercial and into McUstick. In speaking with the property owner they are supportive of McUstick commercial subdivision plans and will, you know, be great neighbors as Hawkins looks to develop there. We have also been in coordination quite a bit with Toll Brothers. They are the ones that are developing Day Spring and Spring Day and have brought the sewer down and along Ustick Road there. We actually plan to -- well, we did submit this application for Durango last year. A long time ago. It's gone by fast, though, but we were told, you know, put things on pause until Toll got their approval and was able to sign that service -- or sewer agreement with the City of Meridian. So, we made sure to put things on hold, wait for that agreement to take place and, then, come back before you. So, that's why it's taken this long, but we have come to an agreement with Toll. The property owner has. They have actually signed off on a contract to stub into that sewer line for Durango Subdivision. Lots of coordination that's taken place. This slide just shows some of the landscape sections along both Ustick entryway corridor -- it is an entryway corridor, so there has to be some additional landscaping provided and we have the detached ten foot wide sidewalk with the park strip, as well as the Dry Creek -- creek bed, some trees, additional shrubs and, then, along McDermott another detached sidewalk with some plantings and, then, the cross- section here on the bottom is between McUstick Subdivision and the residential lots. If I go back here with my cursor. So, this is along the Sky Pilot Drain here. I'm sorry. That's what that cross-section shows. So, we are going to have quite a bit of open space here. As I said we can only do so much within Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District's easement, so we are providing some open space and, then, we have the pathway. There is going to be a privacy fence on the back of those residential lots, as well as some smaller shrubs. They can only be about six feet tall I think is what we came to an agreement with with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. Sonya already kind of went over this, but this is our -- really only our requested modification to the conditions that were provided in the staff report we received late last week. We just would like to make sure that commercial is outlined here is the -- the cross-access that we are trying to obtain between the commercial lots when it makes sense to have cross- 10 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 7 of 35 access from one residential lot to another. So, just a clarification. Going into the other condition that Sonya brought up tonight was talking about having a stub here or some sort of street coming south. We don't believe that that is necessary, just because we already have the Dayspring Way connection here going north from the commercial into the residential and, then, also along McDermott there is going to be an additional access here. So, we don't believe that that vehicular access there between the development is necessary. I think it would -- it would cause some more issues perhaps with neighbors driving right up against their property line. We do have that pedestrian connection and I believe that should be sufficient. And, then, the last slide just show what Sonya had already provided, some conceptual building elevations. So, overall I think that covers it. If you have any specific questions you would like to ask of me or of the property owner who is here, we are happy to answer. Thank you. Smith: Are there any questions for the applicant? Perreault: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Good evening. Lindstrom: Good evening. Perreault: Can you go over the -- the section that says future drive, whatever that little road is there on the south side of the drain. What's the plan for that? Lindstrom: Yeah. And, here, maybe if I go -- sorry. So, from Dayspring Way as you travel west you will see this is that service drive. This will be a drive that will provide access to not only these office lots, but will also provide access to the proposed commercial to the west that Hawkins is proposing. So, it will just act as an additional service access for those properties and that will be within phase one. We will have that stub to the commercial lots. Perreault: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: And that is intended to be used by the public or just by the commercial property owners or, you know, whoever is owning or renting those spaces? Lindstrom: It would be by the public. Yeah. Perreault: Is it going to be a full street or what's the street width? Lindstrom: Yeah. So, I'm sorry, I'm not -- remind me of your name, Commissioner -- 11 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 8 of 35 Perreault: Jessica Perreault. Lindstrom: Perreault. Thank you. So, this would be a -- it would be built more of a private road standard, you know, where we would ensure that we are meeting any requirements of the City of Meridian, but it's not going to be a normal local road, it would be more of a service drive that you would see within a commercial development. I'm trying to think of some off the top of my head, but -- Perreault: I understand. Lindstrom: Okay. Perreault: Thank you. Smith: Commissioners, any other questions? All right. Thank you. Lindstrom: Thank you. Smith: Madam Clerk, is there anyone signed up to testify? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. We have Greg Larson. Smith: And if I could just get your name and address for the record. Larson: Thank you. Yes. Greg Larson and my address is 95592 Willow Bridge Lane and that's Lakeview, Oregon. I am the property owner where you come out here onto the bypass straight out of Durango. I own the 13.5 acres across the street there and I'm working with KM Engineering right now and our goal will be to align with the City of Meridian on the future use of this as mixed use interchange, so it will be light commercial, flex space type, support for all these roofs you see going in here. We think it's important to -- to have this as -- as available service light commercial. So, I'm here on record I just want to make sure -- or state my concern for this access road coming out of Durango that we also have access onto the bypass road here and my concern being this 90 degree corner to the north and the proximity to that. We will be coming off of my property on the inside of that 90 degree corner and so I think there is some restrictions as to how close you can be to that and -- and, therefore, I'm here on record stating my concern for that and just noting the proximity to that 90 degree corner, making sure that we can have access straight across from that Durango access into this commercial. We think it's important, because there is no other access to our property, other than a private driveway to the west. So, as we develop this and get it submitted for annexation here in the near future, we are going to want that access onto the bypass directly across from Durango and -- and probably one to the north as well onto the bypass, so that we can have efficient access to that -- those commercial services in there. Thank you. Smith: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? 12 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 9 of 35 Larson: No questions? And as it's -- as it's presented here that -- that access into Durango could be moved south a little bit if needed and you would still maintain your distances to the -- the roads to the south there. So there is -- there is an option there if that corner was ever to be a problem. But I'm just hoping that that corner is not a problem. Smith: I guess one question for you is how far south does your property -- that is kind of -- you are working on at the moment extend? Larson: Sure. Get this mouse here. All right. I'm struggling with -- right -- I go to right there. It's a -- it's a -- I believe it's a nine -- is it the Nine Mile Lateral that goes through there? Okay. I go to the Nine Mile. Smith: Okay. Larson: Okay. Cool. Smith: Thank you. Any other questions, Commissioner? Okay. Thank you very much. Larson: Appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Smith: Madam Clerk? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. Shaun -- Shaun Wardle. Wardle: Commissioners, Shaun Wardle. 2239 East Greiner Street, Meridian, Idaho. Representing John and Cheryl Wardle, who own the parcel directly east here adjacent to the -- to the office commercial piece. So, applicant has already clarified for me my question, which was cross-access to that parcel through that and it sounds like they are going to perfect the cross-access -- access across the commercial with an easement and so we -- we agree to that and appreciate the access to that and I would stand for any questions. Smith: Commissioners have any questions? Wardle: Thank you. Smith: Question for staff? Is that -- does that need to be anything to ensure that in the staff report or is that adequate as -- okay. We are good? Okay. Parsons: It's in the staff report already, so -- Smith: Okay. Parsons: -- just with the clarifying remark that it's commercial lots, not all the lots, as applicant's requested. 13 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 10 of 35 Smith: Okay. Thank you. Madam Clerk, is there anyone else? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. No one else has signed up and no one online is raising their hand. Smith: Anyone else who would like to testify? If you would, please come forward and have your name and address for the record. Thacker: Corey Thacker. 5900 West Ustick. The other question that -- I just want to make sure that it's understood that like a year and some ago it may have come across who knows how it came across, but, basically, thanks to Sonya and staff I mean we got that cross-access. I have no objections to this particular issue other than if mine doesn't get done, so -- Smith: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? All right. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? All right. Would the applicant like to come back forward? Lindstrom: Thank you. I don't have much else to add, other than I think Mr. Larson's point about access to the McDermott bypass. We understand where he is coming from. I will just say that we worked with ACHD. They were -- they approved our access to the McDermott bypass. The 90 degree turn there that's the curve for McDermott bypass, was not a concern of theirs for our access, so that's all I will say. We haven't delved into much deeper other than that. But if there are concerns I'm sure we would be willing to work with ACHD and the neighbor as they come forward. Smith: Question for staff. I guess regarding this, I -- we don't have a crystal ball, but are there any concerns that immediately stand out regarding that ability for the neighbor to take access, whether at that location -- like at that spot directly across or further south? Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, not necessarily. I mean that can change from pre-plat to final plat, but the applicant is correct. If you recall McDermott bypass is still under the jurisdiction of ITD. They provide it -- they said they had no comments regarding this application, so they seem to be good with that. ACHD in their staff report has -- has indicated that as long as that intersection is 830 feet from -- from Ustick Road that they would approve it. So, the applicant is correct, there doesn't appear to be any issues with that. But, again, if the adjacent landowner and this owner want to work on a minor adjustment that's something they will work with either ITD, ACHD, and provide that with their final plat with a minor change. I don't -- don't want them to shift it too much, but somewhere -- because I -- I do agree with the gentleman saying that there is always -- there are site distance concerns when you get around those curves on roadways, so that -- that has been an issue in other applications that we have -- you have acted on in the past. While I have your attention, too, I just wanted to also ask the applicant -- and maybe pose a question to the Commission. You know, I don't want to -- to commingle the applications too much with the Ustick commercial in F14] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 11 of 35 this one, but you can see that they have been working pretty closely together to make sure that these -- these projects do integrate. In my discussions you can see here on the graphic that the Ustick commercial piece has a little more landscaping on the south side of the driveway than this office portion of the development. So, I wasn't sure if that's something that you guys -- I know that was something we discussed at the previous hearing for that project, but I know the applicant is working with this particular -- this same consultant, so I didn't know if that -- their plan was to do the same thing on the office portion. So, just would like to get some clarification maybe from -- from the applicant on that and decide -- like to get feedback from the Commission as to whether or not you want to make that a condition, too, to -- to provide some of that landscape treatment on the south side of the driveway. Thank you. Smith: I guess I will extend that question to you, if you could clarify that. Lindstrom: Yeah. Thank you. Thanks, Bill. Commission. Yeah. So, at -- at this time we -- we do not have a specific landscape plan here. If I go back -- this is a conceptual building layout and without really knowing what will develop on those lots it's hard for us to say, yes, we will put a specific landscape buffer that looks this way versus Hawkins, who has more of a detailed plan as to what those uses might be. So, that's why we are not showing anything at this point. It's going to take some time before those lots are sold off to end buyers who will, then, have to go through their own design review applications and make sure that they follow the landscape code at that time. So, generally we don't get into the details of showing landscaping internal to the -- the office lots at this time, but -- I hope that answers your question. Gelsomino: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioner Gelsomino. Gelsomino: Just --just a quick question of-- part of it's going to be directed to staff, part of it to the applicant's. Staff, do we have a picture that displays Lot 9, Block 3, where the proposed condition for the covered -- the common shelter will be? Okay. Perfect. Thank you. And for Connor, have we -- because I didn't see it. I don't believe I saw it in the report. So, just to confirm. Do we have any agreement on whether the condition for that common shelter is approved or -- or accepted as part of this discussion? Lindstrom: Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner. We did -- we saw that condition of approval and in speaking with the property owner we agree that that would be a great amenity to add to the development and we are in agreement with that condition. We do not have a specific detail or elevation as to what that shelter would look like, but we will make sure we work with staff to provide maybe some sort of rendering as to what that could look like moving forward. Gelsomino: Excellent. Thank you. Smith: Commissioner Perreault, you had a -- 15 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 12 of 35 Perreault: Yes, Mr. Vice-Chair. Thank you. So, the drain easement there directly east of the entrance, that hundred -- that's a hundred feet; correct? Is there any permitted use -- I understand that there can't be anything permanent, but is there any kind of recreational use or permitted use rather than just being a grassy area that would benefit the commercial section at all? Lindstrom: Yeah. That's a great question. We worked with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and kind of -- we asked the same question, what can we do with this land. It's -- it's difficult, because they say, you know, they need access to their easement to make any maintenance -- or to, you know, maintain the drain itself and they specifically said no structures. We are not really looking for people to be spending long amounts of time in that area. They were fine, though, with it being a grassy area and people are welcome to walk through it. We can even have a pathway across it and folks can recreate within it, but they didn't want to see any kind of -- like basketball hoops or, you know, courts of any kind, things like that. So, we did explore that option and they pretty much said grass, small shrubs, pathways, service drive, those were the options. Perreault: Are you planning on implementing anything? A pathway? Lindstrom: Yes. We do have -- as you can see there along Dayspring Way, that's a sidewalk, that's -- or a pathway along Dayspring Way and we will have a pathway that cuts across to the east going into the commercial. Those office lots there. So, you could walk west and get across to the other commercial and further down to McUstick Subdivision. So, there is some pedestrian connectivity through that -- that area, but that's -- that's all that we are showing at this time. Perreault: Okay. I just have kind of seen these sort of empty spaces not be taken great care of when it -- when no one really knows what they are for, you know. Lindstrom: Correct. Correct. Perreault: But visually the public is not going to understand that that's a drain easement. So, just curious kind of how that maintenance is going to look. Hopefully as an entrance to a commercial area I assume that there is some sort of association that will be managing that. Hopefully they will take that pretty seriously, but you never know. Lindstrom: Totally understand. Yes. And there will be an HOA with this development and they will have a maintenance agreement that they will have to maintain, you know, these open space areas, so -- and also to the irrigation district they require it to be maintained, because they need to have adequate access to that easement. So, hopefully, together that will keep it looking nice, because this is an entryway corridor as we understand along Ustick Road, so it is important that we have enhanced landscaping and it looks nice. So, I understand where you are coming from. Thank you. Smith: Commissioners? F16] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 13 of 35 Stoll: Mr. Vice-Chair? Smith: Commissioner Stoll. Stoll: Connor, on the extension of Del Norte south as a stub street, can you just reiterate your concerns and -- regarding that? Lindstrom: Yeah. Here, let me go -- thank you, Commissioner. Yes. So, if you can see here -- let me get the mouse again. It's kind of hard. There we go. So, we already have Dayspring Way as it goes north from Ustick through the commercial office lots. Sorry. This is not cooperating with me. But I will just speak. The Dayspring Way goes north from the commercial lots into the residential subdivision. We also have access into the residential subdivision from McDermott bypass. So, two entryways into that development. This being about a hundred -- and its 127 residential lots, which will also be stubbed to the east and to Spring Day. So, I always mix them up. Will provide a third access point. So, with that we think there is plenty of vehicular connectivity through this acreage and we will also have that service drive through the commercial lots into the proposed commercial at the hard corner. So, that's a significant amount of vehicular access options throughout the site. So, we think adding another point of access directly south there from Monte Vista where Del Norte goes south, would be cumbersome mostly for those neighbors. You can see they have a common drive -- driveway that's -- that's what that little flag is going south to get access to those lots. We think if we had that, as well as another access drive it creates more -- we are just going to have to mitigate more traffic coming through there and it could create some more -- I don't know, concerns with pedestrian crossing there as you see with the Sky Pilot Drain we have a pathway proposed across there. So, there is just more interaction with those houses that we don't think is really necessary. There is other ways to get throughout the development. Hopefully that answers your question. Stoll: Mr. Vice-Chair, ask staff a question. Smith: Yeah. Stoll: So, Sonya, can you walk me through why you all are recommending that we extend the stub? Allen: Yeah. Chairman, Commissioners, the UDC, you know, encourages interconnectivity, you know, between uses. Bill and I were just discussing and we are okay with retracting that recommendation for a stub street. Stoll: Okay. Allen: We agree with the applicant that that should be sufficient. Stoll: Okay. F17] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 14 of 35 Allen: Thank you. Smith: Question. Again not to commingle this and the following application. Does that imply also being okay with retracting that connectivity? Because I imagine you can't have that connectivity in the next application if you don't have the stub street to connect to? Allen: I'm not sure I understand your question. The -- the Ustick commercial property would have access via Dayspring through a cross-access easement -- Smith: Yeah. Allen: -- through the subject property. Smith: So, I think the -- again, not trying to mix this up too much, but I think it's item -- maybe one of the other considerations, that northern vehicular connection that the draft conditions of approval are asking for. That wouldn't be feasible without the stub street to connect to on this development agreement. So, is that -- am I reading that to say you -- Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, that is correct. Smith: Okay. Parsons: Both projects have been asked for you to consider whether or not additional connectivity is -- is going to be required. So, that's your purview. If you don't require them to stub the road to the -- the service drive, then, that condition, when we get to the next project, will be something we need to address with that application. Smith: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from the Commission? All right. Thank you very much. Lindstrom: Thank you. Smith: Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Stoll: Move to close the public hearing. Gelsomino: Seconded. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 18 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 15 of 35 Smith: I will go first on this. I think, yeah, there is just a couple questions here that I think we should probably discuss. Obviously there is that stub street. Seems like staff is okay with retracting that. That does carry that implication over to the McUstick application, but for this application on -- on its own I think that -- that staffs kind of retraction makes sense. I think there is -- it looks like there is adequate pedestrian -- and I actually think this -- not having that vehicular connection could kind of -- to the applicant's point, you know, cushion or ease the transition. It could keep that commercial and residential connectivity still active through Day Spring, but not so direct that it becomes kind of, you know, you are living right next to -- on top of the commercial kind of feeling. I think the only other question that I have is if the Commission wants to kind of require some additional landscaping on the south side of the trackway. I know the applicant -- doesn't seem like it's the intention to leave that fully bare, but it's more just a lack of clear visibility, but part -- part of me is wondering if there is interest in kind of having some requirement to have it continuous with the sort of landscaping that it is on the McUstick side or matching appropriately to just have -- you know, again, ease that transition to the residential. But beyond that I'm generally supportive of this. I don't see any major issues. Stoll: So, with -- Smith: Commissioner Stoll. Stoll: Sorry, Mr. Chair. Smith: Yes. Stoll: With the removal of the stub street I'm very comfortable with what staff has recommended. I think the question about the landscaping is really is it going to be coming back to us anyway to have that discussion when the commercial properties are coming forward or we can put the condition in there and just say future commercial development will have some sort of landscape -- -- appropriate landscaping to buffer the residential and commercial. I'm okay with either way. But I'm supportive of the project. Smith: Other Commissioners? Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Mr. Chair -- Mr. Vice-Chair. I'm in agreement regarding the stub street and not having that as a condition. As for the -- excuse me -- landscaping, I'm fine with -- with -- with what the applicant decides, as long as it's according to code. I mean I think it makes sense that on the corner that you have a different kind of buffering and feel there than in that section, you know, and farther east section of Ustick. My -- let me say this. My one thought about the stub street -- and let me go back to that -- is if there is any benefit to the Ustick commercial -- the future owners of those properties, is there any benefit to having that access where folks are coming off McDermott and just heading straight south into their four lots versus coming up Day Spring or winding around? I think it -- it -- I understand the -- the applicant's thoughts on that. I think, you know, they are ideally probably not wanting to run that over -- over the -- the drain area, F-19 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 16 of 35 even though it's going to be buried, but I kind of see it as having less -- you know, less traffic through the middle of the subdivision if they are able to just come in on McDermott and head straight south and, you know, that's not ideal for those three additional lot owners, but that's essentially -- it affects those three additional lots versus a driver coming off McDermott and, then, heading all the way down Telluride all the way down Day Spring and, then, heading back west again to get to those commercial lots. So, that's just my thought on that. It's not something that I, you know, would -- I'm going to encourage to have put back in as a condition, but something to -- for my fellow Commissioners to consider. Also not a condition per se, but I -- I would like to encourage the applicant to do something more interesting than just a covered area in the park space, even if it isn't a requirement. I know these are larger lots. I know a lot of -- a lot of people are just going to use their backyards, but it's been a good long time since we have been okay with there being just green space when we are out in an area of the city that doesn't have a lot of park access. So, just a recommendation there. Smith: Thank you. I think one thing that I do want to clarify, it's kind of obscured in this image by the landscaping and the lines, but their -- staff can clarify -- clarify. There is access in that future drive to McDermott; right? Again not to get -- that -- that will be an access point without having to go through -- Allen: Are you asking about right here? Smith: Yeah. Allen: Yes. Smith: Okay. Allen: That's what is proposed I should say. Smith: That should still be maintained I think, so they don't have to -- they don't have to go through the residential at all. If they come in off McDermott they can just come directly into that McUstick commercial without having to go around. Allen: Yeah. Mr. Chair. I might add that that applicant is not in favor of -- of having a street connection from the north. Smith: Okay. Allen: Thank you. Perreault: Mr. Vice-Chair. Am I permitted to ask questions to staff without an open application -- or without an open -- Smith: Yeah. I believe so. F20] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 17 of 35 Starman: Yeah. You may. Smith: Yeah. Perreault: Okay. Is -- would that entrance be permitted that close to the intersection? I don't know if -- if ACHD is involved in that -- or I guess maybe ITD is involved in that. I just assumed that that would not be permitted. Allen: I don't know how many feet it is. Again, that -- the bypass is owned by ITD currently. Bill, did ACHD comment on the proximity of the access here of the drive on the Ustick commercial property to the intersection; do you know? Again, that's not part of this application, so I'm not sure we should be discussing it right now, but we can certainly check on that and -- they did approve it? Parsons: Yes. Allen: Yes. ACHD did approve that access location. Smith: Any other commissioners? Commissioner Sandoval? Cool. All right. Would anyone like to make a motion? Gelsomino: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioner Gelsomino. Gelsomino: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File No. H-2025-0017 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 28th, 2026, with the following modifications -- or -- yeah. With the following modifications, basically the approval of the conditions. Am I correct? Smith: So, you would add any modifications to the staff report that you would want to -- Gelsomino: Oh. I apologize. So, as -- as presented. Smith: Okay. Starman: Mr. Vice-Chair, so just for clarification on the motion, does your motion include the insertion of that word commercial with that one -- that cross-access condition? Gelsomino: Yes. Thank you. Starman: Thank you. 21 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 18 of 35 Smith: And, then, Kurt, since it's not in the staff report if we are not -- if the intention is -- I don't know Commissioner Gelsomino's -- his intention. So, that would be worth clarifying. But if his intention is not to include the requirement of a stub street it would still be just as presented with that commercial. Starman: Correct. Yeah. Mr. Vice-Chairman, referred to the planning staff. I can't recall if that was condition or just a topic for discussion. Maybe you can clarify, Sonya. Allen: Yes. Mr. Chair, if I could clarify. Staffs recommended and the applicant's requested change to condition number one to include the cross-access ingress-egress easements are required between all commercial lots to specify commercial on that. Are you in agreement with that -- Gelsomino: Yes. Allen: -- if you could include that in your motion? Gelsomino: Yes. So, with the -- to include that the cross-access ingress-egress easements are required between all commercial lots in the subdivision. Allen: Thank you. Starman: And, Mr. Vice-Chair, just -- I'm not sure if -- I think I tracked your question. The other issue, Sonya, is -- do the conditions right now talk about that -- that stub road that we are not recommending any longer or was that just a topic for discussion? Allen: No. That was an added recommendation by staff that was not in the staff report, so there is nothing to correct on that. The record will reflect that you weren't in favor of that, so -- Starman: Mr. Vice-Chair, I think the motion has not been seconded yet, but the motion on the floor probably is sufficient as is. Stoll: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Smith: All right. Thank you. Starman: And, Mr. Vice-Chairman, can I ask you to pause for like one minute? I need to consult with Commissioner Sandoval just for a moment before you -- before you open the next hearing. F22] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 19 of 35 Smith: Okay. Starman: Thank you. Smith: We will take a couple minutes to break. (Brief pause.) Starman: Okay. Mr. Vice-Chair, thank you for the accommodation. So, just for the record I want to mention that I just consulted briefly with Commissioner Sandoval. The next hearing that you are going to open here shortly was -- originally was opened on May 7th and, then, was continued to this evening. Commissioner Sandoval was not -- not at that meeting, but he and I just consulted, he confirmed that he has reviewed the record and is prepared to participate and deliberate and vote, so he will be participating tonight. 3. Public Hearing for Ustick Commercial (H-2025-0059 & H-2026-0007) by Hawkins Companies, located at 5900 W. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map designation on 4 acres of land from Medium Density Residential to Commercial (H-2025-0059). B. Request: Annexation of 4.31 acres of land with a C-C zoning district. (H-2026-0007) C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four (4) building lots on 4 acres of land in the C-C zoning district for McUstick Subdivision (H- 2026-0007) Smith: Mr. Sandoval, is that adequate -- tracks? Okay. Cool. All right. Great. Well, then, the next item on the agenda is Item No. 3, File Nos. H-2025-0059 and H-2026- 0007, Ustick Commercial Comprehensive Plan amendment, annexation and preliminary plat. We will begin with the staff report. Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The last item on tonight's agenda is the continued item, Ustick Commercial/McUstick Subdivision. Just give you a quick recap of what's transpired since the May 7th hearing. So, I just reorient you. The site consists of approximately 4.31 acres of land, currently zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 5900 West Ustick Road. Current Comprehensive Plan map designation or FLUM designation is medium density residential and the applicant -- on May 7th we discussed that change from going from MDR to commercial. Along with that, the comp plan amendment, the applicant also submitted a concurrent annexation and preliminary plat application for your consideration. So, they are requesting C-C zoning and their plat consists of four commercial lots and here is their CPAM exhibit that was provided to you and shown to you on the 7th and here is the -- kind of their F23] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 20 of 35 adjacency to the Durango Subdivision that you saw tonight and acted on recently and here is the proposed concept plan that was, excuse me, shown to you on May 7th as well. At that hearing you did, again, condition -- or continue the item to direct staff to bring back some -- a memo with some conditions of approval for your consideration. As part of that, too, you also wanted to make sure that this project would be heard at the same hearing as the Durango Subdivision. That was something that was discussed at great length. So, excuse me, staff did have the -- one moment. Dry throat. I apologize for that. So, after the hearing staff did have the ability to meet with the applicant. I did inform you at that hearing that we did have some draft conditions of approval, met with the applicant, went through those draft conditions of approval, put that out in a memo to all of you for tonight's consideration this evening, but as part of that memo there were also some other topics that we wanted to discuss and get -- get your comments on. I think the chair did speak to the one about the northern connection point with the residential subdivision. Hearing on -- based on the action you did on that application staff would be amenable to you striking that condition from the staff report -- or from the memo and, then, DA provision two -- one thing that wasn't known at the May 7th hearing that did come to light when I met with the applicant was hours of operation. So, as we were working through those DA provisions one of those provisions were the hours of operations were going to be restricted between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., unless otherwise approved with a conditional use permit. Now, that provision in code applies when a project abuts a residential use or district. In this particular case the applicant -- this project does not abut a residential use or district currently. It's vacant ground around it and there is roadways. So, technically that provision -- the requirement for a conditional use permit is not required currently by code. So, if they were to get their annexation and zoning approved tonight -- or through the City Council, technically, they could operate a 24-hour use until that residential use -- or zoning came into play. So, the applicant did convey to me that a Lot 1, Block 1, which is this convenience store located on the concept plan, they would like that -- that potential operator would like the ability to -- to operate 24 hours a day currently and so I informed the applicant that I would bring that up with you this evening, because we didn't really have a chance to discuss it at the last hearing, because there were no conditions of approval. So, again, the code doesn't require them to get a conditional use permit at that time. So, therefore, you do have the purview to allow a 24-hour use as part of a DA and the Council does, too. So, if that's something you want to include or provide a recommendation on, that's what staff is asking you to do this evening if you are amenable to just one lot operating as a 24 -- 24 hour use. And, then, also in my discussions with the applicant we also talked about timing for construction. Typically the normal process is when you have a preliminary plat we would like the applicant to go through the final plat process, put in the infrastructure, build everything they need to do, record the plat, and, then develop the lots. Commercial is a little -- treated a little differently. I mean you don't necessarily -- you are not required to subdivide commercial property. They could move forward, annex this and not have to subdivide it and could build multiple buildings on it without doing that and still commence with development without a subdivision. So, the applicant is asking for the Commission's consideration to add a condition of approval to allow them to obtain one building permit prior to certificate of occupancy for the first structure on the site. We have done that historically, so it isn't F24] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 21 of 35 a new condition, but they would just ask you to weigh in on that topic as well. And, then, last -- at the last hearing we also spent quite a bit of time on the auto-oriented uses on the site, you know, that's -- that was one of the -- the reasons for staffs recommendation for denial of the CPAM was how it was going to integrate and work with the adjacent uses. So, the applicant provided you a new exhibit showing how they are going to buffer the commercial a little bit more -- the commercial portion. That's why you see this new exhibit here. That was also attached to the exhibit and, then, as part of that the applicant and I did discuss the number of drive-throughs on the site. So, you can see here currently on -- on the concept plan there are two drive-throughs and so as you are aware we recently changed our code to tier drive-throughs, so we have a tier one, tier two, tier three drive-throughs. So, if this truly is going to be neighborhood commercial, that's something within your purview that you can limit the number of drive- throughs as part of the annexation request or you can cap the -- the number -- what type of tier you want on -- on the drive-throughs on the project. So, that's something that -- that is part of your purview tonight. So, again, you have the conditions of approval. I don't have a slide or anything showing those, but you do have the memo. If those three items -- or four items you want to address as part of your motion tonight if you are leaning one way difference from staff's recommendation, then, I would encourage you to add those additional conditions of approval as well and with that I would stand for any questions you may have. Smith: I do have one question regarding condition two. Kind of hours of -- hours of operation. My question specifically around like noise, noise pollution and things like that. Every time that I have kind of been in at -- you know, at a gas station at, you know, 2:00 a.m. or whatever it's pretty quiet. I'm just curious does the city treat gas stations and C-stores differently regarding commercial? I guess does my perception -- my anecdote, does that track with kind of how the city tends to consider these regarding hours of operation and the noise impact of late night or early morning gas station C- store usage? Parsons: Commissioner, I think I'm following your -- so, currently the noise ordinance is 6:00 to 11:00, 1 believe, under the -- the -- I think the portion that the police department enforces is 6:00 to 11:00. But if there are instances like this where there are -- there is a 24 hour exception, then, they allow that to control, because there is -- the development agreement says they can have that. So, there is nothing in code -- so, if you do allow a 24-7 use I mean someone can still file a complaint and that can happen, but -- and the police can tell them to quiet down, but they are -- they are not treated any differently other than the fact that they are open more -- or longer -- beyond those hours that we would typically police either by the UDC or the -- the -- the PD -- Meridian Police Department itself. Smith: Okay. Cool. Commissioners, are there any other questions for staff? Perreault: Mr. Vice-Chair? Smith: Commissioner Perreault. 25 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 22 of 35 Perreault: So, Bill, I know you can't comment as to the end use, but I understand that the applicant is considering a drive-through coffee shop and a drive-through fast food facility. Are those both tier one? Are those -- Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, those -- any restaurant use with a drive-through would be a tier two. Perreault: Tier two. Parsons: Yes. Perreault: Okay. Parsons: And, then, depending on how many ordering windows, how many menu boards would be a more intense tier three use. But, yes, that would require -- those type of tier two uses would require conditional use regardless of its proximity to a residential use and would come before P&Z Commission. Perreault: Okay. And for the request regarding the building permit being issued for the site prior to the -- recording the plat, is that -- is that a -- do we need to add that as a condition if we are in agreement with that when we make a motion? Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yes, you would need to add that as a condition -- as a DA provision. Perreault: Thank you. Smith: Bill, just to clarify -- Parsons: Or a recommended DA provision I guess. Smith: So, you mentioned that the restaurant is tier two. The coffee shop, to my understanding, would also be tier two, is that -- Parsons: Both would be tier two. Correct. Smith: Great. Commissioners, other questions? All right. This is be -- it's prudent for the applicant to come back forward; right? Kurt? I know we are -- I'm just trying to remember where -- we are technically in the public hearing. Starman: So, we just received the staff presentation. Now is the opportunity for the applicant to present his application and, then, we will have public comment after that. Smith: Okay. Then name and address for the record. F26] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 23 of 35 Mansfield: Good evening, Commissioners. Thanks for having me back. My name is Ethan Mansfield with Hawkins Companies, 855 West Broad Street, Boise, Idaho. 83702. So, I will breeze through most of this. I have similar slides mainly for the benefit of Commissioner Sandoval, but he has already reviewed the record. I don't want to -- what is the thing about beating a dead horse? I don't want to beat a dead horse tonight. So, I will go quickly. I did want to just first just really say thanks to KM Engineering for really collaborating with us on this. I mean, as you know, they are our engineer, too, but I think they did a really really fantastic job working with both us and Mark Hess to create some synergies here. When we first looked at this we were really excited, because we saw this opportunity for cross-access and Mark was very very willing -- KM was very willing to like put that exhibit together, help us get coordinated. That was back in June and here we are now with I think a plan that's pretty cohesive. I also want to say thanks to Bill for kind of working through these conditions with us. We did some significant collaboration with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to allow us to provide their service drive within our service drive, so we don't have to do a bunch of roads within their easement. They are just willing to use our commercial service drive as their service drive for their canal. So, I think that's a really good use of space. Commissioner Perreault was talking about using space efficiently earlier. It's not recreation space necessarily in this case, but it is kind of a doubling up on multi-use of a, you know, service drive. Just to clarify, the McDermott bypass access into this commercial development is approved by both -- well, it's approved by ACHD pending the transfer from ITD to ACHD. We have been in touch with Kendra at ITD and she confirmed yet again that process typically takes three to four months and it's been about three weeks since we last spoke, so we are looking at about three months now. Hopefully that all goes as scheduled and that transfer can be completed without issue and that will happen well before we put shovels in the ground. Let's see. What else do I need to touch on here? Yeah. I mean it's just Durango coordination is -- is really critical here. As you can see, as Bill mentioned, we added the landscape buffer and we coordinated with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. We will talk more about that. I think we can skip over these slides, but, again, you know, this is why we are proposing it. We have seen a massive amount of public investment in auto centric development and that's why we are proposing auto oriented uses. You know, last time we talked a lot about impacts to the surrounding community. Again, you know, two-thirds of these trips to this development are going to be pass-by trips, which means they are on their way from somewhere to somewhere else and are just stopping at ours. Only a third are either diverted, which means they are going a block out of their way or actually only new trips. Impact fees. We talked about that. Our per acre impact is actually very much on par with a medium density residential development at -- at eight units per acre. So, you know, kind of to sum up that piece, any current or future residents within this box will travel for less time and less distance to access our commercial use than any other commercial use outside the box and there is not really any other commercial uses inside the box right now, so, you know, that's speaking to the pass-by nature of these -- of these uses and how they actually could reduce VMT, pollution, congestion, et cetera. So, just to talk a little bit about our -- the orientation of the single family uses, you know, there was some concern initially from staff that there is a negative impact of -- of the -- of the commercial uses to the residential uses to the north. I think that impact would be F27] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 24 of 35 -- no matter what -- no matter what this use is, much less than the impact of Ustick Road on residential uses immediately north of Ustick Road. So, that's why this commercial development makes a lot of sense here and, again, with the additional landscaping that's being proposed, as well as -- I think, you know, we are really supportive of having only the sidewalk extending north-south and I think we are all on board with, you know, it's a good thing to not have that additional roadway connecting Durango and this development and just keeping it pedestrian oriented allows for a much more comfortable pedestrian experience and more limited impact to any of the residential uses to the north. So, you know, we can talk a little bit more -- I would like to kind of talk about this in the context of the 24 hour use that we are proposing on the corner and, again, we are only asking for one of these uses to extend beyond the typical 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. hours and that would be the fuel station. You know, we have -- we have provided extra care to provide a significantly larger buffer than many of the other surrounding -- as you will see soon other surrounding developments to residential and, you know, I think to Commissioner Smith's point, you know, you are right, like when you are -- it's 2:00 a.m. at a convenience store, most people are just pulling in, getting gas, getting out of there. You know, you might go in for a -- for a pop or something. You know, when my wife and I go to a concert at the Ford Idaho Center Amphitheater we are driving back home, we very frequently pass -- we use Ustick and we go back on Ustick, sometimes it's 11:30 or midnight when the shows gets done and we have to get gas, so this is like, yeah, I would hate to not be able to stop and have to go another two miles, because sometimes we neglect to fill up our gas tank and it's, you know, kind of scary. So, this provides an opportunity for that sort of use and, again, it's important to understand all of these uses are still subject to the noise ordinance that's in code, not necessarily the UDC ordinance about hours of operation, but if there are loud noises coming from this gas station and it's outside the typical hours that the noise ordinance allows, absolutely there can be a violation of that. So, you know, between the buffering, the noise ordinance, I would really humbly request that you -- you approve a 24 hour use for just Lot 1, Block 1. Here is some more perspective on what we are proposing for the landscape buffer, you know, this is the same consultant KM Engineering. Their landscape team is great. You saw the right side of this diagram earlier and now you can see the left side of this diagram. You know, trees are -- as confirmed by Nampa-Irrigation District, not allowed within the easement, so what we have done is we have located these trees outside of the easement. We have some of the lower evergreen screening within the easement, but the trees themselves are located outside of that easement, so that will fly with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, which was a critical piece of making this all work. So, here is just some more -- how do the other buffers compare. You know, you have single family adjacent to the Jackson's car wash on Pine and Ten Mile. McMillan and Park Crossing Ave., 38 feet between the single family and the coffee user, 70 feet between single family and the Walmart on Fairview and Venture, you know, and a bunch more here, all, of course, less than our distance of 185 feet. So, it's not like an unprecedented thing. Many fast food users and fuel stations are open 24 hours. In fact, most fueling stations themselves like, you know, when you roll up and fill up your gas tank, those are all 24 hours. I have never seen one that's -- that's not anymore, because you just scan your card and like away you go. But, you know, there is one that's 60 feet from -- from a residential use. So, it's F28] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 25 of 35 not -- you know, I don't think we are asking for anything out of the ordinary here and we are taking especially deep care to ensure that it's buffered appropriately and there is enough space between them and the Sky Pilot Drain creates a drain -- Sky Pilot Drain creates a wonderful sense of separation and the pathway still allows for connectivity. So, it's kind of like the best of both worlds I think. So, this site really is well suited for this commercial use. So, kind of in summary, you know, this is a great spot to put this, both from an individual impact spot and for an overall community impact, because of the pass-by trips. You know, here is kind of the summary slide. Residential units adjacent to Ustick would be far more negatively impacted by noise, light and odor. If homes were developed on the subject site there would be negative impact to quality of life of future residents and, then, most of the traffic on this site would be pass-by trips. So, to Commissioner Smith's point again, at times when there is minimal traffic on Ustick, there is going to be even less traffic into the site; right? I mean like, you know, you are not stopping everyone on Ustick that goes into the site, it's -- it's a lot of traffic on Ustick at all hours of the day and, then, even fewer kind of use -- use of the site at all. So, you know, from a -- from an impact perspective this is actually probably better than houses going on the corner. So, you know, we have talked about this. Bill I think did a really great job of summarizing our perspective. I did create language to use if you choose to adopt this condition. Obviously feel free to modify, but I think this is the intent that we are looking for and I think it kind of protects both us, as well as the city and kind of gets a nice compromise. The future tenant of Lot 1, Block 1, shall be allowed to operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Business hours of operation of additional tenants shall be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., unless extended with a conditional use permit and as we have a -- a known user that wants to operate 24 hours a day, that's what we are asking for. The other users -- there is many who are interested and no leases have been signed, because we are waiting to get an entitlement here, so that bridge can be crossed at a later date if, in fact, there is any interest from those tenants to operate outside of these hours and we can assess those impacts at that time. This is some suggested condition language for the question Commissioner Perreault asked earlier about, you know, what do we need to add to allow it to be -- to allow the site to have site work and an associated single building permit issued prior to the recordation of the plat? This is how I would suggest that we incorporate those. I think it, again, hits everything we need and nothing additional that we don't. So, preparation of the site, including installation of drive aisles, utilities, parking fields, pedestrian walkways may occur prior to recording the final plat. So, again, that's just site work. And, then, condition ten, separate condition, up to one building permit may be issued prior to the recording of the final plat. We are not building the whole thing out, we are just asking for one. One thing we did want to talk about that we didn't really have a chance to talk with Bill about ahead of time -- and I apologize for this, Bill. But we, you know, while we are working to coordinate the timing on the Durango commercial and the McUstick commercial, we -- there is no guarantee that this drive aisle will be constructed at a certain time. I mean it -- it has absolutely considered within phase one of the Durango commercial plat, but if there is no users there, right, there is no real impetus to construct it and that's fine, we are not asking for anyone to construct it early, but what we are asking for is for a right-in, right-out -- a temporary right-in, right-out access to both the McUstick commercial and Durango commercial, right, shared on the property line until 29 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 26 of 35 such a time that Dayspring Road is completed from Ustick Road and connected to the McUstick Subdivision from the Durango commercial drive aisle. So, we are just simply looking for an ability to get from Ustick to the site without going through that intersection and we think this is actually beneficial to the public as a whole. We actually looked at this in the context of doing a permanent right-in, right-out. ACHD will not allow a permanent right-in, right-out. So, we are seeking a temporary one and if you look at the difference between a Table 16, which includes three accesses, one from Durango, one from McDermott and one from Ustick, it's actually significantly -- both the -- both the signalized -- so, when Ustick and Dayspring are signalized, both that scenario and without that signalization -- again, Ustick will always be signalized. So, we are looking at the speed on westbound Ustick Road in the p.m. It's significantly less delay in terms of travel time with a right-in, right-out access. So, that's where all those numbers mean in the p.m. peak when people are trying to go westbound on Ustick there is significantly less delay when you have that right-in, right-out. So, you know, if that's true in a permanent condition, it's obviously true in a temporary condition, probably even more so when the Durango access is not created yet. Everyone, then, goes through that intersection to access McDermott. So, for that reason we are simply asking for a temporary right-in, right-out access to Ustick until that Durango develops. And I'm done here and I think this one's removed already, so thank you very much and I look forward to a recommendation of approval to City Council of H-2025-0059, H-2026-07 with the updated DA conditions, 1-4, 1-5, nine, ten and the removal of condition two two from the memo and I'm happy to answer any questions, concerns, thoughts, ideas. Smith: I have one question before we kind of get into the -- the nitty gritty of some of this. One -- one concern I do have regarding noise past the 24 hour, I'm someone who has had to also fill up my tire -- my tire, you know, at 2:00 a.m., unfortunately. Where is that -- is there intended to be a compressed air station? I know some -- and you are not the owner, but if that were is there any intention for that to be -- like any idea where that would go in the application? Mansfield: Vice-President Smith, that is a fantastic question. I have not -- we have not gotten into the site design of this particular fuel user. I do assume -- I'm going to look at my pal Bronson here. He might know a little bit more about the user's operations, but maybe not. I'm assuming there will be compressed air and -- and I would also assume that we could be a little bit sensitive to the concerns of noise and could locate that in a way that minimizes noise for surrounding users. What's that? Oh, yeah. Smith: Would that be on the southern side? Mansfield: Yeah. We could put in on the south side of the building. Yeah. Smith: Okay. Thank you. Commissioners? Perreault: Vice-Chair? Smith: Commissioner Perreault. 30 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 27 of 35 Perreault: So, walk me through that -- we will call it a drive aisle from McDermott. A driver is heading north and they make a right turn into that. There is no right turn lane. So, are we stopping -- you know, at this point ACHD is saying they are not widening McDermott Road past three lanes for a significant amount of time. So, is -- is that stopping all traffic there as somebody is waiting to turn right -- hopefully not a long wait turning right. Turning left, however, if -- if they are coming out of there and they are turning left are we creating issues with the property directly to the west? That gentleman came and spoke that, you know, there might be some problems with them having to put the entrance to their property further south than Durango. Just kind of walk me through that. You have -- or the traffic coming south on McDermott and now there is traffic stuck behind them waiting to turn left to get into the gas station. I'm not -- I'm really -- I understand the need for this. I just -- I think that it's going to create a lot of problems. Mansfield: Commissioner Perreault, I can certainly walk you through. So, I just want to clarify. You are talking about the access onto and off of McDermott? Perreault: Correct. Yes. Mansfield: Okay. Yeah. So, I will first start with the kind of planner answer. As a former planner I can kind of recite the ACHD like access shall be taken from a lesser classified street whenever possible. So, that is providing an access onto and off of McDermott bypass, because ACHD is not allowing a permanent right-in, right-out. Their perspective is the property requires a full access and it's a collector and it -- ACHD has approved the access. So, it -- it technically meets all of ACHD's policy criteria to allow a full access onto and off of McDermott bypass in that location. Now, I guess from another perspective, you know, kind of from a user perspective, which I think is equally, if not more important than the policy manual, but I didn't say that if ACHD is listening. There is a center turn lane on McDermott bypass. So, as you said, it's three lanes. So, two lanes in either direction and, then, a center turn lane. So, you know, I liken it to like -- I was just pulling out of Happy Camper on Chinden Boulevard, right, and Chinden is a much wider street, but it does have that center turn lane. It also has huge amounts of volume on it and I waited for some time to turn left out of my business that I was at Happy Camper. So, you know, certainly it will take longer to turn left out, probably, than it will to take a free right and when we analyzed level of service for that intersection, given the trips from both the future Durango commercial in this quadrant -- not the other not the other commercial on the other side of the public road. Let me go to the -- so, not the commercial on the right side -- on the -- on the east side of the public road, but we did analyze the Durango commercial on the west side, including McUstick commercial. When we analyze that, that driveways level of service, that is the delay that people experience, was not great enough to warrant another access point -- permanent access point. So, ACHD determined -- so, we did look at the experience delay. I do not have the number on me right now, but it does not operate at an E and F, it operates better than that, so -- I think it was a B -- maybe an A or a B level of service, which corresponds -- I can't remember what number of seconds of delay that corresponds to, but that was analyzed and it was assumed to be acceptable based on the traffic 31 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 28 of 35 volumes using that. So acceptable, in fact, that they would not allow us a full -- or, sorry, they would not allow us a permanent right-in, right-out along Ustick. Smith: Commissioners, questions? Could you pull up -- I think your proposed nine and ten conditions. There we go. So, actually -- sorry. It's not this one. It is the -- sorry. The temporary access from Ustick. Sorry. I thought that was nine and ten. I want to -- I want to just make sure I'm clear. The intention is this prior to any occupancy for construction purposes and that only or is this also intended for temporary right-in, right- out during commercial activity, like user activity? Mansfield: Commissioner Smith, great question. Thanks for allowing me to clarify that. This would be a right-in, right-out that would operate potentially during commercial activity for customers and the reason it would be temporary is because it would provide another access point to minimize traffic into and out of that McDermott drive before the Dayspring access is constructed, if that occurs. So, basically, what it allows us to do is construct the -- you know, at least the first building permit -- potentially more, right, but construct what we have constructed, operate certain users without the requirement that that Dayspring Road have -- have been constructed already and so it allows us that temporary access, so that not every single car who is coming into our -- into and out of our development goes to the McDermott access. Smith: Okay. And, Bill, question -- question for you on this. I know this is something that I guess we didn't have enough time to -- to analyze ahead of time, but I guess as a initial reaction or general kind of approach, does that align with what is appropriate -- like what staff feels is appropriate in other maybe similar circumstances or what is your early read on it? Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I think this is one where I think the applicant's well aware of our policies, too. It really does take a Council waiver for access to arterials. So, again, I'm -- I'm going to have to stay with code and say we have to prohibit access unless otherwise approved by City Council. So, to me that's -- if that's something that you want Council to take under consideration, you support what the applicant is asking for, you can certainly include that and endorse that. But, ultimately, ACHD has said no access to Ustick and our policy say no access to Ustick. So, that's why we are being very restrictive in the DA saying that you are not getting the access, because they do have a -- they are approved for full access to that McDermott bypass based on ACHD's findings. But I certainly understand where the applicant is coming from in regards to its temporary. Again, I don't -- none of us know the timing for when Dorado gets started -- or when they get started. Again everything along Ustick is going to be waiting on Ustick -- ACHD to widen and sewer to be there. So, it could be a whole other year or two years before we even see anything starting out here. So, that's -- that's really -- it's all about timing and when they can even move forward. So, I think my recommendation would be -- is maybe as we transition to City Council maybe the applicant can maybe get something from ACHD kind of supporting that temporary right- in, right-out and, then, at least have that information for Council, because they are really the ones that have to say, yes, this is good and, then, have -- encourage the applicant F32 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 29 of 35 to come back with maybe a plan showing how that can be remediated in the future if it does go away, if it is truly going to be temporary in nature. Smith: Commissioner Stoll. Stoll: That was going to be my question, whether ACHD has weighed in on the temporary access. Mansfield: Commissioner Stoll, they have not yet weighed in. However, we are very much aware that they would need to weigh in. Stoll: Okay. Mansfield: So, that's kind of on our list of things to -- essentially what the removal of -- or the change of this condition does -- the modification of this condition does is it allows ACHD's decision to kind of be the decision and it -- it -- it allows us to not have to go back -- so, let's say Council requires the condition to remain as is, prohibits access, that means that if we can get ACHD to agree to a temporary right-in, right-out, we, then, have to go back to Council to get their permission for a right-in, right-out and what I would like to do is -- first of all, I would like to try and get ACHD and everyone rowing in the same direction prior to Council, but what it does is -- if I cannot get ACHD to be rowing in the same direction prior to Council, it doesn't mean ACHD gets ignored, it means we still have to talk with ACHD and Council is saying look, if ACHD is cool with it, we are cool with it temporarily. That's all we are looking for here. Smith: Commissioners, any other questions? I do have one other question regarding these -- these two drive-throughs. So, like Bill said, you know, the coffee shop I believe is generally in tier two, a restaurant is -- can be tier two, can be tier three. Could you -- could you help me understand the intention behind -- I guess what level of drive- through, you know, volume, expectations, etcetera? Mansfield: Commissioner Smith -- Vice-President Smith. Or vice -- vice-chair. Smith: Vice-chair. Mansfield: Vice-chair. Excuse me. I will refer to you as vice-chair from now on. Vice- Chair Smith, yes, I'm frantically clicking to a nice picture of our development here. What we have established with our users -- just -- and just our knowledge of site plan development and shopping center development with the 50 years of development that Hawkins has doing this, is this site, because of its size, there is no way it could support two class three users. It's just -- there is just too much stacking. There is too much, you know, action going on for such a small site. We totally acknowledge that. What we would like to be able to do is say we -- we would be open to restricting drive-throughs to a maximum of one class three use and either another class one or class two if it is in the cards and, again, this is conceptual. We may not have four users here because of a class three drive-through eating up too much space, you know, so we are really really 33 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 30 of 35 cognizant -- because we have done this so many times we are really cognizant about the customer experience. The user experience. The staff experience on this site. We don't want to create conflict and so for that reason I think that's why we are agreeing to a condition for one class three -- no more than one class three drive-through and the other drive-through has to be either a class one or class two. Stoll: Just to remind me -- I have a question for Bill. What's -- what's the definition of a class three again? Drive-through? Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, tier three is basically a restaurant with two stacking lanes, two ordering points, two ordering menus. Just a more intense drive-through, so -- Stoll: Okay. Parsons: -- what he has drawn here is not going to be anywhere close to a tier three. They are probably tier two. So, again, it's not -- it's -- the Commission doesn't have to add anything. It's just something that you can if you want to. I know recently you guys have been getting into the weeds a little bit more of that and staff has been coming forward with DA provisions that said, hey, we are good with some drive-throughs, but would you think about maybe locking it down to a tier one? So, again, it's -- if you feel comfortable with the concept plan there is a DA provision that says comply -- generally comply with the concept plan and they -- regardless, if it is a tier one or tier three, they are coming back with a CUP. So, it's -- it's just whether or not you guys want to lock down the intensity of the site or if you feel like you need to build in that extra assurance that it won't be too intense for the future residential -- or the road -- or the transportation network that we know gets a lot of trips on Ustick. We know it is going to have a lot of vehicle trips in that area. So, that's why I just bring it to your attention. Smith: Did you want to -- was there anything you wanted to add? Okay. Cool. Any other questions? All right. I guess we will go -- Madam Clerk, is there anyone signed up to testify? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. Yes. I have Corey Thacker. Smith: Okay. And if you could just give us your name and address for the record. Thacker: Hello again. Corey Thacker. 5900 West Ustick. Property in question. I'm not going to -- I'm not going to go through the -- the same this -- this all sucks to me. The thing that I told you last time. It does. It still does. I can't help but laugh, because it's kind of like, okay, everything that's happening, everyone's talking about how sucky it's going to be to live there. How -- how crappy it's going to be for residential this side or the other. It's like, look, I currently live there and I know, because I'm experiencing it. They are starting to work on Day Spring across the road and I'm just envisioning what's coming and it's like, oh, geez. But the thing that I think that everybody is kind of forgetting is kind of like, okay, when -- when people buy a house in this proposed F34] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 31 of 35 Durango or now, you know, it looks like it's moving forward -- well, they are buying it knowing what they are buying next to; right? They are not guessing. It will be there and so, then, how do you -- how do you put it? How are you going to sort of take the proposed future stuff into consideration when they are doing it knowingly? I guess that's the thing that I kind of want to bring up. You know, it's like, all right, you talk about noise stuff, all right, so at 2:00 o'clock in the morning I got somebody with a souped up car blowing down the road. Has nothing to do with any commercial property. But, yet, I hear it just fine and so it's kind of one of those things that, you know, you are asking good questions for somebody that wants to move into a neighborhood, but I'm experiencing these things and it ain't even there yet and it's already happening to me. So, I mean as I -- as I kind of told you before, it's kind of the point where it's like, well, I'm cool with Durango going in as long as I get to go out and the conditions would be is, of course, if all this moves forward. I don't want to be there. I had some random person at some point in time come in and cut one of my horse's tails. Just the hair. Like you wake up and say who gave my -- who gave my horse a haircut? And it's only going to get worse, because we are putting in all these extra people and I'm going to get surrounded. So, I would ask you to worry more about the person who lives there and is being impacted, as opposed to the people who are going to pick and choose and have the opportunity to decide that's where they want to live. So, that's all I had. Smith: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, is there anyone else signed up to testify? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. No one else has signed up and no one has their hand raised online. Smith: Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to come forward? If I could get your name and address for the record. Lindstrom: Thank you, Commissioner. Connor Lindstrom. KM Engineering. 5725 North Discovery Way. I apologize for not signing up to testify given that I was the applicant on the previous application. I just wanted to speak on behalf of the Hess development and Durango that we have been working closely with Hawkins and we are in agreement with what they are -- what they are proposing and their proposed new conditions and modifications. So, just wanted to make that clear. Thank you. Smith: Is there anyone else who would like to testify? Great. Okay. Great. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? Stoll: So moved. Perreault: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Any opposed. All right. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 35 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 32 of 35 Smith: Someone want to go first? I can give thoughts. If someone has -- all right. I guess I will go first. So, I generally -- for some reason this -- this has been sticking in my head a lot since we first heard it over the last couple of weeks and the more I have chewed on it I think it's -- I think this is appropriate for some automotive oriented uses. I think like a gas station C-store makes sense here. I think the commercial use makes sense. I think -- and to the applicant's point and to the current -- current homeowners point of backing off of Ustick is -- I think is generally a good idea, backing the residential off of Ustick. So, I'm generally in support of this. I'm not comfortable at this time including anything to allow access from Ustick. I think that's something that you can bring to City Council with ACHD. At least, again, this is my perspective. I don't know how the rest of the Commission feels. But I just -- I'm not comfortable including that recommendation at the moment. But it seems like that would be something that you will work on and you can bring up there. The only other thing -- I don't need to add something for the compressed air or anything like that, but I would like -- I do appreciate knowing that it would be on the south side. Again, if the goal is to prevent more noise pollution of the type that the -- you know, the current homeowner is experiencing from Ustick. The only other thing I would say is -- to Bill's point, it seems like there is not any tier three kind of envisioned in the concept plan. I would prefer -- I would feel more comfortable recommending locking that in. If there is a tier three I would like for it to be the only drive-through on the location. I don't know how the rest of the Commission feels about that. But I think if the -- if the goal is to kind of let this commercial also serve as a bit of a transition space, I don't think it makes sense to have a very high volume drive-through in that. But beyond that I generally -- I'm okay with the rest as -- as the applicant presented. Those are just some concerns I wanted to call out. Any other -- Commissioner Stoll. Stoll: Make sure I got the mic on. I agree on the tier three. I think limiting it to a tier two or tier one is fine. Generally it does seem to fit exactly with what -- how the area is developing. I -- yeah, I don't have a problem especially now that we are not stubbing the road Del Norte through. I'm comfortable with the project as proposed. Smith: Commissioners, thoughts? Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair. So, the -- the entrance off McDermott has given me heartburn. But if the transportation entities have -- are in agreement, then, you know, I wouldn't recommend denial for this application for that reason. I just think this is going to be a really really active corner with a gas station, with folks coming off of Highway 16 and I just see a lot of opportunities here for safety issues with traffic. So, as for the -- the operating hours, I'm -- I'm fine with recommending that to Council with the 24 hour use, because I agree with Mr. Thacker that -- that any future residents will know that that's going to be the case, that there is going to be 24 hour use and so they -- they have full knowledge of that prior to purchasing in that area. I'm also okay with the applicant's request to allow building permit to be issued prior to the recording of the plat. I don't -- I don't know specifically which building permit that -- or excuse me -- which building it's going to be for. I assume it will also be for the gas station, but I'm fine with it as long as it's limited to just one building permit for the entire project and I agree with 36 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 33 of 35 Commissioner Smith, that if the applicant is in agreement with -- with limiting themselves to having one Tier 3 drive-through max, then, I think that we should just go ahead and make that recommendation for it to go into the DA. I think I have covered everything. Smith: Any other Commissioners? Sandoval: Mr. Vice-Chair? Smith: Commissioner Sandoval. Sandoval: Yeah. Extending the hours just makes sense. It's a gas station. You don't want to go in there at 2:00 o'clock in the morning and not be able to get a drink; right? It just makes a lot of sense. As far as the class three versus class two versus class one conversation, yes, one class three I think is appropriate or two class twos I would say max. Smith: All right. Any other Commissioners? Gelsomino: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioners Gelsomino. Gelsomino: I will echo the majority of my colleagues on the Commission. Smith: Well, if there is any other commissioners -- or if anyone would like to make a motion I would be open to that. I can also make the motion. Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I will attempt -- Smith: Okay. Perreault: -- to make a motion. After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of File No. H-2025-0059 and H-2026-0007 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 28th, 2026, with the following modifications. Let's see. I recommend that we modify the conditions of approval to remove Condition 2.11 or 2.11 1 guess, which is the -- the additional drive that would be added to the north. So, removing that. And, then, allowing for the applicant -- I don't -- I apologize, I don't know the condition numbers that's associated with this. Allowing the applicant to have a 24 hour use on Lot 1, Block 1, and that we make that recommendation to -- to Council. Also allowing the applicant to be issued one building permit for a site prior to the recording of the plat and -- and then -- and adding that as a DA provision. Did we miss anything? Do you want -- should I go back and add those condition numbers in -- numbers and letters? Do we have it all? I don't have them in front of me. F37] Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 34 of 35 Starman: Mr. Vice-Chair and Commissioners, no, I think your -- your motion is sufficient. We understand what you are talking about. The one thing I would ask maybe the motion maker, there was some discussion about drive-throughs and tier one, two and three, if you want to include anything like that in your motion. That's just a question. I think your motion as it stands right now is -- is fine. Smith: Would you like to include any language around tier one, two, three or is it your intention to -- Perreault: Yes. I will add to the motion a recommendation to not allow for anymore than one tier three drive-through classification. Smith: Okay. Been moved. Is there a second? Stoll: Just a question on the condition -- proposed condition for Lot 1, Block 1, as we are seeing on our screen here, is your intention to limit the other buildings to -- or businesses to business hours of operations between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m? Perreault: I don't know that we need to state that, because it -- that's already what it will be unless they get approval otherwise through a conditional use permit. So, that conditional use permit -- they will need to come before us. So, I don't think it needs to be restated that we leave those hours in place. Smith: But the intention is only for Lot 1, Block 1, to be 24/7. Perreault: Correct. Stoll: Okay. Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing for Starling Ridge Subdivision (H-2026-0009) by Rodney Evans and Partners, generally located 112 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 61.34 acres of land with R-4 (25.62 acres) and R-8 (35.72 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 211 building lots and 26 common lots on 60.43 acres of land in the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. 38 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 28,2026 Page 35 of 35 Smith: The last item we have on our agenda is Item No. 4, File H-2026-0009, Starling Ridge Subdivision, which will be open for the purpose of continuance. Madam Clerk, is it -- my understanding right that they are asking for a continuance to July 16th? Lomeli: Thank you, Vice-Chair Smith. That is correct. Smith: Okay. Can I get a motion? Stoll: Mr. Chair, I move that we continue the public hearing for Starling Ridge Subdivision, H-2026-0009, to July 6th? July 16th. Perreault: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Smith: Can I get one more motion? Stoll: Move to adjourn. Gelsomino: Seconded. Smith: Moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Thank you all. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:22 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED JARED SMITH - VICE-CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK F39 The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will begin at 6:30 PM E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Approve Minutes of the May 21, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commision Meeting 3 Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission May 21,2026 Page 3 of 3 MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for Butte Fence (H-2025-0060) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, located at 5233 W. Franklin Rd. A. Request: Annexation of 9.14 acres of land with the I-L zoning district for the purpose of complying with the terms outlined in the consent to annex agreement for the existing fencing business in operation at the subject property. Smith: Now we will move on to the public hearing for Butte Fence, Item H-2025-0060, which requests a continuance to July 16th, 2026. Get a motion? Perreault: Mr. Chair? Smith: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: I move that we continue the public hearing for Butte Fence, H-2025-0060 to the date of July 16th, 2026. Gelsomino: Seconded. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. Smith: Can I get one more motion? Gelsomino: Mr. Chair, I move to adjourn tonight's meeting. Smith: Can I get a second? Perreault: Second. Smith: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:19 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. ) APPROVED 5 1 28 1 26 JARED SMITH - VICE-CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E K IDIAN:--- iuAn Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline h2 City Council Meeting, 2026 th May 28 Slide 1 h2 Agenda Item Numbers/Order: hoodc, 12/19/2006 FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map FLUM Aerial MapZoning Map Excerpt from the Plan: Uses adjacent to SHimmediate vicinity of the interchange to other, nearby areas.generating uses away from the -vicinity of the interchange from traffic conflicts and shift the high trafficI area, or as individual use types. The intention is to protect the immediate -aggregated over the larger planned MU16 interchange areas, are not intended for high volume trips, either - W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Durango Subdivision (H-2025-0017) by KM Engineering, LLP, generally located off the northeast corner of the N. McDermott Rd. Bypass and W. Ustick Rd. A. Request:Annexation of 37.08 acres of land with R-8 (29.53 acres) and L-O (7.55 acres)zoning. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 127 residential lots and 6 commercial building lots and 14 common lots on 35.88 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and L-O zoning districts. 00 *%j CA vi Z lu 00 O 3 OIQ 0 cn Cr Cr n. 0 r m O*Q OIQ m cQ O m r+ ET O,q CD 0 (D U) "I > (D 0 m 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �E IDIAN --- DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 5/28/2026 Legend DATE: ® Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission :::Area of Impact City Limits - FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner O Analysis r 208-884-5533 sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Connor Lindstrom,KM Engineering, ;- F LLP SUBJECT: Durango Subdivision—AZ, PP �3 H-2025-0017 LOCATION: 5630 W.Ustick Road, generally located -f at a portion of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 33,Township 4N,Range 1W Parcel Nos. SO433346600, S0433346710, SO433346650 and SO433347115 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Annexation of 37.08 acres of land with R-8 (29.53 acres)and L-O (7.55 acres)zoning and a Preliminary Plat consisting of 127 residential lots, 6 commercial building lots and 14 common lots on 35.87 acres of land in the proposed R-8 and L-O zoning districts. B. Issues/Waivers Input Issues and Waivers Here. Link it to the Section of the report C. Recommendation Planning Division: Approval Planning and Zoning Commission: Click or tap here to enter text. D. Decision City Council: Click or tap here to enter text. E. Table of Contents Community Metrics.............................................................................. II StaffAnalysis..................................................................................... III City/Agency Comments and Conditions...................................................... IV Findings............................................................................................ V Action.............................................................................................. VI Exhibits............................................................................................ VII City of Meridian I Department Report I. Project Overview II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Vacant and Residential - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential and Office - Existing Zoning RUT VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning R-8 and L-O Adopted FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential and Office VII.A.3 Table 2: Project Overview Description Details History NA Phasing Plan 3 phases are proposed Residential Units 127 Open Space 25.41% Amenities 7 points required/8 points provided Physical Features Eight Mile Lateral and the Sky Pilot Drain Acreage +35.87 acres Lots 147 lots(127 residential/6 commercial/14 common lots) Lot Sizes minimum lot—5,547 s£/maximum lot—8,687 sf/average lot—5,864 sf Density 4.48 du/ac Table 3: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 4/7/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 1/8/2025 Site posting date 5/5/2026 Table 4:Agency Comments Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IV.K • Comments Received Yes/Staff Report - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Ustick Road/Existing - • Traffic Level of Service Ustick Road—Better than"E" - ITD Comments Received ITD has indicated that they have no comments related to this application. Meridian Public Works Wastewater IV.B • Distance to Mainline Sewer not yet available to site. • Impacts or Concerns Extension of the McDermott Trunk line to Ustick and an additional 1700ft of 10-inch sewer main required to serve site.PW will not approve utility plan until sewer is made available. Meridian Public Works Water IV.B • Distance to Mainline Available at the site • Impacts or Concerns A maximum of 50 lots can be developed before a second water connection is required. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see the public record. Paste the following link into your browser to access the public record: https:llweblink.meridianciU.or lWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=400842&dbid=0&repo=MeridianQ Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:S0433346600 Date Retrieved:2026/5/S Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator: 817 Surrounding Area 1,s11 0 44 /o .vot city ® City Limits 1,197 Not City HouseholdHousehold& Population Growth F Households El2020 Population Change:82.0% Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses Single-family Multi-family 191% 190% ® Commercial Preliminary Plats (last 5-years) Conditional Use Permit(Mast 5-yearn Proposed Proposed Pending Pending Approved Approved 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 100 200 300 ■ Single-family Multi-family City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ 2.00 QW 1,500 Single-family y 1.50 Residential M, 1,000 Parcel Diversity y 1.00 U 0 Parcel Count in 0.50 ® 500 L m Average Acres 0.00 ' O a 0.15 0 06_ 0 a R-2 R-8 R-15 Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average 20.00 15.00 �15.92 d' Density 10.00 p �6.56a�� 5.00 0 4.36 0.00o:ao Dwelling Units 1 Acre R-2 R-4 R-8 R-15 Notes: See VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables, and Charts. Figure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics Level of Service Planning Thresholds 1. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH) Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service llstick Road 870-feet Principal Arterial 293 Better than "E" *Acceptable level of service for a two-lane principal arterial is"E" (690 VPH)_ 2, Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT) Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD's most current traffic counts. + The average daily traffic count for Ustick Road east of McDermott Road was 5,505 on January 27, 2022. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ ACHD Planned Improvements 1. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)l Five Year Plan (FYP): • Ustick Road is scheduled in the FYP to be widened to 5-lanes from McDermott Road/Bypass to Black Cat Road in 2027. • Ustick Road is scheduled in the FYP to be widened to 5-lanes from Black Cat Road to Ten Mile Road in 2025_ The intersection of Ustick Road and McDermott RoadfBypass is scheduled in the FYP to be widened to 3-lanes on the north leg, 3-lanes on the south leg, 6-lanes on the east leg, and 6- lanes on the west leg in 2027. ■ The intersection of Ustick Road and Black Cat Road is scheduled in the FYP to be widened to 7 lanes on the north and south legs and 6-lanes on the east and west legs and signalized in 2025. • The intersection of Ustick Road and Owyhee Storm Avenue is scheduled in the FYP as an intersection improvement project to be widened to 3-lanes on the north leg, 6-lanes on the east leg, and 5-lanes on the west leg in 2025. • Black Cat Road is listed in the C I P to be widened to 5-lanes from Cherry Lane to Ustick Road between 2031 and 2035. ■ The intersection of Cherry Lane and Black Cat Road is listed in the CIP to be widened to 4- lanes on the north leg, 4-lanes on the south, 4-lanes east, and 4-lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2031 and 2035_ Notes: See V111. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables, and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview This property is designated Medium Density Residential and Office on the City's Future Land Use Map(FLUM) contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The Medium Density Residential designation allows for dwelling units at gross densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school,or land dedicated for public services. The Office designation provides opportunities for low-impact business areas. These uses would include professional offices,technology and resource centers; ancillary commercial uses may be considered(particularly within research and development centers or technological parks). Sample zoning include L-O. The applicant proposes to extend("float")the existing Office land use designation west along the Ustick frontage to accommodate additional L-O zoned office lots within the overall Medium Density Residential designated property. The Comprehensive Plan allows adjacent future land use designations to be utilized through a development application process where the designation directly abuts the subject property, does not extend across a collector or arterial roadway, and does not exceed 50%of the land being developed. The applicant states that approximately 16%of the development area would utilize the floated Office designation and that the subject property directly abuts the existing Office designation. Based on these findings,the request appears consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's floating designation provisions. The proposed plat contains 127 residential lots on approximately 35.87 acres at a gross density of 4.48du/ac,meeting the required density range listed above. The applicant has also provided a conceptual layout for the office portion of the development. The plan depicts site parking,cross-access driveways to adjacent properties,and 6 office buildings,totaling approximately 51,255 sq ft. Staff finds that the proposed zoning,plat and conceptual office layout are consistent with the MDR and Office designations. The City may require a development agreement(DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommend a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section IV. The DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies • 2.02.01A-With new subdivision plans,require the design and construction of pathways connections,easy pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, safe routes to schools, and the incorporation of usable open space with quality amenities. The proposed plat has an abundance of pedestrian connectivity throughout the proposed development. • 2.02.01C-Require all new residential neighborhoods to provide complete streets,consistent with the Transportation and Land Use Integration Plan. The internal street network meets ACHD standards. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ • 2.02.01D -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. The applicant proposes extending several walkways to other properties abutting this development. • 3.03.03F-Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services.As noted above, sewer to this development is not in the immediate area. However, with the development of the Dayspring Subdivision, sewer will be extended in Ustick, which this development could utilize. The timing of the extension is unknown at this time. • 3.07.01A-Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices. The applicant is coordinating the landscape design with the Ustick Commercial development to the west.Additionally, the office lots west off. Dayspring Way were located here to integrate with the property to the west and coordinate an appropriate transition between the two commercial developments and future residential lots north of the Sky Pilot Drain. • 4.05.01D -Requires improving and protecting creeks and other natural waterways throughout commercial, industrial, and residential areas. The Eight Mile Lateral runs along the northern boundary of the site and will remain in a natural state, enhanced with a multi-use pathway. 0 5.01.02C-Promote area beautification and community identity through context sensitive building and site design principles,appropriate signage, and attractive landscaping. Ustick Road is designated an entryway corridor. The applicant is proposing a dry creek bed with river rock and boulders as additional design features.Additionally, the applicant should enter into a license agreement with ITD or ACHD to landscape the surplus ROW located along McDermott Bypass, near the NWC of the property identified with phase 3. 0 5.01.0IF—Minimize noise,lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code. The UDC limits business hours of operation in the L-O district from 6 am to 10 pm to minimize these disturbances. 0 6.01.02B -Requires the applicant to 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. Cross-access is being provided to abutting properties. Direct lot access isn't proposed; however, the Ustick Commercial project did show RIRO access to Ustick to be shared with the property.ACHD and City staff are not supportive of any access to Ustick Rd. C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): There is an existing structure on parcel S0433347115 that will need to be removed with development of the property. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The applicant is proposing a mixed-use development consisting of 147 total lots, including 127 single-family residential lots, six(6) commercial lots and fourteen (14) common lots on 35.87 acres. The residential portion of the property is proposed to be zoned R-8 and is proposed to develop with single family detached homes. The office portion of the development may develop with 6 office buildings totaling 51,255 square feet. The subdivision is proposed to develop in three phases. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): This subdivision is proposed to include various sized residential lots, ranging from 5,547 sq. ft. to 8,687 sq.ft. In total, 127 buildable residential lots are proposed. Average lot size is 5,864 sq.ft. The office lots range in size from 31,017 sq.ft. to 47,798 sq.ft. The minimum lot size in the R-8 zone is 4,000 feet, and there is no minimum lot size for the L- O zone. Staff finds that the proposed development meets the dimensional standards of both zones. Any future homes and office buildings will also need to comply with the dimensional standards in UDC Table UDC 11-2A-6 and 11-2B-3. Lots 1, 2, 4, Block I should graphically depict the 35 foot landscape buffer along Ustick Road and a 10 foot landscape buffer along N. Dayspring Way. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Structure and Site Design Standards (UDC 11-3A-19): All structures and site designs are required to comply with the standards listed in UDC I I- 3A-19. The conceptual development plan of the office area depicts an interconnected network of walkways and drive aisles that promote pedestrian and vehicular mobility within the development and to the adjacent development to the west and east; a pathway is proposed to the future residential development to the north for pedestrian access and connectivity,no vehicular connectivity is proposed. Where the pathway crosses a vehicular driving surface(driveway that parallels the Sky Pilot Drain),the applicant should distinguish this pedestrian crossing through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks,per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. Staff is supportive of the proposed layout with the noted modification. 2. Qualified Open Space&Amenities (UDC 11-3G): UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Open Space: 15%for the 7.63 acres or 25.41% R-8 Zoning Amenities: 1 Point for Dog waste station,open space commons,pathways for a every 5 acres of gross total of 11 points,7 points were required. land area All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. The applicant is proposing to construct a 10 foot multi-use pathway along the south side of the Eight Mile Lateral outside of the 50 foot easement. Landscaping along the pathways should comply with the standards set forth in UDC 11-3B-12C. Although the applicant exceeds the required amenities per the UDC, staff believes with this annexation the applicant should provide an additional amenity in one of open space commons lots.If these areas are for play for the residents, staff recommends the applicant construct a passive amenity such as an open space commons shelter in Lot 9, Block 3. 3. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Entry Way Corridor: A 35-foot wide landscape buffer is proposed along Ustick 35 feet Road. Collector Road: 20 feet A 20-foot buffer is proposed along a portion of the McDermott Bypass. The roadway is currently under the jurisdiction of ITD and is anticipated to be conveyed to ACHD in the near future. Staff recommends the applicant coordinate with the applicable transportation agency prior to submitting Phase 2 of the project and enter into a license agreement to incorporate the surplus right-of-way into the buffer area. Local Road: 10 feet or Eight-foot parkways are proposed along the internal streets 8 feet with detached consistent with UDC standards. The Sky Pilot Drain runs sidewalks along the east boundary of N.Dayspring Way which creates an exceptionally wide buffer in this area.If trees are not allowed to be planted in the easement,the applicant should add an additional five feet outside of the irrigation easement to plant the required trees. ii. Tree preservation Per UDC 11-3B-10,the applicant shall preserve existing trees four-inch caliper or greater from destruction during the development. Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two (2)ten-inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four-inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees).Deciduous specimen trees four-inch caliper or greater may count double towards total calipers lost,when planted at entryways,within common open space,and when used as focal elements in landscape design. The applicant shall add a mitigation section to the landscape plan for trees that are removed meeting the criteria above. iii. Parking lot landscaping Landscaping is required to be provided along all parking areas per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. The office portion of the proposed development will have to meet the parking lot requirements listed in UDC 11-3B-8 with the submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance. iv. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses A minimum 25-foot-wide buffer is required adjacent to residential land uses in accordance with UDC Tables 11-2C-3, 11-2B-3, and 11-4-3-34F. The buffer shall be landscaped in compliance with the standards of UDC Section 11-3B-9C. The residential and commercial components of the development are separated by the Sky Pilot Drain and its associated 100 foot-wide irrigation easement. The applicant proposes to pipe the drain and improve a portion of the easement area with approximately thirty- eight(38)feet of open space that includes a five(5)foot-wide pedestrian pathway and a seven (7)foot-wide planting bed adjacent to the residential portion of the property. The other half of the easement is located on the commercial portion of the property providing the 100 foot buffer between the two uses. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ As trees are not permitted within the irrigation easement, an additional five(5)foot-wide landscape strip outside of the easement will be necessary to accommodate the required tree plantings and meet the landscape buffer requirements of the code. v. Storm integration An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18. A Geotechnical Evaluation and geotechnical groundwater monitoring report was submitted with this application. Development will be required to meet UDC 11-3B-II for stormwater integration. vi. Pathway landscaping A landscape strip a minimum of five(5)feet wide shall be provided along each side of the pathway. If landscaping is not allowed within any of the irrigation easements, the applicant shall provide five(5)feet of landscaping outside of the irrigation easement to meet this requirement. 4. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Residential parking analysis Off-street parking is required per the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6;the number of parking spaces is based on the number of bedrooms per unit. The applicant shall comply with these standards. Each single-family residence will be evaluated at the time of building permit submittal. ii. Nonresidential parking analysis UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Commercial: 1 Parking This will be determined during the Certificate of Zoning Stall per 500 Square Feet Compliance application review. of Gross Floor Area iii. Bicycle parking analysis A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space must be provided for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Bicycle parking will be determined with the submittal of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 5. Building Elevations (Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed subdivision as shown in Section VII.N. Single family homes along the collectors should be designed with elevations that create interest through the use of broken planes, windows, and fenestrations that produce a rhythm of materials and patterns. Design review is not required for single-family detached structures. Staff recommends a DA provision requiring those home elevations incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g.projections, recesses, step- backs,pop-outs), bays, banding,porches, balconies, material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from adjacentpublic streets. Single-story homes are exemptfrom this requirement. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ The office elevations will be subject to the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). 6. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing constructed on the site is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7. 7. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Per the UDC the minimum width of parkways planted with Class II trees shall be eight(8) feet. The width can be measured from the back of curb where there is no likely expansion of the street section within the right-of-way;the parkway width shall exclude the width of the sidewalk. Class 11 trees are the preferred parkway trees. The applicant is proposing parkways along the local streets of the subdivision. The applicant has designed the local streets with sixty-three feet of right-of-way which includes an 8 foot- wide landscape planter and a 5-foot-wide sidewalk within a thirteen foot ACHD easement on each side of the thirty-seven-foot right-of-way. The parkways will be required to meet the requirements of UDC 11-3A-17. E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Access to the preliminary plat is via W. Ustick Road and N. McDermott Road. For the L-O portion of the development, the applicant is proposing cross access to the property to the west and east as required by UDC 11-3A-3. Direct lot access to Ustick is prohibited. 2. Pedestrian Connectivity(UDC 11-3A-5, UDC 11-3A-8, UDC 11-3A-17): The applicant has provided ten-foot-wide multi-use pathways and five foot-wide pathways as well as five foot-wide sidewalks throughout the development for pedestrian connectivity. 3. Subdivision Regulations (UDC 11-6): i. Common driveways Per UDC 11-6C-3D,common driveways shall serve a maximum of four(4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three(3)dwelling units be located on one (1) side of the driveway. The applicant is proposing three (3) common driveways that meet the dimensional requirements as outlined in the UDC. ii. Block face Per UDC 11-6C-3.F.1,block face length in in residential districts shall be more than seven hundred fifty(750) feet in length without an intersecting street or alley,except as allowed in subsection(F)(3) of this section. The north side of W. Pagosa Street exceeds 750 feet in length requirement but does not exceed 1,000 square feet in length. Per UDC 11-6C-3.F.1.a, where a pedestrian connection is provided, the maximum block face may be extended up to one thousand (1,000)feet in length in residential districts. The applicant is proposing multiple pathway connections, including traffic calming as required by the UDC. Therefore, staff has no opposition to the extended block length. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ F. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): All irrigation ditches crossing this site shall be piped or otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3. Per the applicant's narrative, the Eightmile Lateral is proposed to remain open while proposing to reroute and pipe the Sky Pilot Drain north along the southern access road before traveling west under the service drive. Various meetings and coordination took place between the applicant, Nampa Meridian Irrigation District(NMID) and ACHD to establish a route that works for all parties. The easement in which the drain will travel will be 100'wide as required by NMID and the origination point of the drain and the location in which it departs the property under McDermott Road will remain. To provide NMID the access needed to their pipeline, no structures will be placed within the easement, and no trees will be planted. A waiver to keep the lateral open needs to be approved by City Council. Per UDC 11-3A-6E, in Residential Districts, irrigation easements wider than ten (10)feet shall be included in a common lot that is a minimum of twenty(20)feet wide and outside of a fenced area, unless otherwise waived by City Council. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-15): The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-3B-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18.A Geotechnical Evaluation and geotechnical groundwater monitoring report was submitted with this application. 4. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Ensure development is connected to City of Meridian water and sanitary sewer systems and the extension to and through said developments are constructed in conformance with the City of Meridian Water and Sewer System Master Plans in effect at the time of development. Sewer is not yet available to the site. The extension of the McDermott Trunk line to Ustick Road and an additional 1700 feet of 10-inch sewer main is required to serve site. The Public Works Department will not approve utility plans until sewer is made available at the site. Commission and Council should determine if annexation of this property is in the best interest of the City. 5. School Capacity(Comp Plan): School Districts West Ada School District • Capacity of Hunter Elementary School-625 Schools Sawtooth Middle School- 1000 Owyhee High School- 1800 City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ • Number of Hunter Elementary School-574 Students Sawtooth Middle School-844 Enrolled Owyhee High School- 1807 IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 1. A Development Agreement(DA)is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption,and the developer. A final plat will not be accepted until the Annexation ordinance and development agreement are approved by City Council and sewer improvements have been completed. Currently, a fee of$611.47 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,incorporate the following provisions: a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, landscape plan,phasing plan, conceptual plan and building elevations included in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. b. Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. c. No development shall commence on the property until sewer service is readily available at the site and meets one of the following criteria: • The connection to this City's sewer collection system is actively being installed by the applicant; or • Sewer has already been stubbed to the site. d. The Final Plat shall be recorded prior to submittal of any building permit applications for the commercial or residential portion of the development and prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancies within the commercial portion of the development. e. Business hours of operation in the L-O zoning district shall be limited from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm. f. The development is subject to the Oaks lift station&West Ada School District reimbursement agreements. g. Direct lot access to W.Ustick Road is prohibited. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ h. Homes on lots that abut McDermott Bypass and N. Avellino Way,both designated collector streets,will be highly visible; therefore,the rear and/or side of structures on these lots(i.e. Lots 19-25,Block 1; Lots 1-2,4-8, 31-36,Block 6 and Lots 5-12,Block 2) shall incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding,porches, balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story and existing structures are exempt from this requirement. Preliminary Plat 1. The final plat(s) shall include the following revisions: a. Depict cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all lots in the subdivision and to adjoining properties either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2. b. Add a note on the final plat(s)that states direct lot access is prohibited. c. Lots 1,2,4,Block 1 shall graphically depict the required landscape buffer widths along Ustick Road and N. Dayspring Way. 2. The landscape plan prepared by KM Engineering and stamped by Alyssa Ensen,included in Exhibit Section VIIE, dated January 5,2026, shall be revised as follows: a. A 20-foot-wide landscape buffer and 10-foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed within the right of way west of Lots 5-8,Block 6. Any surplus right of way outside of the 20-foot landscape buffer shall also be landscaped and the 10-foot multi-use in Lot 10,Block 6 shall connect to the 10-foot sidewalk. b. If landscaping is not allowed within any of the irrigation easements,the applicant shall provide five(5) feet of landscaping outside of the irrigation easement to meet this requirement. c. All common open space areas are required to be landscaped with one deciduous shade tree for every 5,000 square feet of area and include a variety of trees, shrubs, lawn or other vegetative groundcover per UDC 11-3G-5B.3. d. Mitigation information shall be included for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10. e. The development shall comply with standards and installation for landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5 and maintenance thereof as set forth in UDC 11-3B-13. f. The applicant shall provide an open space commons shelter in Lot 9,Block 3.A detail of said amenity shall be submitted with the final plat application. g. Where the pathway crosses a vehicular driving surface(driveway that parallels the Sky Pilot Drain),the applicant shall distinguish this pedestrian crossing through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete, or bricks,per UDC 11-3A-1913.4b. h. Additional design features consisting of a dry creek bed with river rock and boulders shall be included in the street buffer along W. Ustick Rd., an entryway corridor, as proposed,in accord with UDC 11-313-7C.3£ 3. The Eightmile Lateral and Sky Pilot Drain shall comply with the provisions for irrigation ditches,laterals,canals and/or drainage courses,as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6. The applicant shall obtain Council waiver to leave the Eightmile Lateral open as proposed. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 4. Pathway and adjoining fencings and landscaping shall be constructed consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7A7, 11-3A-8 and 11-3B-12C. 5. Prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer,the applicant shall submit a public access easement for the multi-use pathway along the Eightmile Lateral to the Planning Division for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation or unless required by ACHD. 6. The development shall comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to driveways,easements,blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 7. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 8. All common driveways shall meet the requirements of 11-6C-2-D including a perpetual ingress/egress easement being filed with the Ada County Recorder,which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. 9. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted and approved for the commercial portion of the development prior to the submittal of a building permit application. The design of the site and structures shall comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19; the design standards listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. 10. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two(2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC 11-613-7. 11. The plat shall comply with the dimensional standards of the R-8 and L-O zoning districts per UDC 11-2A-6 and 11-213-3. 12. The Applicant shall comply with all conditions of ACHD. 13. Staff s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. B. Meridian Public Works General Conditions of Approval 1. Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department,and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service outside of a public right-of-way. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet,if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2. Per Meridian City Code (MCC),the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 3. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way(include all water services and hydrants). The easement widths shall be 20-feet wide for a single utility, or 30-feet wide for two. The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat,but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor,which must include the area of the easement(marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2"x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. All easements must be submitted,reviewed, and approved prior to development plan approval. 4. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water(UDC 11-313-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized,the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. 5. All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Any structures that are allowed to remain shall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 6. All irrigation ditches,canals,laterals, or drains, exclusive of natural waterways,intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC 11-3A-6. In performing such work,the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42- 1207 and any other applicable law or regulation. 7. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rules administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources. The Developer's Engineer shall provide a statement addressing whether there are any existing wells in the development, and if so,how they will continue to be used, or provide record of their abandonment. 8. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections(208)375-5211. 9. Street signs are to be in place, sanitary sewer and water system shall be approved and activated,road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded,prior to applying for building permits. 10. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110%will be required for all uncompleted fencing,landscaping,amenities, etc.,prior to signature on the final plat. I t. All improvements related to public life, safety and health shall be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. Where approved by the City Engineer, an owner may post a performance surety for such improvements in order to obtain City Engineer signature on the final plat as set forth in UDC I I-5C-3B. 12. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process,prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 13. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 14. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 15. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 16. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill,where footing would sit atop fill material. 17. The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 18. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 19. At the completion of the project,the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 20. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements are listed in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at htlp://www.meridiancily.org/public works.aspx?id=272. 21. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer,water and reuse infrastructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit,cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. 22. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surety in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration of two years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond.Applicant must file an application for surety,which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 887-2211. C. Meridian Park's Department https://weblink.meridiancity.oYg/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&redo=MeridianCit X D. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=Meridian Cit X E. Irrigation Districts 1. Nampa&Meridian Irrigation District https:llweblink.meridianeily.orglWebLink/Browse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=Meridia nCi City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ F. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orelWebLinkBrowse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=Meridian Cit X G. West Ada School District(WASD) or Other District/School https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X H. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit X I. Idaho Transportation Department(ITD) https:llweblink.meridianciU.orglWebLinkIBrowse.aspx?id=400843&dbid=0&repo=Meridian Cit X V. FINDINGS A. Annexation (UDC 11-513-3E) Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; Staff finds the annexation of the subject site with the R-8 and L-O zoning districts will be consistent with the Medium Density Residential and Office FL UM designation. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed lot sizes and office layout will be consistent with the purpose statement of the residential and commercial zoning districts. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds annexation with R-8 and L-O zoning districts will not be detrimental to public health, safety, and/or welfare. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and The applicant is proposing the phase the development which should not have an inverse impact on any of the public services. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the annexation of the site is in the best interest of the City. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings ■ 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; Stafffinds the proposed plat is generally in conformance with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section IV. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Stafffinds that water is readily available to property, however the extension of the McDermott Trunk line to Ustick and an additional 1 700 ft of 10-inch sewer main is required to serve site. Development of the subject property won't be allowed until sewer service is extended to the property as required by the Public Works Department. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Stafffinds proposed development is consistent with scheduled public improvements.ACHD is scheduled to widen Ustick Road next year, and the City has entered into a cooperative development agreement with a developer for the extension of the McDermott truck line to Ustick. The private developer is responsible for the remainder of the extension in Ustick Rd., which is anticipated to occur prior to the completion of the road widening. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Stafffinds 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 Stafffinds the proposed development is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Stafffinds the development is preserving the Eightmile Lateral and incorporating it into proposed subdivision by keeping them open as a natural feature. VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed annexation and preliminary plat with the requirement of a development agreement containing the provisions in Section IV per the Findings in Section V above. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on[date]. At the ublic hearing the Commission moved to approve the subject[app] request. I. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor. b. In opposition: None C. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application. f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: City of Meridian I Department Report VI.Action ■ a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None C. City Council: The Meridian City Council heard these items on[date].At the public hearing,the Council moved to approve the subject[app] and [app] requests. 1. Summary of the City Council public hearing: a. In favor. b. In opposition: None C. Commentin • None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council: a. None 4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation: a. None City of Meridian I Department Report VI.Action ■ ' 1 1 S � * �+'I1I. 4 - T _ �• ... J .t { 4 �tNf w W+lC�H�1�LJ7 a ► ' orthwest , Auto Transport • 4 W tlstkk Rd W.L1 ticka _._ .W ok'1 Is is . . .nnc. n►rr4p " -IIIIIIp��i�11111 �?��Si-�I ui mnn�rinnnnl BID — • • nP �/ r►rr►��II L■illgllIIIII 11j11111 \,�i•� ��I�11111111111111111111111111►1. pin/1 1 IIIII 111 1\ i 1111OIO111 Q9.........IIIIIII �_mp,►r1 �� 1►IIIp�i�nIn1I1n11 p ennnnn Inn■/� Project �i1111._____= lOou_� �� 11/1. a IOOIIIIIO-=IIIIIIOIIIIIIIIIIII= -1 7 �(1 lump, Area -• of •• lase.. 0 .1111010"lilininiiii- � o� •` �iI`- �� II IIIIp11\�I = ��1111111►�'u._ IL■.... yt•►O __ 1 1►►11111►ID�!Irgr =OI�D• ` �. I♦I nll,iinnll e- 111► 4 I III♦�C�i��i�i llll►nuyuignu►► �11111111111�1111 I�r/ _==T■_ II IIIIIIr�i �liiiii�iiin C 1 p� -'-=unmet� �mllull+��innl nnul . ,�Illpppl♦,�_ -momnn� p,11 Im n� ` u � !III■ . � ■ USTICK� m ■! , , II �_'■ "'IT"� _I� 111 l� ..�...—.. ......■n—■I;�. i III111 1 !,� � �■) QIIIIIIII 1� a■`n m■��■nn'►mm�m __ :��10 11� .�\i m■■■poi nmmq ♦� � _° '■and 1/ ■pl ■m mop r,'�� ,u►q` ■ e�■unn►��i �:In■p♦1♦Oj�♦� ■g11I/ Junom �/ ■ ♦ o ��■ In► -oo u■►♦♦♦ / •nn 11::::1:■ � �j►�: i-�mplrina �1;;�:liiiiiiii►�♦O�l � �•��••ii•�♦`��•ii`i::'. ►�Q ��♦: �� a1 Analysis ,f Mill ► o\�IIIIIII p♦UI � � •O�•`i`�Iq: ♦ ♦� :I♦ �■na 111■.ME �111111111♦✓♦�� W ■ \�♦ ��■■ •I1� :: ♦i♦ �.n.l Q ��,��■n■n■ =� :��•i� IIIIIII/I ,./ son IIIII 1111\�♦11 U ■ ■■■`_�,-�— ==,� �� loon■■■■ ► -- 1!��,.p�'�.,� ■nn■n■1�� U/i► 1 ' Inn��•••i/u°Inu�';' nnlu�►%':��Il�--��01�•I�iininnnt�rinlunu�tnnn►�Jl— Legendn1r—,.;� '� -:u _ ��♦��1\m mnnunnmu IImn1 nm vc_"�•� - • D - •:�Inunnm�mnnnm Inuu� IO :npl�_!ugg11,!" � 1��IIIIUIIIIII�■Immin Illllnr� Project • �UIII =_=_=_ (IIII/I_� - e - • ►11/ son pp111t 11111111� _ _111117�1t 1 IIIInInIII- IIIIIII/ _ Ii4nldi IIII ��Ittlt1ll11t1 i=11111111,IIIIIII1116�J . ��`■�_Area of •• n1u111p�Innmiiiill 1111111►'■._ Iti•...,,` '�•I�iq� ��_____� IIp11►1►►� /�= � Analysis IIIIIIIIIp11 111111 1�•" Ze I�11111 t �I ♦1, ,I♦I� nn,0inntl e .111:� /II- �i►��p I♦■-��G��j Illsit. i�iiiiiiiiii , 111►`TOn��i♦ nllll�a�IIIIII s%nittu ' � �I npl4tp♦�♦/ ME mnuur� Ii1n nID♦♦ I� /'' r ► 'II "� m ■� _�_ l�lr-- J�/I• 1. o *STICK _ :IIIIIIIII - . IIIIIIIIIII ME ��, UiA/.J-L"j ma's��1■■II� - � .■ �:7 . � ��ii �' :\:ii::i�/lam DIII 11 � `• e eJi�1 ul •�iiiii■ .1 I■� i■■ ► ♦ 1� III 1 / /nn■�■ ■■.■.. f ♦ �♦ ��1 log ■.�umu v��i: \��p�♦.■■..:p■ �!i i 7 lam �1��:IIIIIIIID,01 � �, ♦••ice.♦♦♦•iii.�� •♦♦♦ •�•� ',, ��....I �Q:::1111111,��•II � i ♦\i�♦♦�i:: \�rli i '.i♦♦♦i ::iri Ito�p 111111111�� {Y ■ �♦�♦ �m un �. :� ♦♦i II. IIIIII■I 1wig.� um nn\�9nnoi� �— l e D - son m►�► I�nwa e110 �i��Ilp1 /�i�I/�iiini umnl■rinnnnl lnnn Illlel I==1==1=1-11 ui I iiil 11i qm nnmunnnlu mnnarl IIIIIII�■ ►III ��IIIIIIIIItIt 11111111111 IIIIIIIII�I nun■unnm out Legend Its 1►► Ilnl�=_I/I �`�%IIII III\\�=�ItI11IIIlIt1�=(IIIIIIIII 1111111►� Project41111.e■eo= Il rlrl II mIlIlIlnlpl1lI1lpl11i■E10►1�-IIII\-IIIII/I'1111/0=II\r=-5 �,=rI"I►I II��U� '�I/�lulUn.`_I�III pA,,�,b,1•.1..I IS • MEN 11 9/ ��►ll1l1�l1l1l1•1lil1,p,�1l1`11l1l1l1l11ll1l11l��=-J I �r I,�■1�1=1=��_`_ _■_ City Limits _ I�♦i♦�1� IIII►lup, n11,�11nnt1_■�111�� 1 I�IA•I�:�i�i��i% ==Planned Parcels ,un J II� mm= IU►up1►`T IIII♦jai IIII/� �� ►►IN,♦ -1 •%� �1111/ � =1111111111-� .IC:I::D:�.�.,L7C771��_I:1:1� � /IIII►„_ • Analysis e limnnm ' IIIIIN e mm�■I //IIII■►�♦♦_; �i♦`jiiii' __ eM Iln II_�Ili nm►o = ' :}�n ss ♦i♦i. ni Inunn nn� =Inn 1 II; '-� - i n ♦ 7 �� _'i�� =,unnmummui_ af:IBl nuns a af:I:I � 7[[70 IIIIII= unl 1 t _ U Ind mn1 unnnuIS = -nll lnunl= n■n.10=__�_E =Inn noon_=? /♦��-• _nnnumm 1 Imuu,_ � �/ �,;��7 =moon m I •i,:,Y° -_ r mmM e �n- n inol-wn �I louun m+ - w(IIIIIIIII=� nqi:: 1 ulnnnnn nm - I ` 1� -,i' cii■iimin��nnni Unnun on s= :.iwD►�ii�1 \n m::Iron ummm ___ _ _ � r��p m u��n■I I►unmq ,..,'.�.- i �' ■IIIIIIIIIIIIi= _■I -. IIIIIIIII � .■,nu�1i 1: ■Ii �� 1 / leeoo nos ♦��p♦j an�� ,� • IIIIIIIIIIIII=1 - _ ■■■n1/♦I� �Ii ■�n....11►•♦1♦♦♦1 �111•��i1 ►� � =mamma e �■n■un♦■♦d: .. �p ♦i♦♦i♦O�loii.. :mums / _- �• /.■n■�.��::::::: !♦ i •♦i .I 11•■� I, / I, `` �_■_ II:Iai' ■■•a■. ♦ q � � .♦ Ion �mJ■noulq�ii l. ~ �•".i ,�� //,•■iiii��::::1'` /� jwf: i�Un11j/.n.l �� I,�. � Ir ..•1111�� uo� ��► •� IIIIII ��mmnr,�i . c ♦i::. ♦��Imo••♦�•��..:1 �. ♦ s■ ;��, 111111111►,•. 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I •. .•.•.�.... �•, . ,, ...IIII ��:Q:1111111,E p�Il � mnn/►��:s_p ii ••i�•i•♦♦♦♦�: �I♦♦ ��♦i �■■m Is— logo y IIIIIIIII�i �� W nn nn-� �■�1�i♦♦♦�■■ .I� �'♦i,♦ .■n.l ♦ un nu� ■■ ♦ �♦■n nn m • I ♦ �• �III. ♦ Illlttul I��Q11111 tlll\��4 � nnunnQ I�llmnnll■ ��♦1�1��°� �� ♦—�♦ 11■uunu111.u'-��n■nn■ol�r I �� 11 G:�1,�Luri/` 14, nm■n • m B. Conceptual Office Layout and Preliminary Plat(date: 1/5/2026) ............ .. .. % 10 iff 'E '5 N i;' 9 ;E q 6g gEj ZZI Oa ...... ....... 4Z ....... TTn L I I-1LQ km M PRELIMINARY PLAT SHOWING DURANGO SUBDIVISION A PORTION N OF THESE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 33, I(TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH,RANGE I WEST,BOISE MERIDIAN, CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY,IDAHO mm 00 OO ID 00..... ...... @ a 8 El KUTES L;K F" wl �CD CD (D DUPANGO�SUBDIVISIONn MERIDIAN, IDAHO T City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits , I -- __-- _ — DUANGIGSU N N ME OUNHIDAF O Ion �PP1.1»u _ r - -- EE .,. T l T �Y k' s 2s 4 4w. =7- - . g. a ,m mm t' ®§ +-:-:-:_ ::::::::.:.:.:.:.:::::::. - ----s ar h Egga: s� LEGEND DURANGoSUBDIVISio MERIN MERIDIAN,IDAHO FIon ® w am m City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ e s a a J _ $§ §ox _ Ida fi ii_ 4 __i_F__ __-- ___A__ � __g_______ '_ _A_ _-g____— __-______ __ �5 �s��' ��s�� §"� �' I��•:' ?�� s§E ?'§� g§� ?§• 3§x a. a� a� W e z I �,a 3: -� :: ----------- �� :. i -- -- ----------------1--- ------------------ Ali �; --------- -- -------- DU RANGO SUBDIVISION vu' MERIDIAN,IDANO U.. u..wre i _ I - - - _ __-_ - ----------- _ - ___--_—__—_-_-_-_----_- _- f1j}' .J• �_ w :: WID ID 0 LEGEND 1 0 1 it I — ® D DUMNG..... JISION ..NA? PIN ®�sr� ";JPP3a City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ -------1-- I -- 4y o o o :jo ---==FTIPP=�-- I -- ------------I{----------- ------ f m 0 i 1• e f --------------------------------- - - --t- 'leg�. ,M �. o ''� a. I , i l ! ---------------a— 1 : o LEGEND DURANGO SUBDIVISION � ■V■■ --- ME I101AN�IDAHO --- E.PP3.2 �e s"i� sw -- --- --- is I c`i SEWERALIGNMENTA F -sa gga 9 z•,.o sgE 'fi3—�8 -- j� I ii a io - =r`----- l DU-NG.SUBDIVISION O ■V■■ ME1101ANo OAHO SEWERALIGNMENTA CONTINUED City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 8 �� y♦ ell- ----------�f asa° rz r o a g{pii ____ p! drx3 l333 SEWER ALIGNMENT B e ea ii! "r ______________` xsw x5}5_ fil x x51q_ ag pp mSEWER ALIGNMENTD 33 da �S a d� �,.�.1� DUPANGO SUBD IDAHAH O ON -ws am wo .m r.m z,m MERIDIAN� a.n xm xm x vn Hiss •'zn SEWER ALIGNMENTC ��oN. �ri'.L^W�`r '.,,'. l 37'ROW TYPICAL LOCAL STREET SECTION f 37ROW LOCAL STREET SECTION-COMMERCIALANDENTRANCES DUUNGO SUBDIVISION ■ MMERIDIIDIAN,IDAHO �■■(\�i�■r�j■ PP3.4... City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ ' I � mm� �oo _ `RRO�ReRR �OGeRGp ` A oo© moo oo©�000 eeee ee I� " �ooa®oo - m0000© oo0�mm nn fi4&i � _ poll ............„tea,..., oa0�m© a ;�. b� I o yf !� o 0 �. so ® I li o ® ® ® o ---- ---- -- --- --- ------ Imll- LANDSCAPE PLAN ym.W....n..W. DDRANGO SDBDNISION ova Cd�SS MERIDIAN,IDAHO 0. a...,.is•es�Q.i E�l1914T.6 CE L3.0 -_— ________ _---_—___—____—_ _—______--____ - O O O _ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o� o 0 ® ® e ® ® ® ® © ® ® 0 04 Blom F N ® ® Q ® ® ® 0 05 Tfoo ® o © ® 0 ® ® —— -- -- ----------- ---------- o E ------ DDRANGo SDBDMSIDN LENCE PLAN d MERIDLWIDAXD i a City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ LMSF F.W= 09 ma.aEE.nEo.EEE.EN E ME -- MW 07"` ....... 10 W T .. 08 ID4H,ouPAH�osu ory MEPIUTANIOAHO 0,km DURANGO SUBDIVISION CONCEPTUAL,SUBJECTTO CHANGE i I ---------------- ----------- -- _ ' - - -- - --- w mOHIEY SN St. � J yf - s R 8 sn�o�Lal na�nn wo City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ D. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 1/5/2026) HALE o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� 0 0 k m ® o ---Wa=r o ® m o m mr®- ® -ALSrtE AMENrtl6 ____________________ fl (D 1 (D I � �1 i I I QPEN SPACE E%HI6IT I DDPAN60SU-SIDN MEPIDL4f!IDAMD f%1.0 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ E. Common Drive Exhibit(date: 1/5/2026) LOT MUST LOT 8 MUST PROVIDE SPACE FOR AI VEHICLE P TOVIDE TURNPACE FOR A VEHICLE TO TURN AROUND.LAYOUT IS SHOW AS AROUND.LAYOUT IS SHOW AS AN E%AMPLE. CItt TO -AN E%MPLE. CItt TO APPROVE ACTUAL LAYOUT AS A APPROVE ACTUAL LAYOIR AS PART OF LOT 31 A PART OF LOT 8 CONSTRUCTION PLANS. CONSTRUCTION PLANS. :.EIGHT MILE LATERAL J»:»::ii?i:•:r:ii.T.:: EIGHTMILE LATERAL --- — ... ... z L 0O x �SIbE7--1 >Q w �.ILI F -r SIDE 1 �12 N ® 8 20 2C' 31 '^ N Z > Oa y10' --EIDE N_- Z z O __ __ LOT 9 IS A LOT 30 IS A ° SIDE - TIDE - NON-BUN DABLE 12'� BUILDING O $ NON-BUILDABLE f ® O BUILDING ® COMMON LOT WITH COMMON LOT WITH ENVELOPE. 0 U 12'"v� A BLANKET 20' 32 N TYPICAL. ENVELOPE. O7 20"" _ A BLANKET INGRESS EGRESS TYPICAL. v' INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT IN b L-- WE- 10 EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF 10' -- FAVOR OF LOTS 31,32.AND -_ TIDE---- 9 LOTS 8.BLOCK 6. 33 ----3 0 SIDE ® BLOCK 6. ®• 12'� 12'in © 20 W.PAGOSA ST. - 0 33 z PAGOSA ST. 11 L-_-SIDL_--- i' DRIVEWAY FOR DRIVEWAY FOR 1 C. --SIDE1- J 10 LOT 5 BLOCK LOT 34 BLOCK - f"-- -------7 8 MUST BE B MUST BE ---_ _-� LOCATED ON THE OPPOSITE ON THE OPPOSITE OS SIDE OF THE SIDE OF THE ... SHARED SHARED ;.: ON DRIVE COMMON DRIVE I L---_---_- a COMMPROPERTY PROPERTY a r 3 .._-______I BLOCK6 w uNE. uNE. .f 2 w E N G I IN E R I N G m LOTS 6-8 BLOCK 6 LOT 30-32 BLOCK 6 a Ex2.0 0 s0 100 150 0 0 00 150 Plan Scale:l"=50' Plan scaler=sp' P 9 S vgSPYP,y o* e s61 w -165 T 31/ �NpsCA City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ F. Building Elevations Conceptual Commercial Off-ice Building Examples - Linder & Goddard Creek AN 4LOW, u � AIL .41 bf Ji City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ Conceptual Commercial Office Building Examples - Chinden & Fax Run s 7.:& r w * A . City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ Conceptual Single-Family Residence Examples 1wi _ -' Jam= - E. i I City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ G. Annexation Legal Descriptions & Exhibit Maps I= E N G 1 N E E R I N G March 19,2026 Project No.:24199 Durango Subdivision Exhibit A Legal Description for Rezone to L-0 A parcel of land being a portion of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 114 of Section 33,Township 4 North,Range 1 West,B.M.,Ada County,Idaho being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an aluminum cap marking the South 1/4 cornerof said Section 33,which bears S89°19'00"E a distance of 2,638.24 feet from an aluminum cap marking the Southwest corner of said Section 33,thence following the southerly line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4, N89'19'00"W a distance of870.62 feet; Thence leaving said southerly line,N00"29'28"E a distance of 369.87 feet to the centerline of Sky Pilot Drain; Thence following said centerline,100.55 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 220.00 feet,a delta angle of 26"11'15",a chord bearing of N76"34'28"W,and a chord distance of 99.68 feet; Thence leaving said centerline,S89°40'10"E a distance of 527.80 feet; Thence 500'41'00"W a distance of 50.18 feet; Thence S89'19'00"E a distance of 247.42 feet; Thence 78.54 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 50.00 feet,a delta angle of 90°00'00",a chord bearing of N45°41'00"E,and a chord distance of 70.71 feet; Thence S89°19'00"E a distance of 142.50 feet to the easterly line of said 5outheast 114 of the Southwest 1/4; Thence following said easterly fine,SD0°29'07"W a distance of 393.92 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains a total of 7.55 acres,more or less,and is subject-to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of record or implied. Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof. a 1.24 9 . air �9 L. 13A�'y� 3- t -ZZ 2-f' 5725 North Discovery Way•Boise,Idaho 93113•20&639.6939• kmengllp.com City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ km E N G I N E E R I N G March 19,2026 Project No..24-199 Durango Subdivision Exhibit A Legal Description for Rezone to R-8 A parcel of land being a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33,Township 4 North,Range 1 West, B.M_,Ada County,Idaho being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at an aluminum cap marking the South 1/4 corner of said Section 33,which bears S89`19'00"E a distance of 2,638.24 feet from an aluminum cap marking the Southwest corner of said Section 33,thence following the southerly line of said Southwest 1/4,N89"19'00"W a distance of 870.62 feet; Thence leaving said southerly line,N00°29'28"E a distance of 368.87 feet to the centerline of Sky Pilot Drain; Thence following said centerline,100.55 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 22C.00 feet,a delta angle of a chord bearing of N76"34'28"W,and a chord distance of 99.68 feetto the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence following said centerline,N89'4(Y10"W a distance of 385.32 feet to the centerline of N. McDermott Bypass; Thence leaving the centerline of said Sky Pilot Drain and following the centerline of said N.McDermott Bypass the fallowing two(2)courses: 1. NOD'29'45"E a distance of 593.73 feet; 2. 419.07 feet along the arc of a curve to the left,said curve having a radius of 371.00 feet,a delta angle of 64°43'12",a chord bearing of N31'51'51"W,and a chard distance of 397.15 feet to the northerly line of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 33; Thence leaving said centerline and following said northerly line,589`18'42"E a distance of 1,566.45 feet to the Northeast Corner of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 SCenter-South 1/16 corner); Thence leaving said northerly line and following the easterly line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4,S00'29'07"W a distance of 922.93 feet; Thence leaving said easterly line,N89'19'00"W a distance of 142.50feet; Thence 78.54 feet along the arc of a curve to the right,said curve having a radius of 50.00 feet,a delta angle of 90°00'OO",a chord bearing ofS45'41'60"W,and a chord distance of 70.71 feet; Thence N89°19'00"W a distance of 247.42 feet; Thence N00"41'00"E a distance of 50.18 feet; Thence N89"40'10"W a distance of 527.80 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains a total of 29.53 acres,more or less,and is subject to all existing easements and/or rights-of-way of record or implied. Attached hereto is Exhibit B and by this reference is made a part hereof. z a �,12459 0 5725 North Discovery way•Boise,Idaho 83713•208.639.6939• kmengllp.com City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ r r � cn _ 0 I ilk zm 2� I NOG 29'#5"E 593.73' Z RfVf RfYf I b I VS C ' CO �o L .�'-r y C7 �m rn �a rn 47 d [R co Z n" Q 4 A Q M i p P � O c O o NCO'29'28"E 368. 0 Go CO 87 CO rn ZCL o m 6 p U G7 r,n .i sn = 0 C N O Z 90 �= N A C Ol Q G ? '� 4o fq Z 0 Cr N C � t'b p m ry O ¢ C_ O m n r. I' �n N a o c = y p a° r 0D'� [p a w o ru n COCr I K ID 1-4 W W W W [(D W .2i = �' o InQ r�F, 0- 0 wwwww 4 1 a; a. N o AI+ °'4 cwO V o — W r'a n 3 Cn 0 0 000rri T4 00 .1 G a 1+LA 73 _ f7 [h „�N Q rr¢ O m > i ti a _ rn j o s I Rn to ❑ 0 1 Ua p Qrn rrh2 pp 4 z� r 393.92 922.93' s SO0'29'47"W 1316.85' z z m C CL rn ti v z m Exhibit B 1 a m � .. mA- �:71 Rezone to R-8 & L-D �g Z 0 a q Q rn -n 3 �mA Durango Subdivision =z e SW 1/4 Sec. 33, T4N, RlW, BM, Ada County, ID City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ VIII. ADDITIONAL NOTES &DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS, TABLES,AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days. Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel. Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0(i.e. excludes most HOA area,transitional development, government,and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2<5.0; R-4<2.0; R-8< 1.0; R-15 <0.5; R-40<0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones,may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates,usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries(TAZ's). B. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources, including sewer main lines, sewer trunk sheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times,police crime reporting,pathway information,existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review,using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria(not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city(higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores,whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. C. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service(LOS).LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver's experience with a letter ranking from A to F. Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience.ACHD considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians,nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP). The IFYWP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary, from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan(CIP).The CIP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years. City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts ■ NEW HEARING DATE Development Application Transmittal Link to Project Application: Durango Subdivision AZ, PP H-2025-0017 Hearing Date: May 28tn 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: cityclerk(cD_meridiancity.org Built for Business, Designed for Living All e-mail messages sent to or received bV CitV of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and maV be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. F47 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation Durango SubdivisionCity of MeridianPlat, Annexation and Zoning-Pre Vicinity Map SITE Current Conditions (City of Meridian Zoning Map)SITE MCDERMOTT Future Land Use Map Low Impact Business Uses –O) -Office (L8 du/a-3–Medium Density Residential (R8) SITE Preliminary Plat Layout Conceptual LO Building Layout- Site Plan McUstickIntegration with – Landscape Sections McDermott Bypass LandscapingUstick Entryway Corridor LandscapingCommercial to Residential Buffer Requested Condition Modification Add Clarification Language to Preliminary Plat Condition 1.a: •Commercial Conceptual LO Building Elevations- Conceptual R8 Building Elevations- W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Ustick Commercial (H-2025-0059 & H-2026-0007) by Hawkins Companies, located at 5900 W. Ustick Rd. A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map designation on 4 acres of land from Medium Density Residential to Commercial(H-2025-0059). B. Request:Annexation of 4.31 acres of land with a C-C zoning district. (H-2026-0007) C. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of four(4) building lots on 4 acres of land in the C-C zoning district for McUstick Subdivision (H-2026-0007) 48 00 V 01 Ul w NJ cu 1 00 N cri r+ rD ED -n Ln rD r) z w 0 3(D (D ml -0 Cl c cr 0 3: m -n fu C, "no rn > N = 0- O*Q Ca Ln drQ Ln 0 m 9 m O cn -C3 (D O r+ �+ x 0 0 0 C: rD 0 CD 0 (D Pr > (D 0 ::3 m =3 (IQ V IDIAN% Community Development Dept. Meridian City Hall, Suite 102 A H U 33 E. Broadway Avenue Community Development Meridian, Idaho 83642 Department MEMORANDUM May 21, 2026 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor Re: Ustick Commercial/McUstick Subdivision—H-2025-0059 and H-2026-0007 On May 7, 2026, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the Ustick Commercial/McUstick Subdivision project to the May 28, 2026 hearing. The continuance was required to allow this project to be discussed during the same hearing as the Durango Subdivision and bring forward draft conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration. Below are the draft conditions of approval that staff believes are most relevant to the subject application should the Commission recommend approval. Staff has also identified additional considerations for the Commission to evaluate during deliberations on the application. Further, the applicant has provided exhibits demonstrating how the proposed commercial development is intended to transition and integrate with the proposed residential development known as Durango Subdivision(see attachments below). Draft Conditions of Approval A. Meridian Planning Division 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A fee for the DA shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6) months of the date of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision & Order for the Annexation request. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: i. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations,preliminary plat, landscape plan, and buffer exhibits included below in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. ii. The final design of all structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM). iii. The development is subject to the Oaks lift station&West Ada School District reimbursement agreements. 49 Page 12 iv. The site design shall comply with the site design standards in UDC 11-3A- 19.B.2b, which require a minimum of thirty (30)percent of the buildable frontage of the property to be occupied by building facades and/or public space. v. Business hours of operation in the C-C zoning district shall be limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3B. Extended hours of operation may be requested through a conditional use permit. vi. Access to W. Ustick Rd is prohibited in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. vii.Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. 2. The final plat(s) shall include the following revisions: i. Depict cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all lots in the subdivision and to adjoining properties either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat asset forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2. ii. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide drive aisle connection with pedestrian facilities on each side to the property to the north. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s) shall include the following revisions: i. Where pedestrian pathways are proposed from perimeter sidewalks to the main building entrances, pathways shall be distinguished from vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks, per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. ii. Lawn and other grasses requiring regular mowing shall comprise no more than sixty-five (65)percent of the vegetated coverage of a landscape (street)buffer per UDC 11-3B-7C.3e; calculations or a note demonstrating compliance should be included on the plan. iii. Mitigation information shall be included for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10. iv. Depict a 25-foot-wide buffer to adjoining residential land uses with landscaping per the standards in UDC 11-3B-9C. 4. Additional design features consisting of a dry creek bed with river rock and boulders shall be included in the street buffer along W. Ustick Rd., an entryway corridor, as proposed, in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.3f. 5. A public use easement shall be submitted for all multi-use pathways/sidewalks located outside of the adjacent ACHD right-of-way, as required by the Park's Dept. 6. Staff s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. 7. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted for the commercial development and approved by the Planning Division prior to submittal of application(s) for building permits. 8. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq ■ Rev:01/2011 Page 13 Other Considerations for the Commission 1. Draft Condition of Approval 2.ii above requires a northern vehicular connection to the Durango Subdivision in lieu of pedestrian connectivity only. The applicant believes adequate access is already being provided to the commercial property without the addition of the northern vehicular connection. The condition should be removed if the Commission finds additional vehicular connectivity is warranted. 2. DA provision v. restricts the operating hours between 6 am and 11 pm unless otherwise approved by a CUP. The applicant has indicated the future tenant of Lot 1, Block 1 operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The applicant is requesting that the Commission allow a 24 hour use on said lot because the property isn't currently adjacent to a residential use/district. This DA provision should be modified if Commission supports the 24hr operation. 3. The applicant is requesting that the Commission allow one building permit to be issued for the site prior to recording the plat. The applicant would like the ability to begin site work and prepare the property for development prior to recording the final plat. A new DA provision should be added if this request is supported by the Commission. Landscape Buffer Exhibits lit LLJ � q f nI COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL BUFFER 11 HIBIT °� lar I;M ` Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq ■ Rev:01/2011 Page i4 -------------------- ------- {{ �(\GOMMERCVLL TO RESIUENUAL BUFFER III w a A _ T II —I llr J I I II A[OMMERCN L TORESIDENTIAL[ROSS=ON as mo xos�nw ow ws MCSTICI(SIIBOINSION MERIOIAN,IOAHO Q�km COMMERCIALT� NUA�PERATION L L��m �� III II�� ,f(— J Ilr J IL.Ik „LL,��I�— �' Bxrs ORESIUE �LL Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq ■ Rev:O1/2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �E IDIAN --- DEPARTMENT REPORT HEARING 5/7/2026 Legend @17-I N 0 DATE: L Project Location TO: Planning&Zoning Commission :::Area of Impactri i= City Limits FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner Q Analysis 208-884-5533 sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Hawkins Companies SUBJECT: Ustick Commercial H-2025-0059 (CPAM); H-2026-0007 0 (AZT pp) LOCATION: 5900 W.Ustick Rd., in the southwest 1/4 of Section 33,TAN.,R.1W. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary The Applicant has submitted the following applications: • Comprehensive Plan map amendment to change the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) designation on 4-acres of land from Medium Density Residential(MDR)to Commercial; • Annexation of 4.31 acres of land with a C-C zoning district; and • Preliminary plat consisting of four(4)building lots on 4-acres of land in the C-C zoning district for McUstick Subdivision. B. Issues/Waivers Staff is not in support of the proposed map amendment from MDR to Commercial for the following reasons: • The proposed development plan is entirely auto-oriented and the uses will create a high volume of trips,which will create traffic conflicts in this area—none of which are desired in such close proximity to the Ustick/McDermott interchange area. • The proposed development is not consistent with key policies in the Comprehensive Plan,as follows: o There is no transition in uses,zoning or buffering provided between the proposed commercial uses and future residential uses to the north,which negatively impacts quality of life for those living in the immediate area; o There is no landscape buffer and/or wall proposed along the northern boundary of the site to assist in buffering the future residential uses to the north from noise, lighting, and odor impacts from the proposed uses; City of Meridian I Department Report I. Project Overview ■ o The proposed auto-oriented commercial development will not improve air quality or reduce air pollution,which will negatively affect air quality in the Meridian and Treasure Valley airshed due to added vehicular traffic and vehicles idling in drive-thru lines. o The proposed commercial uses,associated business hours of operation and site design will create conflicts with adjacent future residential uses and is not compatible. o The Dayspring project on the south side of Ustick includes commercial uses that haven't been realized yet. Additionally,their concept plan did not include auto-dominated uses. C. Recommendation Planning Division: Denial of the proposed map amendment and consequently the proposed annexation and preliminary plat. Planning and Zoning Commission: Pending D. Decision City Council: Pending E. Table of Contents CommunityMetrics.............................................................................. II StaffAnalysis..................................................................................... III City/Agency Comments and Conditions...................................................... IV Findings............................................................................................ V Action.............................................................................................. VI Exhibits............................................................................................ VII II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1•Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) J1 Rural residential - Proposed Land Use(s) Commercial(e.g. convenience store/fuel facility,coffee - shop,oil change facility,financial institution,or other commercial uses allowed in the C-C district) Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning C-C(Community Business District) Adopted FLUM Designation Medium Density Residential(MDR) VILA.3 Proposed FLUM Designation Commercial Table 2: Project Overview Description Details History None Phasing Plan 1 phase Physical Features The Sky Pilot Drain lies on the northern boundary of this site;50' of the 100' easement for the drain lies on this property Acreage 4 acres Lots 4 building lots/0 common lots Table 3: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 12/2/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 11/19/2025 City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Table 4: A2ency Comments Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District _ IV.K • Comments Received Yes—Draft report - • Commission Action Required No - - • Access Full access driveway to McDermott Bypass and RIRO to - Ustick as temporary access if cross access isn't provided from the Durango development. • Traffic Level of Service Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour - Classification Traffic Count Level of Service Ustick Road 448-feet Principal Arterial 493 Better than"E" McDermott Bypass 363-feet Future Collector N/A '"N/A "Acceptable level of service for a two-lane principal arterial is"E"(690 VPH). ACHD does not set level of service thresholds for ITD roadways. • TIS submitted? Yes ITD Comments Received No comments received IV.L Meridian Public Works IV.B Wastewater • Distance to Mainline Sewer to this property is contingent on others extending the _ sewer from McDermott Rd. • Impacts or Concerns No Meridian Public Works Water IV.B • Distance to Mainline Water is available to the site. • Impacts or Concerns No Note: See section IV. City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see the public record. Paste the following link into your browser to access the public record: https:llweblink.meridiancily.orb/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=435499&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCitX City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:S0433346925 Date Retrieved:2026/5/1 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator: 848 Surrounding Area 1,547 0 49 /o rot city 976 ® City Limits 40 888.3 ■ Not City Household Household& Population Growth Households 02020 Population Change:82.4°I° Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 Use Types Residential Addresses All Addresses ■ Single-family ® Multi-family 1% 0% is 99% ® Commercial Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. History None B. General Overview The subject property is currently zoned RUT in Ada County and designated Medium Density Residential(MDR)on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)in the Comprehensive Plan. The MDR designation allows residential dwellings at gross densities of three(3)to eight(8)units per acre. The adjacent property to the north and east has a development application(i.e. Durango Subdivision H-2025-0017)in process for annexation with R-8 and L-O zoning and a preliminary plat, scheduled to be heard by the Commission on May 28'. That property is proposed to develop with single-family detached residential homes and offices along Ustick Rd., as shown below. The configuration of the proposed Office area has shifted from the east to the west from that shown on the FLUM. t AIN. �: a The property directly to the south across W.Ustick Rd. (Dayspring Subdivision H-2024-0070) was recently annexed and is proposed to develop with neighborhood commercial non-auto- oriented uses along Ustick Rd. and single-family residences to the south. The McDermott Road Bypass runs along the west side of the property,which is currently under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department(ITD). The Applicant proposes an amendment to the FLUM to change the future land use designation of this property from MDR to Commercial, annexation of 4-acres of land with a C-C(Community Business District)zoning district, and a preliminary plat consisting of four(4)buildable lots on 4- acres of land. Per the Comprehensive Plan,the Commercial designation provides for a full range of commercial uses to serve area residents and visitors and is the most intense of the commercial designations. Per the UDC (11-213-1),the purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed C-C zoning district allows a larger scale and broader mix of retail, office and service uses with access to arterial streets than the C-N district but is less intense than the C-G district,which allows the largest scale of these uses along with industrial uses. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ A conceptual development plan and building elevations are proposed with the annexation application that demonstrate how the site is proposed to develop with a convenience store/fuel sales facility,oil change facility,coffee shop, financial institution and/or other commercial uses as allowed in the proposed C-C zoning district. Four(4)building pads are proposed,two (2)of which have drive-through establishments. The proposed development plan is entirely auto-oriented,which is not desired in such close proximity to the Ustick/McDermott interchange. This area is not intended for high volume trips and is to be protected from traffic conflicts,which are created by high traffic-generating uses, thus the reason the MDR FLUM designation was determined to be the most appropriate for this site and the Mixed Use—Interchange (MU-1)designation most appropriate for across the street to the west adjacent to the interchange. As noted above,the adjacent development to the north and east of this site(Durango Subdivision) is not scheduled to be heard by the Commission until after the subject application is heard. If office uses aren't approved along the frontage of Ustick Rd. on that property,residential uses will likely develop in that area,which will abut the commercial uses proposed on this site making the use even more inappropriate due to incompatibility of uses. At the pre-application meeting, Staff requested the Applicant submit a market analysis to support the proposed change to the FLUM—the Applicant did not do so but their narrative does include their reasoning for why the property should be designated Commercial rather than Residential. The Applicant also recommended waiting until the project to the east(Durango) obtains entitlements before submitting an application for this property—that application as noted is in process but scheduled to be heard by the Commission after this application. Beyond the desire for low intensity uses to be located in close proximity to the interchange area, Staff is concerned about the negative impact approving the proposed development might have on nearby planned retail and restaurant uses in Commercial and Mixed-Use designated properties in the nearby area. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion the existing entitled and designated commercial uses should develop first in order to determine if the market will support additional commercial uses beyond those planned in this area. C. Comprehensive Plan Policies (Staff analysis in italic text) • 3.07.01 A—Require all new development to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses through buffering, screening,transitional densities, and other best site design practices. There is no transition in uses or zoning between the proposed commercial uses and future residential uses to the north, which negatively impacts quality of life for those living in the immediate area. No landscape buffer and/or walls are proposed outside of the 50'wide Sky Pilot drain easement along the northern boundary of the site to adequately buffer/screen the proposed commercial development from the future residential development to the north. • 5.01.0117—Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code. The UDC limits business hours of operation in the C-C district adjacent to residential uses and zoning from 6 am to 11 pm to minimum these disturbances; however, extended hours may be requested through a conditional use permit as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3B. It's anticipated extended hours will be needed for the fuel facility and drive-through uses. • 6.01.01J—Encourage new development to include buffered sidewalks,a sidewalk separated from the motor vehicle lane by a planter strip, especially on collector and arterial roadways. The proposed sidewalks along the arterial streets (McDermott Bypass & Ustick) are separated from the motor vehicle lane by a planter strip. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ • 3.07.0213—Locate smaller-scale,neighborhood-serving commercial and office use clusters so they complement and provide convenient access from nearby residential areas, limiting access to arterial roadways and multimodal corridors. The proposed convenience store/fuel facility, drive-through establishments and oil change facility uses are larger scale and more intense than neighborhood-serving uses listed in the Comprehensive Plan with direct access to adjacent arterial roadways and no vehicular connectivity with the future residential neighborhood. • 4.06.00—Improve air quality and reduce air pollution in the Meridian and Treasure Valley airshed. The proposed development would negatively affect air quality for adjacent residential uses due to added vehicular traffic and vehicles idling in drive-thru lines. • 3.01.01 A—Evaluate comprehensive impacts of growth and consider City Master Plans and Strategic Plans in all land use decisions(e.g.,traffic impacts, school enrollment, and parks). The existing FL UM designation for this property in the Comprehensive Plan is MDR, which has a much lower traffic impact than the proposed development plan.As noted in the Applicant's narrative, the McDermott Bypass/Ustick intersection is expected to be extremely busy—the proposed uses will exacerbate traffic in this area where low traffic generating uses are desired. The study that went into the FL UM determined that residential use was the best use for this property with higher intensity/traffic generating uses located further away from the interchange area. • 3.07.00—Encourage compatible uses and site design to minimize conflicts and maximize use of land.Residential uses as currently planned on this property which are more compatible with future adjacent residential uses and the nearby interchange area than the proposed commercial uses. Residential uses will create less traffic than commercial uses, which is more appropriate and will create less conflicts in this area. The proposed commercial uses, associated business hours of operation and site design will create conflicts and is not compatible with adjacent residential uses. • 3.07.01 —Proactively address potential conflicts between incompatible uses. The proposed convenience store/fuel facility, drive-through and vehicle service uses and associated hours of operation will likely conflict with future residential uses due to impacts pertaining to lighting, noise and air quality, which are not proposed to be buffered and/or mitigated. D. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements (UDC 11-1): There is an existing home and accessory structures on the property that will be removed with development. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The proposed convenience store& fuel sales facility and restaurant(coffee shop)are principal permitted uses in the C-C district, subject to the specific use standards in UDC 1I- 4-3-20 (and 11-3A-16 if applicable)and 11-4-3-49 (and 11-4-3-11 Drive-through Establishment if applicable),respectively. The proposed vehicle service(oil change facility) use requires conditional use permit approval in the C-C district, subject to the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-38. A financial institution is a principal permitted use in the C-C district, subject to the specific use standards in 11-4-3-17 (and 11-3A-16 if applicable). See UDC Table 11-2B-2 for additional uses allowed in the C-C district. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ 3. Dimensional Standards (UDC 11-2): Compliance with the dimensional standards of the C-C zoning district in UDC Table 11-2B-3 is required. E. Design Standards Analysis 1. Structure and Site Design Standards (UDC 11-3A-19): All structures and site design is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 19. The conceptual development plan depicts an interconnected network of walkways and drive aisles that promote pedestrian and vehicular mobility within the development and to the adjacent development to the east; a pathway is proposed to the future residential development to the north for pedestrian access and connectivity,no vehicular connectivity is proposed. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of thirty(30)percent of the buildable frontage of the property shall be occupied by building facades and/or public space per UDC 11-3A-19B.2b. A drive aisle is proposed along the frontage of the property adjacent to Ustick Rd.,which separates the buildings from the street—parking is proposed at the rear of the buildings. If the proposed development is approved,compliance with this standard is required.A revised conceptual development plan should be submitted that demonstrates compliance with this standard. Pedestrian pathways are proposed from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrances. Where the pathway crosses vehicular driving surfaces,it is required to be distinguished through the use of pavers,colored or scored concrete,or bricks,per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. 2. Landscaping (UDC 11-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Entry Way Corridor: W.Ustick Rd.—the proposed buffer width is 35',which 35 Feet complies with this standard Arterial Road:25 Feet N.McDermott Rd.Bypass—the proposed buffer width is 26',which complies with this standard Landscaping must comply with the standards in UDC 11-3B-7C. Lawn and other grasses requiring regular mowing shall comprise no more than sixty-five(65) percent of the vegetated coverage of a landscape buffer; calculations demonstrating compliance should be included on the plan.Because W. Ustick Rd. is an entryway corridor, additional landscape design features are required within the buffer as set forth in UDC 11-3B-7C.3f. The additional design features consist of a dry creek bed with river rock and boulders as shown on the cross-section below and on the landscape plan below in Section VII.H. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ 35' ENTRYWAY CORRIUOR LANOWAPE BUFFER {35' REQ) 5' 1 p' 19' �USTIOIt RD.— LAWN CONCRETE —LANDSCAPE BEd PARkSTRIP WALKWAY PER PLAN I DRY CREEK BED PLFNT M&ERLAL —II III— —II I I I I *7- USTICK RD. LANDSCAPE BLIFFER SECTION r Y DRY CREEK BED REFERENCE IMAGE ii. Parking lot landscaping Landscaping is required to be provided in all parking areas with future development per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. Analysis of the plans for consistency with these standards will take place with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance and/or Conditional Use Permit application, as applicable. iii. Landscape buffers to adjoining uses A minimum 25-foot-wide buffer is required adjacent to residential land uses in the C-C district in accord with UDC Table 11-2B-3 landscaped per the standards in UDC I I-3B- 9C. Where the adjacent property is vacant,the FLUM designation determines use. Although no residential land uses currently exist on the adjacent property to the north and east,the FLUM designation on that property is MDR. With the pending Durango Subdivision application for that property,residential uses are proposed to the north and office uses are proposed to the east. Because there is a 50' wide easement for the Sky Pilot Drain along the north property boundary,which prohibits trees/shrubbery,the buffer should be placed outside of the City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ easement. The width of the buffer may be modified by City Council at a public hearing with notice to surrounding property owners if requested by the Applicant. iv. Tree preservation Per UDC 11-3B-10,Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two(2)ten- inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four- inch caliper trees,or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees). There are existing trees on the site that will be removed with development. Mitigation should be assessed prior to removal of any trees from the site and information should be included on the landscape plan that demonstrates compliance with the standards in UDC 11-313-10C.5. v. Storm integration An adequate storm drainage system shall be required in all developments in accord with the city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the city. A geotech report was submitted with this application for Durango Subdivision; a report for the proposed subdivision and not the adjacent subdivision should be submitted. vi. Pathway landscaping A minimum 5' wide landscape strip is required along each side of al I pathways landscaped per the standards in UDC 11-3B-12C. 3. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Nonresidential parking analysis UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Commercial: 1 Parking Future development should comply with this standard. Stall per 500 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area Specific Use Standards: Future development should comply with this standard. Restaurants: 1 Parking Coffee shops are considered a restaurant. Stall per 250 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area ii. Bicycle parking analysis A minimum of one(1)bicycle parking space must be provided for every 25 vehicle spaces or portion thereof per UDC 11-3C-6G;bicycle parking facilities are required to comply with the location and design standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. Review of compliance with parking standards will take place with future Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Conditional Use Permit applications, as applicable. 4. Building Elevations (Architectural Standards Manual): Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the proposed convenience store, fuel canopy,coffee shop and oil change facility as shown below in Section VII.J.All structures are proposed to be a single story in height. Final design is required to comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual(ASM). City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ 5. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): No fencing is proposed on the landscape plan. 6. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): Parkways are required to comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-17. F. Transportation Analysis 1. Roadway Improvements(FYWP&CIP): Ustick Road,between McDermott and Black Cat, is planned to be widened to 5-lanes(2-thru lanes in each direction with center medians and turn pockets where appropriate)in 2027 per the adopted North Meridian Neighborhood Plan&the Capital Improvement Plan(CIP). The project includes adding multi-use pathways. State Highway 16 and an interchange at Ustick/McDermott Roads are currently being constructed'/4+mile to the west. A Traffic Impact Study(TIS)was submitted to ACHD for this development at the request of the city. The TIS included trip generation information for the current MDR designation and the proposed commercial designation as follows: and Use Typ �erage Daily Trips W PM Peak Hour Trips Residential 4e7 27 Commercial 3,703 396 Increase in Trips 3,236 369 Percent Increase 693% 1,367% 2. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): One(1)full access is proposed via N. McDermott Bypass on the west side of the site at the north boundary; and one(1)right-in/right-out temporary access is proposed via W. Ustick Rd. at the east boundary of the site. The McDermott Bypass is currently under the jurisdiction of ITD but is expected to be turned over to ACHD at some point in the future. ITD has stated they won't support access via McDermott Bypass. Staff is not supportive of an access via W. Ustick Rd.ACED states that the TIS did not demonstrate a need for this driveway. Further ACHD, like City policy,requires access to be taken from lesser-classified roadways,which is McDermott Bypass; a collector roadway once under the jurisdiction of ACHD. Drive aisle stubs are proposed to the property to the east but no vehicular connectivity is proposed to the future residential development to the north. If approved, Staff recommends a drive aisle connection be provided to the north for interconnectivity with the residential neighborhood.Cross-access/ingress-egress easements are required between all lots in the subdivision and to adjoining properties either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2. City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis ■ 3. Pedestrian Connectivity(UDC 11-3A-5, UDC 11-3A-8, UDC 11-3A-17): A 10' wide detached sidewalk/multi-use pathway is required on this site along W.Ustick Rd. per the Pathways Master Plan; and a 10' wide detached sidewalk is also required along N. McDermott Road Bypass,as proposed. All pathways should comply with the standards in UDC 11-3A-8. If any portion of the multi-use pathway lies outside of the adjacent right-of-way,it shall be included in a public use easement as required by the Park's Dept. G. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Sky Pilot Drain lies along the northern boundary of this site within a 100' wide easement, 50' of which lies on this property. The drain is proposed to be relocated and piped by the developer. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-1 S): An underground pressurized irrigation system is required to be installed in the development for each lot as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. 3. Storm Drainage (UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required for this development in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances per UDC 11-3A-18. Design and construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the City. 4. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): All utilities for an approved use shall be installed at or below grade in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Street lighting shall be installed in accord with the city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. The development shall be connected to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems in accord with the standards in UDC 11-3A-21C. Toll Brothers, the developer of the adjacent Dayspring and Springday developments to the south and east, recently reached an agreement with the City to extend sewer service from the north down McDermott Rd. and east on Ustick Road to serve their projects earlier than the City project to do so. This extension of services is planned to occur at the same time as the Ustick Rd. widening project and would also provide service to this development if approved. This development is subject to the Oaks lift station&West Ada School District reimbursement agreement: https.Ilweblinkmeridiancity.orQ/WebLink/Doc View.aspx?id=178931&dbid=0&repo Merid ianCi Adequate fire protection is required in accord with Fire Dept. standards. An emergency access plan is included below in Section VII L IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division Staff is recommending denial of the comprehensive plan map amendment application and consequently the annexation&zoning and preliminary plat applications; therefore, conditions of approval are not included. If the Commission and/or City Council determines the proposed map amendment is in the best interest of the City with the proposed development plan,the project should be City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ continued to a later hearing date in order for Staff to prepare recommended conditions of approval. B. Meridian Public Works https:llweblink.meridianciiy.or lWebLinkIDocView.a,y x?id=435509&dbid=0&redo=MeridianC hty Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. If a Well is located on the site it must be abandoned per regulatory requirements and proof of abandonment must be provided to the City. 2. Ensure no sewer services pass through infiltration trenches. 3. Provide 20'Easements for mains,hydrant laterals and water services. Easements should extend up to the end of main/hydrant/water meter and 10'beyond it. 5. No permanent structures(trees, bushes, buildings, carports, trash receptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles, etc.)to be built within the utility easement. General Conditions of Approval 1. Applicant shall coordinate water and sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department. 2. Per Meridian City Code(MCC), the applicant shall be responsible to install sewer and water mains to and through this development. Applicant may be eligible for a reimbursement agreement for infrastructure enhancement per MCC 8-6-5. 3. The applicant shall provide easement(s) for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). Sewerlwater easement vanes depending on sewer depth. Sewer 0-20 ft deep require a 30 ft easement, 20-25 ft a 40 ft easement, and 25-30 ft a 45 ft easement. Ensure no permanent structures(trees, bushes,buildings,carports, trash teceptacle walls, fences, infiltration trenches, light poles,etc,)are built within (he utility easement. Submit an executed easement(on the form available from Public Works),a legal description prepared by an Idaho Licensed Professional Land Surveyor, which trust include the area of the eascrncint (marked )~XHIBIT A)and an 81/2"x I I"map with bearings and distances (marked I XIIIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be Sealed,signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor_ DO NOT RECORD. 4_ The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by aycar-round source of water(UDC 11-313-6), The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available,a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to prior to receiving development plan approval. S_ Any structures that are allowed to remain sliall be subject to evaluation and possible reassignment of street addressing to be in compliance with MCC. 6. All irrigation ditches, canals, laterals,or drains, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or laying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be addressed per UDC I 1-3A-6. In performing such work, the applicant shall comply with Idaho Code 42-1207 and anv other aonlicabie law or reLtulation. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ 7. Any wells that will not continue to be used must be properly abandoned according to Idaho Well Construction Standards Rulcs administered by the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR). The Developer, Own er, or project Engineer, shall provide a statement addressing whether there arc any existing wells in the development. and if so,how they will continue to be used,or provide record of their abandonment_ If wells are to be abandoned, the project owner or their representative must contact the IDWR Groundwater Protection section (Aaron Skinner, Hydrogeo log]st 208-2874972) BEFORE any work is done to de Qum mission an cxiSung wCII (even if it is believed that the well is less than 18 ft deep)_ Proof of corn munic ation with IDWR must be submitted to the City prior to any work being done to decommission the well. Failure to communicate with 1DWR inny result in additional work and expense to decommission the well. 8_ Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8. Contact Central District H cal th for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 9. All Improvements related to public life, safety and health slral I be completed prior to occupancy of the structures. 10. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review,and construction inspection fees,as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act_ 12. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may 1x required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 13. Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office_ 14. Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for ail building pads receiving engineered backfi11, where footing would sit atop fill material. 15. The design engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 16. The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and./or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD_ The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have bccn installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This cettification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 17. At the completion of the 1)rojcct, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project_ 18. A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans. Street light plan requirements ate IIstcd in section 6-5 of the Improvement Standards for Street Lighting. A copy of the standards can be found at http://www.meridianciiy.orB,�public works.aspx?id=272. 19. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a performance surety in the amount of 125%of the total construction cost for all incomplete sewer, water and reuse infi-astructure prior to final plat signature. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, casts deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 587-2211. 20. The City of Meridian requires that the owner post to the City a warranty surely in the amount of 20%of the total construction cost for all completed sewer,water and reuse infrastructure for duration oftwo years. This surety will be verified by a line item cost estimate provided by the owner to the City. The surety can be posted in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, cash deposit or bond. Applicant must file an application for surety, which can be found on the Community Development Department website. Please contact Land Development Service for more information at 987-2211. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments &Conditions ■ Click or tap here to enter text. C. Meridian Park's Department https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=435517&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC iv D. Idaho Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ) https:llweblink.meridiancily.orglWebLink/DocView.aspx?id=436100&dbid=0&repo=MeridianC ity E. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) See public record. V. FINDINGS A. Comprehensive Plan(UDC 11-513-71)) Upon recommendation from the Commission,the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant a amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. Staff finds the proposed amendment is not consistent with key elements of the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to compatibility and transition of land uses and other elements, as noted above in Section III.C. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. Staff finds the proposed amendment will not provide an improved guide for future growth and development of the city and that the existing MDR FL UM designation is more appropriate for this property and should remain. 3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the proposed map amendment is not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to, compatibility and transition of land uses, as noted above in Section III.C. 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with this Unified Development Code. Staff finds the proposed map amendment is not consistent with UDC 11-5B-7, which requires the amendment to be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. The proposed land uses will not be compatible with the adjacent Ustick/McDermott interchange area and future residential uses to the north as discussed above in Section X. 5. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. Stafffinds the proposed map amendment to Commercial will not be compatible with abutting planned residential uses to the north. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. Staff finds the proposed amendment will burden existing and planned transportation capabilities in this area due to the increase in traffic a map amendment from MDR to Commercial will create. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings ■ 7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable)provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. Staff finds the proposed map amendment does not provide a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient areas to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. Stafffinds the proposed map amendment is not in the best interest of the City for the above- noted reasons. B. Annexation and/or Rezone (UDC 11-513-3E) Because the proposed map amendment request is recommended for denial,the proposed annexation&zoning request is also recommended for denial because the proposed development plan isn't consistent with the FLUM designation in effect for the property. Therefore,no findings analysis is provided for the associated annexation&zoning request. C. Preliminary Plat(UDC-613-6) Because the proposed map amendment request is recommended for denial,the proposed annexation&zoning and preliminary plat requests are also recommended for denial because the proposed development plan isn't consistent with the FLUM designation in effect for the property. Therefore,no findings analysis is provided for the associated preliminary plat request. VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for the reasons noted above in Section III. Consequently, Staff recommends denial of the associated annexation &zoning and preliminary plat requests because the proposed development plan isn't consistent with the MDR FLUM designation in effect for this property. B. Commission: Pending C. City Council: Pending City of Meridian I Department Report VI.Action ■ VII. EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps 1. Aerial Legend Project Location . . : Area of Impact i 0 Analysis •,- �r,w, 111i I i R _ k . r - I 1 R � r 7 sir>L� �.: OF 4 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 2. Zoning Map Legend Project Location Area of Impact 0 Analysis „- Li 0 R-40 R-1�5 C-N C-C . A, TN-R RUT R-8 3. Future Land Use Legend Project Location A T Area of Impact Medium-Densi ty' 6 Analysis Resldentlal Hf MU-N Mixe l2 Inte c' a - e ?� Office .. Plan City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ 4. Planned Development Map Legend E9 Project Location City Limits Planned Parcels Area of Impact rrj 0 Analysis + y Pw y _.. ..F _ r r + r r � rrxrTr*T'r^ _ City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ B. Service Accessibility Tool(Existing Conditions) PARCEL S043334 925 SERVICE ACCESSIBILITY verall score: 1 2 nd Percentile Criteria Location Within 1/2 mile of City Limits Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains > 2,000 ft.from parcel Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or > 2 acres Emergency Services Fire Response time < S min. Emergency Services Police Reporting District meets response time goals some of the Pathways Within 1/4 mile of future pathways Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (-#of lanes in master streets plan) School Walking Proximity From 1/2 to 1 mile walking School Drivability Either a High School or College within 2 miles OR a Park Walkability No park within walking distance by park type Report generated on 44-11-2Q2b by MERIDIAM&AEn City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ C. Aerial View of Property/Site Photos dW f � IG y - ..,,r-apt` L x t9: City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ D. Adopted vs.Proposed Future Land Use Map Date: 03/19/2026 0 500 1,0D0 Feet Adopted Future Land Uses Legend UTICIC+ _ Area oif Change ■ Future Land Use Map tywide ' Law Drns'ty Residential Medium density Re-4dential Med-High density Residential High Density Residential Cammerddl Proposed Future Land Uses Offiae 7rdustria! Civic r-Ad Town Mixed Use Neicgh6arhecd Mixed Use Community { rr Mixed Use Regional Mixed Use Non-Residential Mixed Use-Interdtidnge ' Ten Mile Specific Law Density Employrrt Lifestyle Center High Density Empbyment it it it Mixed Empbymenk UST IC,I( Mixed Use Residential rE Mixed Use Commercial r 1 r City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ E. Conceptual Development Plan 1 �LW rl haw 15 i � I Y I I L1..1 0 h I _ 1-r+ LU D 1 I k I � I� I < [1 ua o Mow W. I I � J I � r I ❑} r,I I I I ssudAa IIOVC3n7w . a City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ F. Concept Plan with Durango Subdivision WW ILItTon"nHa: L1OV4414PF4!Olin ---------- -------- - -------------- 4■ II J1. ---------- F City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits G. Preliminary Plat(dated: 12/15/2025) � a -�g F a z o z avZO � Q ° weg p y6`l�B¢� spy 9 'Pip, k 7 6E11- U ¢w o Y ¢Fp I ¢ 9in O Y5 @!°F x z W z �' a O Jill W r c 4 I A I r y i � I i I 1 »I � I•r ��$g � �� I 1 � Y i i 1 I I• I - � I I I 1 I I I I I I I• I ••w.r a 1 f � ; i I011e x� .ovra Irs pt-.{.'_ •�E s -- — ---- --- fLYN9llpYHiP�IY N RYAII LLOYIIWTY'll 1 Ih a _— __--_— —_--__ _ I �� Ir City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ H. Landscape Plan (date: 12/15/2025) ifs f ff J � T + � I � � I r I r r f. + w I � I N � I d I � LLJ U CO Y I � 1 r r z I , :.1W auowa]mw City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ rJ 1.4 51 il 66 71 h,I TT. I .rr- yy 1! -7' P Ell 99 Lu City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits \| � \�\ )§) �)\ | � )§( §�§ s§a /R | � .§ | 4■ � � , . $■ k r g . � , •I �/ g ) UN �� ■ �� ' � � � d\ / � q $§� _ � � ■ � � �� Ln kc City of Meridian Department Rep o4 yJ. Exhibits � I. Fire Access Exhibit LIHIH)2 SSK)N 3V1 ��# x OH V01'NVIOIa3 W 9V071)OLLSf1'M 006S e � r i G� I i o - lit v low 77 .rc ....:. .....:. r.•.y{:::..:�..:..: ....ray .. ....:r::{. - I� I � 6Ydt ypyi�y N I I I ' I /1 I City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ J. Conceptual Building Elevations Afl IMM: An r. E City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits I I I I I I HOHS Y Go l _ I I I li � II I � I I J I I W I I I I � I I I J I M I I I I I I I I s 1 V � E 111H y @ ap Leo H"I �s 3 pp�g$ S � pp �e �� xx 7q qr Sq pT Jq_ p�k!! W E - e C� FI tylI rl 1 a Do o a o 1 °I ga kl -11 I I I ^I I I I I I j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I = Ij W I II W I N I a � I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I �J I I I I I _ I �. I J k l Eq City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ dOHS='u- SNOMI-W CN E3E)NVHO 110 2J § /) � � F | ) | |� | � § | A | ) � |�� § �q �n ]§ ƒ| �� b &| &| �§ ��e �n q§ El. El EJ EJ a. I:]- El El H- 0- 11, , , J ( { El I? . ' ) � � a \ Nil C), D- EP- City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits VIII. ADDITIONAL NOTES &DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS, TABLES,AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days. Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel. Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0(i.e. excludes most HOA area,transitional development, government,and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2<5.0; R-4<2.0; R-8< 1.0; R-15 <0.5; R-40<0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones,may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates,usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries(TAZ's). B. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources, including sewer main lines, sewer trunk sheds, floodplain, fire service areas and response times,police crime reporting,pathway information,existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review,using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria(not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city(higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores,whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. C. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service(LOS).LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver's experience with a letter ranking from A to F. Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience.ACHD considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians,nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP). The IFYWP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary, from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan(CIP).The CIP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years. City of Meridian I Department Report VIII. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps, Tables, and Charts ■ Development Application Transmittal Link to Project Application: Ustick Commercial H-2025-0059 TWO LINKS Ustick Commercial H-2026-0007 Hearing Date: May 7, 2026 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: 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 request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. F86 V IDIAN% Community Development Dept. Meridian City Hall, Suite 102 A H U 33 E. Broadway Avenue Community Development Meridian, Idaho 83642 Department MEMORANDUM May 21, 2026 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor Re: Ustick Commercial/McUstick Subdivision—H-2025-0059 and H-2026-0007 On May 7, 2026, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the Ustick Commercial/McUstick Subdivision project to the May 28, 2026 hearing. The continuance was required to allow this project to be discussed during the same hearing as the Durango Subdivision and bring forward draft conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration. Below are the draft conditions of approval that staff believes are most relevant to the subject application should the Commission recommend approval. Staff has also identified additional considerations for the Commission to evaluate during deliberations on the application. Further, the applicant has provided exhibits demonstrating how the proposed commercial development is intended to transition and integrate with the proposed residential development known as Durango Subdivision(see attachments below). Draft Conditions of Approval A. Meridian Planning Division 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of annexation of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A fee for the DA shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6) months of the date of City Council approval of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision & Order for the Annexation request. The DA shall, at minimum, incorporate the following provisions: i. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the conceptual development plan and building elevations,preliminary plat, landscape plan, and buffer exhibits included below in Section VII and the provisions contained herein. ii. The final design of all structures shall comply with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual (ASM). iii. The development is subject to the Oaks lift station&West Ada School District reimbursement agreements. Page 12 iv. The site design shall comply with the site design standards in UDC 11-3A- 19.B.2b, which require a minimum of thirty (30)percent of the buildable frontage of the property to be occupied by building facades and/or public space. v. Business hours of operation in the C-C zoning district shall be limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm when the property abuts a residential use or district as set forth in UDC 11-2B-3B. Extended hours of operation may be requested through a conditional use permit. vi. Access to W. Ustick Rd is prohibited in accord with UDC 11-3A-3. vii.Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. 2. The final plat(s) shall include the following revisions: i. Depict cross-access/ingress-egress easements between all lots in the subdivision and to adjoining properties either by recorded easement or as a note on the final plat asset forth in UDC 11-3A-3A.2. ii. Depict a minimum 20-foot wide drive aisle connection with pedestrian facilities on each side to the property to the north. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s) shall include the following revisions: i. Where pedestrian pathways are proposed from perimeter sidewalks to the main building entrances, pathways shall be distinguished from vehicular driving surfaces through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks, per UDC 11-3A-19B.4b. ii. Lawn and other grasses requiring regular mowing shall comprise no more than sixty-five (65)percent of the vegetated coverage of a landscape (street)buffer per UDC 11-3B-7C.3e; calculations or a note demonstrating compliance should be included on the plan. iii. Mitigation information shall be included for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site as set forth in UDC 11-3B-10. iv. Depict a 25-foot-wide buffer to adjoining residential land uses with landscaping per the standards in UDC 11-3B-9C. 4. Additional design features consisting of a dry creek bed with river rock and boulders shall be included in the street buffer along W. Ustick Rd., an entryway corridor, as proposed, in accord with UDC 11-3B-7C.3f. 5. A public use easement shall be submitted for all multi-use pathways/sidewalks located outside of the adjacent ACHD right-of-way, as required by the Park's Dept. 6. Staff s failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. 7. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review application shall be submitted for the commercial development and approved by the Planning Division prior to submittal of application(s) for building permits. 8. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq Rev:01/2011 Page 13 Other Considerations for the Commission 1. Draft Condition of Approval 2.ii above requires a northern vehicular connection to the Durango Subdivision in lieu of pedestrian connectivity only. The applicant believes adequate access is already being provided to the commercial property without the addition of the northern vehicular connection. The condition should be removed if the Commission finds additional vehicular connectivity is warranted. 2. DA provision v. restricts the operating hours between 6 am and 11 pm unless otherwise approved by a CUP. The applicant has indicated the future tenant of Lot 1, Block 1 operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The applicant is requesting that the Commission allow a 24 hour use on said lot because the property isn't currently adjacent to a residential use/district. This DA provision should be modified if Commission supports the 24hr operation. 3. The applicant is requesting that the Commission allow one building permit to be issued for the site prior to recording the plat. The applicant would like the ability to begin site work and prepare the property for development prior to recording the final plat. A new DA provision should be added if this request is supported by the Commission. Landscape Buffer Exhibits lit LLJ � q f nI COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL BUFFER 11 HIBIT °� lar I;M ` Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq Rev:01/2011 Page i4 -------------------- ------- {{ �(\GOMMERCVLL TO RESIUENUAL BUFFER III w a A _ T II —I llr J I I II A[OMMERCN L TORESIDENTIAL[ROSS=ON as mo xos�nw ow ws MCSTICI(SIIBOINSION MERIOIAN,IOAHO Q�km COMMERCIALT� NUA�PERATION L L��m �� III II�� ,f(— J Ilr J IL.Ik „LL,��I�— �' Bxrs ORESIUE �LL Ph:208.884.5533 • www.meridiancity.orq Rev:O1/2011 E IDIAN;--- Applicant Presentation H May 28, 2026Planning and Zoning Commission SubdivisionMcUstick0007-2026-0059 & H-2025- Location Map ramp-16 on-rd 1/3•BypassUstick and McDermott 4 acres on NE corner of •2 Location Map Durango on access. Coordinating with •3 Concept Plan 1b-9C.1a-3B-Added landscape buffer per UDC 11 but sod and plants will be allowed.No trees will be allowed in the easement, •location.NMID supports access/maintenance drive •NMID prefers drain to be piped.•100’ wide easement whether piped or not.•NMID Coordination4 lots–Prelim Plat •(Community Commercial) zoneC -Annexation and Zoning to C•CommercialComprehensive Plan Amendment to •Request: •4 Auto at Ustick Rd Interchange)76,000 vehicles per day by 2045 (Up to 110,000 •in vehicular transportation infrastructure700 million investment -$600•84)-44 to Interstate-State Street (SH–16-SH•5 centric Private Investment-centric Public Improvements Drive Auto- 6 centric Private Investment-centric Public Improvements Drive Auto-Auto vehicles per day35,000 -28,000•in vehicular transportation infrastructure$10 million investment •Widening to 5 lanes; signal at McDermott & Ustick Rd.•Black Cat to McDermott Rd.–Ustick Road • 7“No mitigation is required … ; no alternative mitigation is required”•constructed with Ustick widening.–Hawkins to pay for frontage improvements •ACHD approved this project with standard conditions.•We provided a TIS at the request of City of Meridian.•Neither ACHD nor ITD requested a Traffic Study for this project.•oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT-“Auto “Autonew trips or truly diverted Only 33% of trips to the site are either •by trips”.-Traveled because they are “passVehicle Miles reduceof the customers visiting our site, these uses will 65%For •8 oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT- 9 oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT-“Auto counting trips.-Avoids double•by and captured trips. Only counts new and diverted trips.-Removes pass•development is expected to consume.proportional cost of roadway capacity that a new Impact fees measure the •.that developmentexpanded roadway infrastructure needed to accommodate the traffic generated by fund the construction of new or time charge assessed on new development to -One•Impact Fees can tell us a lot about… impacts!• 10$724,920 (per acre = $97,962)----------------------------------$12,082 ): 60 x thrus-Shopping Center (60,000SF, no driveDayspring Commercial (7.4 acres immediately South)$386,624 (per acre = $104,493)----------------------------------$12,082 ): 32 x thrus-Shopping Center (32,000SF, no driveDurango Commercial (3.17 acres immediately east)oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT-“Auto$191,000 (per acre $47,750)----------------------------------Gas Station: 10 x $13,144Coffee Shop: 1 x $2,940Food: 2 x $24,646-FastOil Changer: 2 x $4,312 OUR PROPOSAL (4 acres) “Auto$185,696 (per acre $46,424)----------------------------------$5,803Family Homes (8 du/acre): 32 x -32 SingleDensity Residential-Medium$191,000 (per acre $47,750)--------------------------------- -Gas Station: 10 x $13,144Coffee Shop: 1 x $2,940Food: 2 x $24,646-FastOil Changer: 2 x $4,312 OUR PROPOSAL oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT- 12 oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT-“Auto commercial uses than any other commercial use.16 will travel less time and distance to access our -Any current or future resident within this box that is using Impact of “noise, light, and odor” on Residential Development?: 2,951+ 1,629 = 4,580 Vehicles Per DayMcUstick: 4,337 Vehicles Per DayMcHurtreyUSTICK: 35,000 Vehicles Per Day 13 14 184’Landscape Buffer Proposal 15 Landscape Buffer Proposal How do other buffers compare?home and nearest commercial use3x distance between McUstick Dayspring Subdivision Commercial 16 17 McMillan and Locust Grove Rd How do other buffers compare?Pine & Ten Mile Rd 18 Fairview and Venture140’McMillan and Linder Rd How do other buffers compare? Impact of “noise, light, and odor” on Residential Development?: 2,951+ 1,629 (Durango Commercial) = 4,580 Vehicles Per DayMcUstick: 4,337 Vehicles Per DayMcHurtreyUSTICK: 35,000 Vehicles Per Day 19 Impact to Residential Development?.impactreducingfurthersite,theintotrafficminimalmoreevenbewillthereUstick,ontrafficminimalistherewhentimesAt.tripsby-passbewouldsitethetotrafficthisofMost•.residents futureoflifeofqualityonimpactnegativedramaticabewouldtheresite,subjecttheondevelopedwerehomesIf•.proposedcurrentlyaretheywherethanodorandlightnoise,byimpactednegativelymorefarbewouldRdUsticktoadjacen tUnitsResidential•20 21 limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm unless extended with a Conditional Use Permit. per day, 7 days per week. Business hours of operation of additional tenants shall be The future tenant of Lot 1, Block 1 shall be allowed to operate 24 hours Proposed 1.v.: Condition 1.v. Modification Summary.selectionsitetomarketofamountextensiveanuserstheseofEach.sitethisonsupportcanwethantenantsmorefromhaveWe•.currentlyaretheywherethanodorandlightnoise,bynegativelymorefarbewouldRdUstickonUnitsR esidential•.du/acre8atUsesResidentialtointensityinsimilarandusescommercialotherthannetworkroadwaythetoimpactfullessareproposingareweusesThe•.uses-autodrivesinvestment-Auto•22 Request for DA to allow for site prep and building permit issuancefinal plat.: Up to one building permit may be issued prior to recording the Condition 10recording the final plat.utilities, parking fields, and pedestrian pathways, may occur prior to : Preparation of the site, including installation of the drive aisles, Condition 9Proposed Conditionsbuilding permit prior to recording the final plat.to complete site work associated with commercial uses and receive a single Because the site is currently a single, buildable parcel, we request the ability 23 Modify DA Condition 1.iv.Ri/RoTemporary from the Durango Commercial Drive Ailse. Subdivision McUstickUstick Rd and connected to until such time that Dayspring Rd is completed from out access to W. Ustick Rd. is allowed -in/Right-Right•Proposed Condition1.iv.: •3. -3A-UDC 11Access to W. Ustick Rd is prohibited in accord with •Condition 1.iv.•Coordinating with Durango on access. •24 Modify DA Condition 1.iv.Ri/RoTemporary from the Durango Commercial Drive Ailse. Subdivision McUstickUstick Rd and connected to until such time that Dayspring Rd is completed from out access to W. Ustick Rd. is allowed -in/Right-Right•Proposed Condition1.iv.: •25 Remove DA Condition 2.ii.impact to adjacent residential uses.to commercial development and minimizes Dayspring Way provides local road connectivity •the property to the north. connection with pedestrian facilities on each side to foot wide drive aisle -Depict a minimum 20•Remove Development Condition 2.ii. •Coordinating with Durango on access. •26 Remove DA Condition 2.ii.connectivity directly to our siteDurango Conditions do not require vehicle •impact to adjacent residential uses.to commercial development and minimizes Dayspring Way provides local road connectivity •the property to the north. connection with pedestrian facilities on each side to foot wide drive aisle -Depict a minimum 20•Remove Development Condition 2.ii. •Coordinating with Durango on access. •27 Thank you!Thank you!with updated DA Condition 1.iv., 1.v., 9, and 10 and removal of Condition 2.ii.0007 to City Council -2026-0059 & H-2025-Please recommend approval of Hand future residents of Meridan.For these reasons, a CPAM to accommodate our proposed uses benefits current 28 29 limited from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm unless extended with a Conditional Use Permit. per day, 7 days per week. Business hours of operation of additional tenants shall be The future tenant of Lot 1, Block 1 shall be allowed to operate 24 hours Proposed 1.v.: Condition 1.v. Modification Request for DA to allow for Site Prep and building permit issuance”.platfinaltherecordingtopriorissuedbemaypermitbuildingonetoUp:10Condition.platfinaltherecordingtoprioroccurcanpathways,pedestrianand fields,parkingaisles,drivetheofinstallationincludingsite,theofPreparation:9Condition 30 31 Landscape Buffer Proposal Market Analysis?Value Permit Commercial Total in Million 391$•ValuePermitResidentialTotalinBillion1.1$•Permits Commercial 118•PermitsResidential462,4•:ValleyTreasuretheforReportMarketLand20253QTOK’sP er•.optionsretailmoreforneedthehighlightingpermits,commercialtoresidentialofratiohighawithValley,Treasuretheinconstructionresidential.vscommercialinimbalanceanisThere:wide-ValleyUnderbuiltisDevelopme ntCommercial•.selectionsiteoptimizetoanalysismarketofamountextensiveanperformsuserstheseofEach.sitethisonsupportcanwethantenantsmorefrominteresthaveWe•.TenantsCommercialforsensemakesthatlandfindtoisJ obOur•32 Commercial Land Availability and Surrounding FLUM Landuse Regional -Lack of availability of Mixed 33 34 oriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT-“Auto 4300 Fairview AvenueValvoline and Human Bean Coffee Shop at parked on site near GreenbeltGreen Acres Impact Fee: 3x Food Trucks Thru Coffee Impact Fee example-Green Acres Food Truck Park vs. Drive• 35 supportednotbendsdegree90•”48betoanticipatedsizePipe•.allowedbewillplantsandsodbuteasement,theinallowedbewilltreesNo•locationdriveaccesssupportsNMID•pipedbetodrainprefersNMID•.notorpipedwhethereas ementwide’100•Coordination with NMID “Autooriented Uses” don’t drive “more” trips, pollution, congestion, or VMT- E IDIAN*-- -)AHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Starling Ridge Subdivision (H-2026-0009) by Rodney Evans and Partners, generally located 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd. Applicant Request Continuance A. Request:Annexation of 61.34 acres of land with R-4 (25.62 acres) and R-8 (35.72 acres) zoning districts. B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 211 building lots and 26 common lots on 60.43 acres of land in the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. L� 87 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT REPORT REPORT HEARING 5/28/2026 Legend 9 r ®FTR DATE: Project Location �® Area of Impact TO: Planning&Zoning Commission i- City Limits FROM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner Q Analysis 208-884-5533 -- J. sallen@meridiancity.org APPLICANT: Benjamin Semple SUBJECT: Starling Ridge Subdivision H-2026-0009 e LOCATION: Generally located 1/2 mile south of E. Lake Hazel Rd., on the east side of S. Eagle Rd.in the SW 1/4 of Section 4, T.2N,R.IE. I. PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Summary Annexation of 61.34 acres of land with R-4(25.62 acres) and R-8 (35.72 acres) zoning districts; and preliminary plat consisting of 211 building lots and 26 common lots on 60.43 acres of land in the proposed R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. B. Issues/Waivers - The applicant has provided building elevations; however,they would like additional flexibility for the building elevations in the Development Agreement due to uncertainty around which builders will be building in the proposed development. - Block 11 along the Farr Lateral requires a City Council Waiver as the block exceeds 1,000 feet. - A City Council waiver is requested to keep the Farr Lateral open. - A City Council waiver is requested for access to Eagle Road labeled E.Via Roberto Drive.However,staff is recommending that E.Via Roberto Drive be the access that remains open and E.Vantage Point Lane be closed. - This project is serviced by Kuna School District. Currently,Fremont Middle School and KHS/SFHS High School are both over capacity. - Sewer is currently not available at the site and won't be made available until the adjacent development to the west(Reville Ridge)of S.Eagle Road extends it from the western edge of Discovery Park and their development to Eagle Road. Currently,sewer is approximately 3/of a mile away,however,engineering plans have been submitted for the extension to this development but timing of sewer being available is unknown and is a concern from staff and the City Engineer. City of Meridian I Department Report 1. Project Overview ■ - Approximately half of the open space for the development is located on the east side of the Farr Lateral. Staff has concerns about the placement of this open space as it is not easily accessible and is not well connected throughout the development.Staff is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to carefully consider whether the open space location is appropriate. - The overall gross density is 3.49 dwelling units per acre,which is at the maximum density permitted within the Low Density Residential(LDR)designation.However,the applicant included approximately five(5) acres of open space on the east side of the Farr Lateral which is not easily accessible for residents to use.When excluding these five(5) acres from the density calculations the overall density comes out to 3.81 units per acre. This over the allowed density in the LDR FLUM designation.In addition,it does not meet the comprehensive plans vision for the LDR FLUM designation of larger estate style lots. - The proposed subdivision does not meet the fire code for secondary access.2018 IFC, Section D107.2.Remoteness.is not being met and shall be revised to meet this requirement.An alternative to this would be to fire sprinkler all of the homes within the subdivision. C. Recommendation Staff: Approval with a Development Agreement and Conditions. Planning and Zoning Commission: Pending D. Decision City Council: Pending E. Table of Contents Community Metrics.............................................................................. II StaffAnalysis..................................................................................... III City/Agency Comments and Conditions...................................................... IV Findings............................................................................................ V Action.............................................................................................. VI Exhibits............................................................................................ VII II. COMMUNITY METRICS Table 1: Land Use Description Details Map Ref. Existing Land Use(s) Agriculture - Proposed Land Use(s) Residential - Existing Zoning RUT in Ada County VII.A.2 Proposed Zoning R-4 and R-8 Zoning Adopted FLUM Designation Low Density Residential VII.A.3 Table 2:Project Overview Description Details History N/A M Phasing Plan 6 Phases Residential Units 211 Single Family Detached Units City of Meridian I Department Report II. Community Metrics ■ Description Details Open Space 9.31 Acres; 15,4% Amenities Required 12 Points;Provided 14 Points.4 pet waste stations,2 outdoor fire pits,playground,unpaved sports court,bocce ball court,bicycle repair station,and pathways. Physical Features Farr Lateral Acreage 60.43 acres Lots 211 Buildable Lots and 26 Common Lots Lot Sizes Average Lot Size: 5,478 square feet Density Gross: 3.49 units per acre;Net: 6.69 units per acre Table 3: Process Facts Description Details Preapplication Meeting date 10/10/2025 Neighborhood Meeting 12/1/2025 Site posting date 5/18/2026 Table 4:Agency Comments Agency/Element Description/Issue Reference Ada County Highway District IVT • Comments Received Yes;Staff Report - • Commission Action Required No - • Access Eagle Road:Arterial Roadway - • Traffic Level of Service Better than"E" - ITD Comments Received Yes;No Comment - Meridian Public Works Wastewater IV.B • Distance to Mainline Sewer is not Available to the site but is actively being brought to the site. • Impacts or Concerns Yes;See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Meridian Public Works Water IV.B • Distance to Mainline Available at Site • Impacts or Concerns No NOTE: SEE SECTION 0. City of Meridian I Department Report 0. Note: See section 0. ■ City/Agency Comments&Conditions for comments received or see the public record. Paste the following link into your browser to access the public record: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=430475&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity City of Meridian I Department Report 0. Note: See section 0. ■ Figure 1: One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Metrics Reference Parcel:R8970710025 Date Retrieved:2026/5/4 Parcel Count Parcel Acreage Infill Indicator: 345 1,145 Surrounding Area 67% Not city 6 ® City Limits 1,088 560.6 . Not City HouseholdHousehold& Population Growth Households 02020 Population Change:38.2% Population ■Growth (Household and Population Change since 2010 Decennial) 5,000 10,000 2.00 1,000 Single-family 41 Residential U 1.50 Parcel Diversity (A1.00 500 uo O Parcel Count in 0.50 0.69 *Average Acres J 0.00 i .28 0.18 0.13 0 a R-2 R-4 R-8 R-15 Average Single-family Density by Zoning Average 10.00 Residential Net 07.70 Density Q O 5.69 � 5.00 0 p 3.58 4.91 O 1.45 0.00 Dwelling Units / Acre R-2 R-4 R-8 R-15 Notes: See VTIT. Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables, and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report 0. Note: See section 0. 92 Fisure 2: ACHD Summary Metrics 1. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour(VPH) Roadway Frontage Functional PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Classification Traffic Count Level of Service Eagle Road 1,330-feet Principal Arterial 629 Better than "E- Lake Hazel Road N/A Principal Arterial 433 Better than "E'" Columbia Road N/A Collector 504 "E" Gamely Avenue 37-feet Local N/A N/A ' Acceptable level of service for a two-lane principal arterial is `E" (690 VPH). Acceptable level of service for a two-lane collector is "D" (425 VPH). Notes: See VIII.Additional Notes&Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables,and Charts. City of Meridian I Department Report 0. Note: See section 0. ■ III. STAFF ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code(UDC) A. General Overview and History The subject development is designated as Low Density Residential (LDR)on the Future Land Use Map(FLUM). The LDR allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at gross densities of three (3) dwelling units or less per acre. These areas often transition between existing rural residential and urban properties.Developments need to respect agricultural heritage and resources,recognize view sheds and open spaces, and maintain or improve the overall atmosphere of the area. The use of open spaces,parks,trails, and other appropriate means should enhance the character of the area. Density bonuses may be considered with the provision of additional public amenities such as a park, school, or land dedicated for public services. The proposed single-family residential use is consistent with the recommended uses outlined in the Future Land Use Map(FLUM) designation. The development includes two zoning districts: approximately 25.62 acres zoned R-4 and 35.72 acres zoned R-8. The project proposes a total of 211 buildable lots and 26 common lots. The overall gross density is 3.49 dwelling units per acre, which is at the maximum density permitted within the Low Density Residential(LDR) designation. The applicant is proposing approximately 9.31 acres of open space throughout the development. However,the applicant included approximately five(5) acres of open space on the east side of the Farr Lateral which is not easily accessible for residents to use and will require residents to walk to E.Vantage Point Drive to access this area. It is important to note that during the pre-application meeting, staff and the applicant discussed removing the large open space area from the density calculation so staff could more accurately evaluate the project density. Additionally, staff recommended the project be annexed with both R-4 and R-2 zoning designations to better align with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff recommended the applicant modify the plan to incorporate R-2 lots along the eastern boundary of the site and more R-4 lots to provide a better balance of larger estate style lots. The applicant did not provide calculations showing the density without the large approximately five(5) acre open space,however; staff calculated did this calculation and the overall density comes out to 3.81 units per acre and open space falls below 10%. This over the allowed density in the LDR FLUM designation and under the UDC requirement for qualified open space. Staff is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to carefully evaluate whether this is adequate due to limited access to a significant portion of qualified open space. In addition, at the preapplication meeting held on October 10', 2025 staff relayed concerns regarding the density,placement of the open space, and ability to meet the LDR description in the comprehensive plan.As a result,staff is recommending the following changes to the preliminary plat to be addressed 15 days prior to the City Council hearing: - Modify Lots 14-23,25-30,32-34,Bock 11 to the R-2 Zoning district to provide larger estate style lots along the Farr Lateral. - Modify Lots 18-29,Block 4 to the R-4 zoning to provide a better transition of the Ada County parcels to the south. - Modify Lots 2-7,Block 13 and Lots 8-11, 13-15,Block 12 to the R-4 zoning to provide a one(1)to one(1)transition to the proposed R-4 properties to the east. - Remove Lots 2-4,Block 14 to incorporate additional open space west of the Farr Lateral. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ Staff and the City Engineer have additional concerns about sewer not being available to the site. Currently,the subject development is dependent on the adjacent development to the west of S.Eagle Road(Reville Ridge)for sewer. This requires the adjacent developer to pull sewer through Discovery Park and Reville Ridge stubbing to Eagle Road before this development will have sewer available. Currently Reville Ridge has engineering drawings in review for this extension but the timeline for this is not clear. In addition,the Meridian Fire Department provided comments to staff that the subdivision does not meet fire code requirements for secondary access.2018 IFC,Section D107.2. Remoteness.is not being met and shall be revised to meet this requirement 15 days prior to City Council.An alternative to this would be to fire sprinkler all of the homes within the subdivision. The applicant has indicated they plan to phase the development into six(6) different phases. However,the phasing plan shall be revised to incorporate the main open space(Lot 7,Block 1) with Phase one(1) of the development.Based on these factors and with the recommended changes presented above, staff finds that the proposed preliminary plat and R-2, R-4, and R-8 zoning districts are generally consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation of Low Density Residential. The City may require a development agreement(DA)in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the provisions included in Section IV. The DA is required to be signed by the property owner(s)/developer and returned to the City within 6 months of the Council granting the annexation for approval by City Council and subsequent recordation. B. Comprehensive Plan Policies Comprehensive Plan Policy: Analysis: "Encourage a variety of housing types that The proposed single-family detached meet the needs,preferences, and financial dwellings with the recommended changes capabilities of Meridian's present and future above will provide a mix of lot sizes and residents." (2.01.02D) housing types to meet the needs,preferences and financial capabilities of present and future residents in the City as desired. "Permit new development only where it can City water and sewer service is available and be adequately served by critical public can be extended by the developer with facilities and urban services at the time of development in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of service for public facilities and services." (3.03.03F) "Require all new development to create a site The LDR designation calls for larger estate design compatible with surrounding uses style lots which are provided on the eastern through buffering, screening, transitional third of the site. However, staff is densities, and other best site design practices." recommending a further transition to the Ada (3.07.01A) County Subdivision to the east and south of the development which will result in the loss of approximately 20 lots. The recommended changes as noted above. City of Meridian I Department Report 11I. Staff Analysis ■ "Require pedestrian access in all new A 10' wide multi-use pathway is proposed development to link subdivisions together and through the site from the south to the north promote neighborhood connectivity." boundary along the Farr Lateral. Other micro (2.02.011)) paths and internal pathways are proposed for pedestrian connectivity within the development. "Reduce the number of existing access points There is currently one(1) access driveway via onto arterial streets by using methods such as S.Eagle Rd. for this property,which will be cross-access agreements, access management, remain for an existing access to the Ada and frontage/backage roads, and promoting County Subdivision to the east. The applicant local and collector street connectivity." is proposing an additional access to Eagle (6.01.02B) Road while also tying into the existing road to the north and stubbing to the south. Staff is not supportive of two (2) access points to Eagle Road and is recommending that Via Roberto be the primary access and Vantage Point be closed off as emergency access only. The applicant is requesting a City Council waiver to keep both access points. "Require urban infrastructure be provided for Currently, sewer services are not available at all new developments, including curb and the site and are approximately 3/4 of a mile gutter, sidewalks, water and sewer utilities." west of the site. An approved development (3.03.03G) across Eagle Road is currently working on engineering plans to pull this sewer to Eagle Road for this development to use;however, timing of this extension is uncertain. The City Engineer has indicated this is a concern as the subject development does not control when sewer will be made available,which could result in an annexed property that the city cannot serve. "Establish and maintain levels of service for The subject development has acceptable public facilities and services,including water, levels of service for water,transportation, sewer,police,transportation, schools,fire, and parks,police, and fire; however,there is parks." concern with maintaining levels of service for (3.02.01G) both sewer and schools. As noted above, sewer is not available at the site and is reliant on an adjacent developer to extend sewer approximately 3/4 of a mile before it will be available. In addition, staff received a letter from Kuna School District which states Fremont Middle School and KHS/SFHS High School are both over capacity. Staff is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to carefully consider whether timing of the annexation in relation to these services is in the best interest of the city. City of Meridian Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ C. Site Development and Use Analysis 1. Existing Structures/Site Improvements(UDC 11-1): The site currently is used as a sod farm and has no permanent structures on it.However, any wells and sceptic systems on the subject properties shall be abandoned prior to City Engineers signature of the plat. 2. Proposed Use Analysis (UDC 11-2): The applicant is proposing single-family detached homes (211 lots), which are listed as a principal permitted use in UDC Table 11-2A-5 and 11-2A-6 for the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. However, as mentioned above,the Comprehensive Plan designates the Low Density Residential designation as large estate style lots that provide a transition between existing rural residential and urban properties. As a result, staff is recommending the following changes to provide larger lots and provide transitions to rural county properties to the east and south: - Modify Lots 14-23,25-30,32-34,Bock 11 to the R-2 Zoning district to provide larger estate style lots along the Farr Lateral. - Modify Lots 18-29,Block 4 to the R-4 zoning to provide a better transition of the Ada County parcels to the south. - Modify Lots 2-7,Block 13 and Lots 8-11, 13-15,Block 12 to the R-4 zoning to provide a one(1)to one(1)transition to the proposed R-4 properties to the east. - Remove Lots 2-4,Block 14 to incorporate additional open space west of the Farr Lateral. - Move Lot 27,Block 12 to align with the proposed traffic calming and have it include a 10-foot multi-use pathway as indicated on the path master's plan.Extend the 10-foot multi-use pathway through the east side of Lots 5 and 11,Block 15 to connect the pathway with the pathway in Lot 24,Block 11. With these recommended changes staff finds the proposed subdivision to meet the Low Density Residential comprehensive plan policy and will bring the overall density of the project closer to the true three(3)units an acre envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2): The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Tables 11-2A-5 and 11-2A-6 for the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. The proposed plat complies with the dimensional standards of the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. If the City Council approves the development with the recommended changes listed above, the applicant shall comply with the dimensional standards for the R-2, R-4, and R-8 zoning districts. D. Design Standards Analysis 1. Qualified Open Space&Amenities (UDC 11-3G): UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Open Space: 15%for the 9.31 Acres; 15.4% R-8 Zoning Amenities: 1 Point for Quality of Life Amenities: every 5 acres of gross - 4 Pet Waste Stations(2 points) land area and multiple - 2 Outdoor Fire Ring(2 points) Recreation Activity Area Amenities: City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis amenities from each - Playground(3 points) category are required - Sports Court,Unpaved(2 points) - Bocce Ball Court(2 points) Pedestrian or Bicycle Circulation System Amenities: - Multi-Use Pathway aligned with Farr Lateral (2 points) - Pathway aligned with Farr Lateral(1 point) - Pathway aligned with linear open space(1 point) Multi-Modal Amenities: - Bicycle Repair Station(1 point) Total points: 14 points The proposed open space and site amenities exceed the requirements in the UDC. However,it is important to note that the applicant is proposing approximately 5 acres or 50% of the qualified open space on the east side of the Farr Lateral which will require residents to walk to E. Vantage Point Drive to access this area. In addition,the applicant is proposing the open space on the east side of the Farr Lateral to be"passive" open space. This means it will not have recreational activities other than walking paths to provide a buffer to the existing residents in the existing Vantage Point Subdivision. The applicant worked with the HOA to ensure there will not be any structures,courts, playgrounds, etc.in this space. Staff is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to carefully evaluate whether this is adequate due to limited access to a significant portion of qualified open space. 2. Landscaping(UDC I1-3B): i. Landscape buffers along streets UDC Requirement Proposed/Analysis Arterial Road: 25 Feet The applicant did not specify the width of the landscape buffer.However,it appears to be 25 feet in width.In addition,the landscaping does not appear to meet the 70% vegetation coverage requirement.These shall be revised with the final plat. Local Road: 10 Feet The applicant did not specify the width of the landscape buffer.However,it appears to exceed the 10 feet required along the local road on the north portion of the site. ii. Tree preservation Per UDC 11-3B-10, Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of one hundred(100)percent replacement(Example: Two (2)ten- inch caliper trees removed may be mitigated with four 5-inch caliper trees, five(5)four- inch caliper trees, or seven(7)three-inch caliper trees). The applicant shall provide mitigation calculations with submittal of the final plat if any trees are being removed from the property. iii. Storm integration An adequate storm drainage system shall be required in all developments in accord with the city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow Best Management Practice as adopted by the city. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ iv. Pathway landscaping Landscaping is required to be provided along all pathways per the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-12C. A minimum of ten (10)feet of landscaping is required along pathways with no less than two(2)feet on any one side. In addition, a mix of trees, shrubs, lawn, and other vegetative ground cover shall be provided with a tree every 100 linear feet of pathway. The applicant does not meet the pathway landscaping requirements and shall revise their site and landscape plan to reflect compliance with these standards. If the irrigation district does not allow for the applicant to plant vegetation in their easement, the applicant shall revise their plat to allow for an additional five(S)feet outside of the easement for the required vegetation. 3. Parking (UDC 11-3C): i. Residential parking analysis Off-street parking is required per the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6;the number of parking spaces is based on the number of bedrooms per unit. The applicant shall comply with these standards. Each single-family residence will be evaluated at the time of building permit submittal. 4. Building Elevations(Architectural Standards Manual): The applicant has provided nine(9)conceptual building elevations for the proposed subdivision as shown in Section VII.G. The proposed housing products throughout the development are single-family detached units featuring a variety of regionally appropriate designs. This includes single story and two(2) story designs with varying garage sizes and materials. The applicant has indicated that they intend to sell lots in the subdivision to different builders and are asking for flexibility regarding the proposed elevations in the future. Staff has apprehension towards this approach as elevations submitted with the annexation process are tied to the development through the development agreement. Staff is asking the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to carefully evaluate whether allowing additional flexibility in building elevations for this development is appropriate. Homes on lots that abut S.Eagle Road, an arterial street, will be highly visible; therefore,the rear and/or side of structures on these lots (i.e.Lots 7, 9-11, 13-16, and 18, Block 4;Lots 7, 9-13,Block 3) should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation (e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays,banding, porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single- story and existing structures are exempt from this requirement. 5. Fencing (UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7): All fencing is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6C and 11-3A-7, as applicable. The landscape plan depicts a six (6)foot fence with a four(4) foot tall vinyl section and a two (2)foot section of open vision paneling. 6. Parkways (UDC 11-3A-17): An 8' wide parkway is required along S.Eagle Road planted with vegetation coverage per 11-3A-17E. City of Meridian I Department Report III. Staff Analysis ■ E. Transportation Analysis 1. Access (UDC 11-3A-3, UDC 11-3H-4): Two (2)public streets,E. Via Roberto Drive and E. Vantage Point Drive, are proposed for access via S. Eagle Rd. Staff relayed to the applicant at the preapplication stage that we would not be supportive of two (2) access points to Eagle Road. It is important to note that E. Vantage Point Lane is currently a private street in Ada County, and the applicant is proposing to convert it to a local street. Staff is supportive of the access point at E. Via Roberto Drive as it aligns with the Future Collector Street on the west side of S. Eagle Road. Staff is recommending the access point at E.Vantage Point Drive be restricted to emergency access only where it connects with S.Eagle Road. UDC 11-3A-3 requires access points to be limited along Collector and Arterial Roadways. ACHD's staff report discusses the access points not meeting the offset requirements for local streets intersecting a principal arterial roadway. However, since Vantage Point Lane exists as a private street that serves both Vantage Point Subdivision and Sky Break Subdivision, ACHD staff is supportive of having both access points to Eagle Road. The applicant has requested a City Council waiver for access to Eagle Road via E. Vantage Point Drive. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall carefully consider whether both access points are warranted. The applicant is proposing two stub streets to the south for future public street extensions with future development. Ada County Highway District required a traffic study for the subject development.In ACHD's staff report,they are requesting traffic calming throughout the development where block lengths are longer than their policy. In addition,ACHD is requesting a southbound turn lane on Eagle Road at its intersection with Vantage Point Lane and a two-way turn lane on Eagle Road at its intersection with Via Roberto Drive.This will provide a safer ingress movements into the subject subdivisions that Vantage Point Lane and Via Roberto Drive serve. 2. Pedestrian Connectivity(UDC 11-3A-5, UDC 11-3A-8, UDC 11-3A-17): The applicant is proposing to construct a ten (10)foot multi-use pathway along S.Eagle Road and the south side of the Farr Lateral. The multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral shall be revised to stub to the southern property and not stop short of the property line. In addition, the applicant will be providing a five(5)foot sidewalk on both sides of all public streets including the improvement to E.Vantage Point Drive as it is converted from a private street to a public street. The applicant provided a micro-pathway through the development leading towards the Farr Lateral and a micro-pathway in the open space to the east of the Farr Lateral. As previously mentioned,the only way to access the open space on the east side of the Farr Lateral is the sidewalk connection on E. Vantage Point Drive. All pathways should be constructed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8. In addition, all pathways not located in ACHD's right-of-way shall be placed in a pedestrian access easement to the standards listed by our parks department in section IV below. Staff is requesting the following change the pathways proposed to align with the pathways master plan: Move Lot 27,Block 12 to align with the proposed traffic calming and have it include a 10-foot multi-use pathway as indicated on the path master's plan. Extend the 10- City of Meridian I Department Report 111. Staff Analysis 1 00 foot multi-use pathway through the east side of Lots 5 and 11,Block 15 to connect the pathway with the pathway in Lot 24,Block 11. 3. Subdivision Regulations(UDC 11-6): i. Dead end streets The proposed subdivision does not contain a dead-end street other than the two(2) stub streets to the southern property as discussed above. ii. Common driveways Per UDC 11-6C-3D, common driveways shall serve a maximum of four(4) dwelling units. In no case shall more than three(3)dwelling units be located on one(1) side of the driveway unless alternative compliance is applied for. The applicant proposes six(6)common drives within the development. Each common drive has two(2) units taking access to them. In addition, the applicant complies with the twenty(20)foot width requirement and five(5)foot landscaping requirement. However, the applicant did not depict the driveways for lots adjacent to common drives. The applicant shall revise the common drive exhibits to show the driveways on the opposite side of the shared property line adjacent to the common drive. iii. Block face UDC 11-6C-3-regulates block lengths for residential subdivisions. The intent of this section of code is to ensure block lengths do not exceed 750 ft, although there is the allowance of an increase in block length to 1,000 feet if a pedestrian connection is provided. In no case shall a block face exceed one thousand two hundred(1,200)feet, unless waived by the City Council. The north side of Block 11 along the Farr Lateral requires a City Council Waiver as the block exceeds 1,000 feet.All other block faces in the subdivision meet the standards in UDC 11-6C-3.ACHD and City staff are requiring traffic calming on three(3)streets within the development, Heather Hills Street, Horsham Street, and Tualatin Drive. The traffic calming measures stated in ACHD's staff report discusses intersection crosswalk bulb-outs approximately every 300 linear feet(or where pathways connect with the street section). F. Services Analysis 1. Waterways (UDC 11-3A-6): The Farr Lateral exists along the eastern portion of the site within a 55-foot wide easement (25-feet on the north side and 30-feet on the south side of the lateral's centerline). All irrigation ditches and laterals crossing this site that aren't being improved as a water amenity or linear open space as defined in UDC 11-1 A-1 are required to be piped or otherwise covered as set forth in UDC 11-3A-6B.3,unless otherwise waived by City Council. The Applicant requests a waiver from Council to leave the Farr Lateral open and not pipe it as allowed in UDC 11-3A-6B.3a. 2. Pressurized Irrigation(UDC 11-3A-1 S): Underground pressurized irrigation water is required to be provided to each lot within the subdivision as set forth in UDC 11-3A-15. City of Meridian I Department Report 11I. Staff Analysis 1 01 3. Storm Drainage(UDC 11-3A-18): An adequate storm drainage system is required in all developments in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City as set forth in UDC 11-3A-18 4. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21): Connection to City water and sewer services is required in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed in accord with the City's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. The Public Works Department and City Engineer provided comments that sewer is currently not available at the site and is approximately 314 of a mile to the west. Sewer will not be available until the adjacent development to the west pulls the sewer through their site to S. Eagle Road. It is important to note that the adjacent development has engineering drawings under review for this sewer extension; however, the timing for the completion of this extension is unknown. The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council should determine whether annexation of the subject development is in the best interest of the city at this time. 5. School Capacity(Comp Plan): School District(s) Kuna School District • Capacity of Silver Trail Elementary: 676 Students Schools Fremont Middle:473 Students KHS/SFHS High Schools: 1688 Students • Number of Silver Trail Elementary: 611 Students Students Fremont Middle:493 Students Enrolled KHS/SFHS High Schools: 1755 Students Fremont Middle School and KHS/SFHS High School are both over capacity. City of Meridian I Department Report 0. 102 IV. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS A. Meridian Planning Division 15 Days prior to the City Council hearing,the applicant shall provide the following revisions: -Lots 1-6,Block 12 and Lots 18-29,Block 4 shall be revised to the R-4 zoning district and dimensional standards. -Lots 2-7,Block 13 and Lots 8-11, 13-15,Block 12 shall be revised to the R-4 zoning district and dimensional standards. -Lots 14-23,25-30,32-34,Block 11 shall be revised to the R-2 zoning district and dimensional standards. - Remove Lots 2-4,Block 14 to incorporate additional open space west of the Farr Lateral. -Move Lot 27,Block 12 to align with the proposed traffic calming along Horsham Street and have it include a 10-foot multi-use pathway as indicated on the path master's plan.Extend the 10-foot multi-use pathway through the east side of Lots 5 and 11,Block 15 to connect the pathway with the pathway in Lot 24,Block 11. -Updated legal descriptions for the R-2,R-4,R-8 zoning districts. - Receive approval from the Meridian Fire Department for secondary access or provide a written letter that you will fire sprinkler the homes in the subdivision. -Revised plat,landscape plan,and open space exhibit. 1. A Development Agreement(DA) is required as a provision of rezone of this property. Prior to approval of the annexation ordinance, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian,the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. A final plat shall not be submitted until the DA and Ordinance is approved by City Council and sewer has been extended to the property. Currently, a fee of$611.47 shall be paid by the Applicant to the Planning Division prior to commencement of the DA. The DA shall be signed by the property owner and returned to the Planning Division within six(6)months of the City Council granting the annexation. The DA shall, at minimum,incorporate the following provisions IF City Council determines annexation is in the best interest of the City: City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 103 a. Future development of this site shall be generally consistent with the preliminary plat, phasing plan,landscape plan,common open space/site amenity exhibit, and conceptual building elevations included in Section VIII and the provisions contained herein. b. Any future development of the site must comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of the development. c. Homes on lots that abut S.Eagle Road, an arterial street,-will be highly visible; therefore, the rear and/or side of structures on these lots (i.e. Lots 7, 9-13, Block 3; Lots 7, 9-11, 13- 16, and 18, Block 4) should incorporate articulation through changes in two or more of the following: modulation(e.g.projections,recesses, step-backs,pop-outs),bays, banding,porches,balconies,material types, or other integrated architectural elements to break up monotonous wall planes and roof lines that are visible from the subject public street. Single-story and existing structures are exempt from this requirement. d. Access to Eagle Road via Vantage Point Lane Shall be restricted to emergency access only unless otherwise approved by City Council. 2. The final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Add a plat note stating"direct lot access to S. Eagle Road is prohibited." b. Revise the phasing plan to incorporate Lot 7,Block 1 with Phase One (1) of the development. c. Graphically depict the five(5)foot wide public utility,drainage, and irrigation easements on the sides of all buildable lots. d. Dimension the width of the landscape buffers/common lots. e. The applicant shall revise the common drive exhibits to show the driveways on the opposite side of the shared property line adjacent to the common drive. f. The multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral shall be revised to stub to the southern property and not stop short of the property line. 3. The landscape plan submitted with the final plat shall include the following revisions: a. Include mitigation calculations on the plan for existing trees that are proposed to be removed in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-1OC.5. The Applicant shall coordinate with the City Arborist(Kyle Yorita kyorita@meridiancity.org)to determine mitigation requirements prior to removal of existing trees from the site. b. The multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral shall be revised to stub to the southern property and not stop short of the property line. c. If the irrigation district does not allow for the applicant to plant vegetation in their easement,the applicant shall revise their plat to allow for an additional five(5)feet outside of the easement for the required vegetation. d. Provide vegetation coverage calculations for landscape buffers along streets to meet the required 70%. Sod and other grasses cannot comprise of more than 65% of the vegetation coverage. 4. The proposed plat and subsequent development are required to comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-5 and 11-2A-6 for the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 104 5. All waterways, except natural waterways,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. 6. Prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat, all wells and sceptic system shall be abandoned. 7. Prior to submittal of the final plat for City Engineer signature, a 14-foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be submitted to the Planning Division, approved by City Council and recorded for the multi-use pathway along the Farr Lateral and any other pathways required by the Park's Department in accord with the Pathways Master Plan that are outside of public right-of-way. Include the recorded instrument number of the easement(s) along with a depiction of the easement(s)on the final plat. 8. Comply with all subdivision design and improvement standards as set forth in UDC 11-6C-3, including but not limited to cul-de-sacs, alleys, driveways, common driveways, easements, blocks, street buffers, and mailbox placement. 9. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table 11-3C-6 for single-family dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit. 10. The preliminary plat approval shall become null and void if the applicant fails to either: 1) obtain the City Engineer's signature on a final plat within two years of the date of the approved findings; or obtain approval of a time extension as set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 11. The final plat shall substantially comply with the approved preliminary plat as set forth in UDC 11-6B-3C. 12. The applicant and/or assigns shall have the continuing obligation to provide irrigation that meets the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3B-6 and to install and maintain all landscaping as set forth in UDC 11-3B-5,UDC 11-3B-13 and UDC 11-3B-14. 13. The Applicant shall comply with all ACHD conditions of approval. 14. The Applicant shall have a maximum of two (2)years to obtain City Engineer's signature on a final plat in accord with UDC 11-6B-7. 15. Staff's failure to cite all relevant UDC requirements does not relieve the applicant from compliance. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 105 B. Meridian Public Works PRE-PLAT CONDITIONS .:,,tewater • Distance to Sewer Sewer not yet available to site.Please see site conditions of Approval Services • Sewer Shed • Estimated Project See application Sewer ERU's • WRRF Declining Balance • Project Consistent Yes with WW Master Plan/Facili Plan • Impacts/concerns • • See Public Works Site Specific Conditions Water • Distance to Water Water Available at Site Services • Pressure Zone • Estimated Project See application Water ERU's • Water Quality None • Project Consistent Yes with Water Master Plan • Impacts/Concerns None•Each phase of the development will need to be modeled to verify minimum fire flow pressure is maintained PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Site Specific Conditions of:Approval I. Sewer not yet available to Site.Sewer to come from the future Reveille Subdivision to the East. Public works will not approve Starling Ridge Subdivision utility plans until Reveille acquires bonds and surety to move forward with Development.or until Sewer becomes available to site by other means. 2. Casings should extend to the boundaries of the Irrigation District Easement. 3. Each phase of the development will need to be modeled to verify minimum fire flow pressure is maintained. 4. Engineer to verify if there is a well onsitc.If a Well is located on the site it must be abandoned per regulatory requirements and proof of abandonment must be provided to the City.Can be used for Pressurized irrigation. City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 106 5 Pro%ide Mr I awooent•fist mAim h%drant Ixcnls anJ waster•cr%tcc•• Fawment•dwaJd ctwnd up to the cad of mats hydrant water txtct anJ I bc%UTA It 6 No permxwnt unncture%itnvt.buslw•%.build soy. saptsttc toath nvcriacle walk knee• mfiltratiaa trenches,light pots-% ete s to be built withn the utility ea.enent I rcc•arc not allowd to the('ter .I atcmcot Gesrral Cosditists%of Appro%sl I Appltcant hall eoordtnvc water and xuer maim stye and rouuny with the Public Norks Wparimmi.and c%rcutc u.xitlanl kstmt of ca•cmem%fin anv maim that are nqutr%d to pros idc seer ice out-,ids;of a public nyhtof-wav \6nmum co%cr m cr aeu cr mama n t►rce feet.if coves from top of pipe to sub.grade i%k-%s than three k%I than shernac materials shall be used in conformance of City of Wood tan Public W orks Departments Standard Specsficaiom 2. Per Ncndtan( t.the applicant+full h rcsltwrhsible to install.ewer anf water mails to and through this&%cloponest Applicant maxi be eligible for a reimbursement altrevncot for tnftastrueture cnhane:mcnt pet WC 94t-5 3. The applicant shall pro%ide easemcmis)for all public water sewer mains cwtsidc of public nghtof wa%tinclufc all waw•r+mists and h%diant%). Iltc cascnicra widtl%%Ul be 2(4txt w idc for a singk uulty,sx 31i feet wide for two The cassntnit*hall ni.t t\Jdieat•A%ia this,plat.but rather tkdi:atcd uubidc the plat ptuccas using this,('in of Wi Jian's+tandard forms, 11sc catumi ni shall la graphically dcprctd sin the plat for mkicricc puihs•cs cuhnti an c%cvuwd ea•ctns,nt ton the forts a%alable f o n Pubic Works1.a Icral"-npirtn mpsrcd by an Idaho l.icrnscd Profasustnal I awl�unc%rst whKh mist iscludc the area of the cascm.•nt irsarkn! EXHIHI I.AI and an x F. s 11'map with bearings and distances it wkd EXHIHI I B►for rc% w Ibth c%hibits mtru be scaled •igncd aid dated Ina{hack%%tc.nal I arid Sunc%or DO NOT RECORD Add a note io the plat rcfercncmg dws document. All easements must be subatstied.rv%scwcd and apptosed prow io dc%cloprsent plan appio.al a. The City of Mcndian requrrs that pressurized rmgatiott systems be supplied b%a vetr-rt trnd sotmce of warn i('UC 11.1B-m The applicant should be required to use any cueing surface or well water for the pnmary source. If a surfacc or wcU sotrce is sot a%ailadc.a singk-pomt eomiccuon to t►c culinary w atcr system%►all be regtsrrd If a usglc-punt cunniecum i%uuhetd the&-%cloper will be responsible for she Mment ofasscsstntats for the cvw.imm areas prior to pnot to rt cn itnr dc%cluprucnt plan appio%al 5 All eusbng mncturrs that we rcyuircd to be icrso%cd shad)be prior so signature on the final plat by dw('it%Engineci Any utuctuics that are allow d so M1matn shall be+ubfoct to"Auxwxt and portAle rcmmgnrnt�i of unvi addns%ing s)I-in cornpltaicc with WC 6. All ungation dsichet canal+.Laterals or drains.excltm%c of nxural watef%tays.interxvims. con sung or Iaymg ad-,xi-no and coniqutus to Ilk area Molt%uhJi%sdtd%lull Ix addn•.td p,i C1X I 1-t A.6 In perf(xmtny such work.the applicant shall csstnpl%with Idaho l'odc 42-IN7 and anv oilier aptilicable law or rvgulaoum 7 Anv wells that will not cononue to be uvd raw be propirriv af%a%dmcd according to Idaho%%'ell Construction%tatdard%Rides admimucrcd Ay the Idaho D.partrncni of N atcr Rc%ourccs i1DWR1.The Dc%ebper.Owncr.or project Erignecr.shall pro%tdc a statement addressing whether there we an%existing-elk in the de%cloprsent.and if so.{sow the%will xmunuc to he used.or pro%idc record of their abandonment.If W ells arc to be aband rocd.the pro)co ouster or thot npescntati%c must contest tic•IDNR(iroundwatet Holtvtiun S ctiors IAaun%kinner. Hydiogeologim 20x-2x7-4a72i BEFORE any work is don;to decommission an existing well ic%cs if it t%bclw%d that the well it fit%thin Is fl dccpl Pioof o(cornmtntcauwt with IDN•R muM be submitted to List,City prior to any won►beinr dos to ds,comtoi>wn the well Failure to eumnunwas,with ID1b•R may a%ult in atfditwiwal work and%;x n%e to d%ionstriamo ri the well City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 107 N Any-timing"ic ii owns widun this ponied shall be it-mi%ed from%n%we per City ordinance section 9-1-0 and 9 4 X. Contact Ccatral Dususct Health for abandonment proeodurcis and ncpar:udrss 12tnt fl7 c.}2 I I 9 Street sngm arc to be in place.tarutan sewer and water t�'stern shall be approscd and acti%atd. road haw approy cd by the Ada County Ikghwas District and At Frail Pis kr this w(dotuon shall be recorded,poor to apphing for budding permits. 11, \Icier of credo or cash wrcty in the amount of I llr.will be required fa all uncompleted fencing.landscaping.arnrntim etc.prior no signatut On the fiwl plat I I All mpnocmcats related to public life.sakty and health shall be complctcd prior to occulpanc-, of the structures Where approsed by the City Engineer,an ouster may post a perforrunce surety for such impros cmenb in order to obtain City Eeginccr ugnaturc on the final plat as set forth to UDC I I•'C.3B 12.Applwant shall be required to pay Public 116ods dcsclopracni plan inicw.and anwwtwa inspection fete.as deicrm.ncd during the plan u' iew plrko%.prior to the icaturwc of a plan approy at letter 13 It shall Isc the iciptnwhility of ti<applicant io eneure that all des cloptricat features comply with the Amerwans with Dicabwliti-s Act and the Fair Haainy Act 14 1pplwant.hall he mpsnuble fir application and tirnphince with any%evion 4414 Kimittmy that may he requnad by the Army Corps of knenccn I s Iki clolscr shall csivo dnalc mantels kwat.ons with if.Mmdtan Post OfrKc Ih Compaction test resuks shall be suhrmtted to the Meridian Building Dkpatmcnt fir all building pads ri vo%ng enysnccnid hac►fill,where fxtuag w vld wt atop till matenal 17 The design engineer shall be regturrd to ccnih that the sircct«merino ckyaisons arc set a mininurn of 3•(cct ahsyc the hiSlicst cstabhshcd peak gnwndwatcr cicsatom This is to crisurc that the bc4wm cloy anon of the craw I spxes of hones ism(cast I•fort abos c. Ix nse applicants design cnirneci shall be responsible for inspection of all imgatwn and or dnu"c facility within this prr+trct that do not fall under the iunsdicam o(an inigmion district or ACHD nr-&-ani n-neitr-xr shall pros.&-certification that the facilities hayc bean nsulkd in acoordancc with the appimcd design plant This ccnificatson will be requdred Iscforc a ccniftcatc of oc-cupascy is tssticd loot any atructuies w ohm the p"ect I V At the completion of the prolcici the applcant.lull tw rc%psnuNe ki submit n\tiled draw mge jie7 tic(tty of hlcndian AuwCAD atandmis Ibcsc icccrd dnw ings must be rcccsscd and appnncd pMr k/11K 1\etiallY Uf a CefllflcaUin OflKitlpanc\'6i/ani NItwlUre\wllin Ihic pn.lc-1 20 A street light plan will need to be included in the civil construction plans Street light plan requirements we Inwd in xctsoit A•e of the Improscncnl Statdanls for street Lighting A copy of the standards can hfinned at bLIP- wwsi tttmdtancil_e%pubfli�•prks�scn td_�7, 21 the Ctly of Mcndias rrgiares that the owner post to the C ity a performance surciv to the amount of I:s (,(the total construction cost for all incompkst uwer.water and reuse infrastructure pia to final ptx sigismurc lhts wrcty will be ien8cd by a line item cost-stoma-pros Wit b% the owner to the Of% The suety can be posted in the form of an irrmocaNc lencr of cmdn.cash deposit or bond Applicant must file an application fa surety,shich can be found on the Commumts l)c%cloprnent Dcpannmi%-bait- Please contact land Ikyelopricnt[-nice for more information at rcx?-__11. 22 The City of WiWian rcguirce that the oyiner post to tie Cin a warranty turcty in the anoint of 2U'.of the twal oanuuctwn cost I'or all cvmpkwd ssrsci.wain and reuse nfratructur-fur duration of two ycan Tlrs surety will he icrifkd in a line item cost cstirnae pros sdcd by the owner to the City The sixty d:ai be pu.tcd in the titan of an nnc%ticablc kttcr of cndit,cash deposit or Ixnd Appkcam must file an application fa suray,shich can tr found cn the l ismmuuty Dkyclopmcnt lhpanmcnt wcbute Please comet land M%clopmcnt son ncc fix rikrc information at ax7•;:I 1 City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 108 C. Meridian Park's Department (:> E IDI� � Isar A�.-I Nrcrranun Revneswr. Kim Warren/Pathways Protect Manager Planner Assigned Sonya Allen Prefect Name:Starting Ridge Sub file No:H 2O2600D3`A7.PP Oro: 3 26 2026 T/w following will be trosnned for drvrlopmenx of the proposed protecl. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL-PATHWAYS I The protect developer shall design and—,,struct muitaVae pathways consistent with the location and specificabons set forth in the Meridian Pathways Master Plan Map and Master Pattways Plan Docurnem Chapter 3). Any proposed adrntnrrts to pathway ailprswist slia8 be coordinated through the Pathways Protect tanager. Sew Interorrrt Porrrways Mop on C,fy Websire 7 Prior to final protect approval the applicant Char dedicate a pubic amen easement for the blip— g multi use pathways: • A 10'wide milts vse pathway along the south(wnt)side of the Fan laseral • A multi-use pathway connection between the Fan lateral Pathway and the neighborhood at the srautheast corn,of the development • A 10'wide mutts-use pathway shall also be constricted wstM the landscape buffer along 5 Eagk Rd for the length of the proposed protect Easernerts shad be a rnownurn of 14'wide(10'pathway•2'shoulder each aside). A8 pathways shall be located outside of ingation dtsdkt easements unless permission is spealically,obtained from the gow i ning irrigation district.Easement need only be dedicated for nhsltt-uw pathways that he outside the pudic ROW Follow A(HD easement rlCuirrnents for detached sidewalks along public roadways Use standard City rempbte tor pubic access rosemrnt Submit ON comments online tnrorgn Cmrrn's Aam fibefd. 3 Commict multi use pathways per prying sMion bned on existing site concMiom as recommended by prefect civil engineer in accord with UDC 11.3A-8 and 11-3912.Prior to final approval the applicant's engineer shalt provide writer docurnntaton(stamped plans depicting reconvnended paving section)that the pathway segment was constructed per ttw recommended specification. 4. The owner lot representative Association)of the property affected by each pudic access easrnerit shag have in ongoing obligation to maintain the mugs use pathway S 6'hgh open iron fnxrhg shall be ontall d between pathways and level water irrigation cysah and laterah as detailed in the Meridian Pathways Master Pas,Chapter 3,page 3-5. AN other fence details per UDC 1I- 3A) 6 Protect developer shall be responsibhr for obtaining kimw agfermert and other permissions)in rephred for constructrig within irrigation disVKt easements. 7 Should any discrepancy exist between these conditions of approval and the repurements of the irrigation district,the developer Mail wort with Pathways Protect Manger to achieve a pathway design that meets both City and irrigation district oblecores City requreryientS as stated slsall not(nor are they intended tot override those of the rftgation district having pwtsdicton over the protect area R..w i6 aG City of Meridian Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 1 09 D. Irrigation Districts 1. Boise Project Board of Control !n=?YM B ist. PRWF:CT BOARD OF COXTROL ....Ana.or..cn n14.lAr�ATrr11an11 ..• ..v�un.�..�r. 1'OMalr Or V a NOlairAnO.i.alerl qqr a rJlnr01 J�OYMO aar0 woad r.r.rwu O[a.sorsigi ww.reior.Os-wtT ata.rw..yr.x r triorrAa AnrwA.aa .Aaw w.wc• Ar..w ro'u_•�.wr. rrA.ar�wnlr w rir woad* AeaYe aAaiara >eacr.w.M- stern►are ceiAna ni Ora M►r w. .►erns►!V[•,A.. ua our ni.An 01 April 2026 City Clerk's oflicc RECEIVE[) 33 F.Bnnxhsay Asentir Meridian 11).83642 AM 03 2026 CITYOFOW-iie sir RL:Starling Ridgc Sub.Avila 1•.aglc!hove.LLC AZ.PP.H-202ti~ON9 02TYCLERKS OFFICE Lal.e Ilarcl tend liaglr Rd.Meridian New York Irrigation District NY-156401-00 Farr lateral 32.60.71.30 Sec.04.T.N.R I F BM. Sonya Allen. Plactater: The l lnucd%utcs Fier Lawral lies within the Nnindary of The atriivc•nxntianed hwation The crowrw it for this canal and lateral is held in the name of the United Stases through the Bureau of Rect.inuuon under the authority of the Act of August 30.1890. (26 Stat.391;43 U.S.C.915)if appro-ovd. I he 114me Mill ILurd,.f l'rraml as contracYaA to opu4a4 and inninuin thin cam[ We awort this 1 ederal ca.ement of i0 feet Noth dimixtn.of the For l.aaecal omtahne. Whcrra din arcs is 4x the operation gird mainrerimm of air taddit),rui actis it)should liindrit err ahtlit)ter d4i ut. If the original landscape I.planned di Ise t%cavaled more than 10 feet(20%air 11 t degrees) within ttl feet of the drone quoted federal tavemcnr. Bois Project will require that the eanaVlateral to be pipecllcoacrNe lined bs the land.rencr or dene4grcr to include all required hoe structure,and dcliserii•%within the project Imandarics. Piped canahAalcrals could get a reduced ca.ctncnt if agreed upon M Boive Project and the landowncr,develaper. The Boise 1'ro w does not appmvr I3nd%*r4(gravel onl))within its cawnsenus.as this will certunls increase the cost of mainlcnrnce. the casrnirnt must rvitwn a flat drivable surface All public nsadways trust be otxvidc of this raicincnt. I asenw'nl mull remain n flat driid le surface No variarices will be granted. Fencing.gates,pathway s and pressurized irrigation lines(as may be required)must be constructed just of Ilhe lateral casement•to enuur public vnlety and prevent cmroochrnetxs. No varunoes will tic granted. The conuructiori of any roadway cnxsings must use conducted only during the non-irrigation season whim the lateral is dcwittend. In any caw no work shell tale place within the eascnsent City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions 1 10 E. Kuna School District (rccn a.. Kuna School District Empowering students to lead productive Yves Mile 41126 RI %tarlmir Ridge%uhilti,m m Ikaf(tmrni—mcn and(it)(uun.d Mc'dnm Kuru%c"Dwrici hA+res Ie1.e1I the AppINA11 n for Starling Ridge and pro.Idc%the folk1 mg cornnicnt%for y.mu (tm.deratwn Kuru%K-K.il I)-oml ha.c.perunccd rapid xrx-ih mci the lay ten)ear.Out'Itan'h:0:t Kid rnca.urc ui imTca.c .tudcnt capacim did arm pass.Nc are currently ar or near dntnct capacity In many of our whook and tho.e pnlial.tntrn ..III-Ml1r rc 10 gniw giscn the current appro%ads the(it)of Kula.City of Wndian.and Counn agirmict hJ.c panted To he abk it,.mi:then dc.cloprwrit.the Kuna Sc-N 4 I)iun:t&card of Tru.tcc.rryuc.tt that dcscl.W.ii-im the uxpayem to mrtigatc thc.,wd of grcw.th through pane r.hip which can K in the form of a dtmution of land.rnoicy.or m-kted facilm)work l hti,dcsclipincnt w ill lfkf.•J.0 the pufutarrm Of S11WI I tall I krll.mtar).F icn►nt Middle.and KIdS\hllti Ihgh S.'drx/1s nea0n Pont 494 421 t10Yd 299 282 7211 ian Cfeeh 322 281 hX 676 640 270 270 Tree 676 611 fw5 473 493 8 100 83 0311 766 701 120 120 100% s a SFHS 16Ia 17i8 lax otar by group SW7 $727 The N19(it)of Kwu(trnprchcriu,c flan,appro.cd h)the City(wrwd,pv.wfc.,at to relate.to whoob:'School facilltin Mill cmwnd.as rmrdcd.to loop pwc umh Kuna't growing population'In order to expand.the Kira School Ditamt rcyurr,y paitact.h.pi w Ali dc.ckgvt+andk term inipurlaall).hwd. To rcducc yr rclwrwc on tknd,and ri pnrrrmc rca.tnahk growth Mithin our dmtrict.Mc gm-rally.cck panncnhip%with rc.dcnital dctek>f+er. I'anncr.hrpi,with kscl.gs r.mitigate the imp it harric.Mill Iusc to the Kura 1clr.ol I)i.tn.t and our ability to&b-,vr scr%wes without comprtnmmng the gealit)of scnicc dedncry to currm reudcan or unpoung Sstparierw.dw� AOaam 11brR1/ ColrvmneaNlorr Qrarb 711 E Poo to Ad. Kuna.kW*8" Phone (206)922.1000 City of Meridian I Department Report IV. City/Agency Comments & Conditions ■ F. Ada County Highway District(ACHD) ACHD ��.A� Nals Wkwvq,V"Pr•i/ OM I+,•M CommWon•r / Da.o raiarr"Commuuor.•r / Pxr"NN•or%Ca--W rw Date:March 18.2026 To Ben Semple.Rodney Evans and Partners,PLLC Staff Contact:Sam Standal-Ass.stant Traffic Engineer Project Description Staring Ridge TrlpGeneration This development is estimated to generate 1.968vehicle trips per day. 191 vehicle trip per hour in the PM peak hour,bated on the Institute of Transportat ion Engineers Trip Generation Manual.17"edition Meets Area Roadway Level of service Proposed Development Traffic Impact Study Planned Improvements Yes NO Livable Street Performance Measures Area roads will rT*et AC I AC the future with planned _. Yes X Is Transit Available? NO Comments connecting you to more b•CGu WV Hsgt l y OM Ci-StMO N rw••rvr A—-Sdfl.ID.•sn)-PH X0-7f74100-f%t4l-74&SO•M .K.'CIO.IO W q 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; Staff finds annexation of the subject property with the recommended changes to the R-2, R-4, and R-8 zoning districts is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan FLUM designations of LDR for this site and the goals and policies in the Plan listed above in Section III.B. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 112 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Staff finds the proposed map amendment to the R-2, R-4, and R-8 districts comply with the purpose statement for the residential districts in that it contributes to the range of housing opportunities consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The staff recommended changes to lower density and meet the intent of the comprehensive plan for larger estate style lots. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Staff finds that the map amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare with compliance of the conditions in section IV. 4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school districts; and Staff finds the proposed map amendment will not result in adverse impacts if the applicant complies with the conditions in section IV as required. 5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city. Staff finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the property develops in accord with the provisions in Section IV as required. B. Preliminary Plat(UDC-6B-6) In consideration of a preliminary plat,combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat,the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with this unified development code; Staff finds the uses and residential density proposed with the preliminary plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and should generally conform with the UDC if the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Section IV. 2. Public services are available or can be made available ad are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services are available or will be made available for the subject development. 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the city's capital improvement program; Staff finds the plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in a accord with the city's capital improvement program. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff finds there is financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development with the conditions listed in Section IV. 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Staff finds the subject development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. There are no significant natural, scenic, or historical features. City of Meridian I Department Report V. Findings 113 VI. ACTION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Annexation and Preliminary Plat with the conditions of approval listed in Section IV. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on [date]. At the public hearing the Commission moved to approve the subject request. 1. Summary of the Commission public hearing: a. In favor: b. In opposition: None C. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission: a. None 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None C. City Council: The Meridian City Council heard these items on [date].At the public hearing, the Council moved to approve the subject [=] and [app]requests. 1. Summary of the City Council public hearing: a. In favor. b. In opposition: None C. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application. f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s)of public testimony: a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by City Council: a. None 4. City Council change(s)to Commission recommendation: a. None City of Meridian I Department Report VI. Action ■ VII. EXHIBITS A. Project Area Maps 1. Aerial Legend Project Location k ` • -• of • • Analysis A City of y, MeridianDepartment Report / 2. Zoning Map Legend M ffMMmM R-8M Project Location IM R4 Area of Impact oAnalysis R-2 - I-RUT RSW e IR 1 RR M1 3. Future Land Use Legend ® ffMiM Project Location ® 0 r_ ® II ■_ Area of Impact ['�� .,�..- Me,d_=High ® Analysis Density Residential CIVIC J ®� Medium D-KsltylR'esidential Low Density Residential � s . City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 116 4. Planned Development Map Legend Project Location 'T=" City Limits �® Planned Parcels Area of Impact ® Analysis Er I� s . City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits ■ B. Service Accessibility Tool (Existing Conditions) Overall Score: 7 12nd Percentile Criteria Description Location Within 1/2 mile of City Limits Extension Sewer Trunkshed mains 500-2,000 ft. from parcel Floodplain Either not within the 100 yr floodplain or > 2 acres Emergency Services Fire Response time > 9 min. Emergency Services Police Reporting District meets response time goals some of Pathways Within 1/4 mile of future pathways Transit Not within 1/4 of current or future transit route Arterial Road Buildout Status Ultimate configuration (# of lanes in master streets plan) School Walking Proximity From 1/2 to 1 mile walking School Drivability Not within 2 miles driving of existing or future school Park Walkability Either a Regional Park within 1 mile OR a Community City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 118 C. Subject Site Photos AL City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 1-9 1 D. Phasing Plan(date: 5/12/2026) e �r ESTIMATED PHASING SHO'AN-MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON MARKET CONDITIONS. Phasing Map 0 400 800 FEET City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F120] E. Landscape Plan(date: 3/10/2026) t3 _ 'e I I; III • o i; CO OVERALL PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PAN _✓ —r L1.00 ,•wsucc:taw uuanwm� O O ® — _F\- — •.e �_ Q.. .� .. E.VANTAGEOI I i Q I A O be H __J m .. ...... _.._.._� / • __-_-____ •�;: 2 —R N —V R PLANTING _ _...a .. 0 - - o I .`: yHR B PLANTING 1. _ __ __ _ _ __ _ ._ - .. __ .. ..�.•+�. IRPRELIMINARV LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA ONE City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 121 Ao\ fe /T&N fe A-ON AO /0--> ft r�0 f ON, NO A 0 ON .4-1 NO -- ----------- ----------- J. SE RED, CAP 46 ------------ -------—------ ----------------- L---------------- ---------------I IN I I -A --------------z.;..l PRELMINAR ----------------- --------- Y LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA TWO --------------- -------------------- IIATNEIVAN I.Srm 11..1 PARCEL Rr70710M 3w C VArtALf POINTE LIN AjST)N&VALME MOSS PARCEL RNW10190 V 3689 E VANTAGE POINTE IN AET 'PRELIMINARY PLAN-AFtEATHFIEE City of Meridian Department Report V11. Exhibits 122] uuo■cv■uaw c+unlrw�.s.0.-= Is . • — EYN O&% IN 0 3 __--___ _____ AET —1 - - ------- -- ---Mpg w, -------- -- ' T PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA FOUR "y - L1.O4 ------------- .wav Imo uuanNws�CJ)= r.______---------------- __________ V a r a , i \\________________$1 , , ---------------- a a Cq , o_ --------------' — --- -- — • a a - - ml a a a . •r � � 1 • W X N VA �+ ■ I ._____________ ____ i ' II , r , ------------- --- , , LIMINARV LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA FIVE , } City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits F123] = ---- ----------- !Jill \ ` /f `` •. 1 i1 •`/// `,• `� 19 i ,`• \� i, `�� ,\ PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA SIX I MIT-- nons.(9— ®--- 8 e� yy�3 ------- ------i �..\ ::;; :;: .'mom... TPRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA SEVEN City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits F124] -------------- r---------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- ------------- • 0I,rl ,00 0 IaQ 0, • ---------------I... ------------- --------- + J ------------- ----------------- I ------------ ---------- --------------- ---------------- a ---------------J- ------'M------ --------------- ------------- ---------------I --------------- L -------------L ------------------ --------------- ------- ------ ______---------- Nil --------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- ------------- H AM rr rr rr rr PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA EIGHT ---------- ----- ---------j- ----------------- ----------------- ------------- -------------------- ------------ -- 11:0 3: L--------------- --------------- a_.o o a 0 a 0 - --------------- --------------- -------------- -- ------------- ---------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- --------_________ ------------ I----------------r L------------------ ---- --- r -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- IM - --- ------- --------------- --------------- �'i, ----------------r L ------------- tr t t • --------------- ---------------- ---------------j -------------- ---------------- ------------- --------------- -------------- ----------------- ------------- ............11" ------ AI.ELIK.1 LANDSCME PLAN-AREA NINE .......... City of Meridian I Department Report V11. Exhibits 125] -------------- r ------- ----- A V ------------- L------------ L------------ ----------- ------------ ------------------------- -----2----------- II II II ----------I L ----------- ----+---- ---------------------------- .1---- ------------ W. 0 ------ ------------------ ------------ ---------- --------- ------------- ------------ ------------- L----------- ---------------- A%PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREA TEN ---------- ♦ N" T CARRIM LAURA ROOM PANEL R897D710130 3M E MIAM PM%IN ........... .......... !46 TP 10:1 % �"LIMINAIRY LANDSCAPE PLAN-AREAELEWN City of Meridian I Department Report V11. Exhibits 126] TP.-w. ,. .... 1 AQouo MM E PuwnNc�_ W_ •2 CONIFEROUS TRff PLANTING --•-•--•• City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 27 F. Common Drive Exhibits EWAY LOTS 6-3+7-3 Camwn DrNaMay Accer Lepttd I COMMON CRY - '�COMMON pNEWAY 1OT812-3+13-0 ' OVERALL PLAN __•_...�•_ u-T_ all- 77 , I COMMON OgVC-WAY LOTS 8J+7J !LN COMMON DgYEWAY LOTS 16-4+19-4 7 COMMON OgYEWAY LOTS b@+8-12 COMMON DRIVEWAY L078 2242+2342 �--f- DWA i l G. Qualified Open Space Exhibit(date: 2/11/2026) LANDSCAPE LEGEND CITY OF MERIDIAN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS a ®oPENaP.cE COMMON OPEN SPACE Toro srtE—zLu.]s.sr.w u to ss Rt]t 21 ACRFS Rt YLtCREs RFOWED OPFM SPttF PFRCFNTtGf .lh PNOv-61Q SF lPttF OENCENf.Cf QUALIFIED OPEN SPACE - '� auus,ED arEu aPACE - tams 1 xl mNsr. a+f 1lTP LF C is C i♦TI:AEt99F SITE AMENITIES FERatcREs t _ wno�am tcw.cs,. N=DDcroTSTATIDNs-Da"PERST-- p)DurtnowrlREgN6-IPT POI BLSFFG.)Pr tl _ tl gAYCAGM.l PTS PEN „ - tl YONISCWNIL.UW.VFD.]PiL.PEN tD(YF LOUlIS-]PTL n n ri `ri - s,LYQE RF➢/JI6TtipN.,PT PER lTtftlN,PT _. .. L; PEDESTRWN OR BRI'CYF CF1g1ATgN lvlTEN ri ri ri � W14NNN:NEDWT,A WtIF:iWtY P1DNTT,ar CJ�Nal1,PF ,! 4i ,! -- W,EN 41DNED WIIN],ITEM DPFN 6PtCE IPtaF061-,PI. ,: n _ n p ' t! 1 tl 41RTILSF PATNNWv,LDUTN Or GV4L)]PTT e n r. ,! -• r OVERALL OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT STARLIN RIDGE SUBDIVISION 7 S.EAGLE ROAD.MERIDIAN,ID 83642 I' City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 28 H. Preliminary Plat(date: 3/5/2026) PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR STARLING RIOOE SUBOIVI.SION _ {ITYAT{O IN N)OR TN{{W 4 OI...TION {OI{{M{NIOIAN.AOA OOYNTV.IOANO -- - '•""'O o■s Note k. fs�r Ij Et "6 _. _ _ Vick*M �.. 71 1 _ �� ,Common DrNw{y Aoosee �PeroaY kldlOsE Contacts_-- -. r' Keyed Notes FW Legend 41 ` - t • • tl z l� ., cart ■ �� • — aw v M d{e LOCO ev" 77/41 Loetl 9—-E V.nI.O.Ponce a. Q nlye M Me{e0 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 129 I. Building Elevations (date: 5/12/2026) Starling Ridge-City of Meridian Example Elevations-2 and 3 car Garages ■ 1. r T", r 71 kill 't City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits F130] Starling Ridge-City of Meridian Example Elevations-2 and 3 car Garages in City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits 131 Starling Ridge-City of Meridian Example Elevations-2 and 3 car Garages City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 32 1 'f 11 DepartmentCity of Meridian po Starling Ridge-City of Meridian Example Elevations-2 and 3 car Garages c. 0 . Mud rr' _ 1 City of Meridian Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 34 J. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map Legal Description Starling Ridge Subdivision —R-8 and R4 Rezone Parcels being in the N'/,of the SW Y.of Section 4 Township 2 North.Range 1 East Dose Meridian. Ada County Idaho.and more particularly described as follows R•8 Zone Beginning at an Aluminum Cap monument marking the northwesi corne•cf said N%of the SW/.of Section 4 from which an Aluminum Cap monument marking the southwest corner of said SW/bears S O'12'45'W a distance of 2653.35 feet. Thence S 89'48'13'E a distance of 30 00 feel to the northwest cofnef of Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivision as shown in Book 80 of Plats on Pages 8575 through 8576.records of Ada County. Idaho. Thence along the northerly boundary of said I of 2 r Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivision tr4! follovnng described courses Thence S 89'48 13'E a distance of 1199.54 feet to a Y:diameter rebar with cap#4998 be rig the northeast corner of said-ot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivision Thence along the easterly boundary of said Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivrson the`ollarrn� described courses Thence S 0'11'4T W a distance of 11368 feet to a pant of extension from sad easterly boundary Thence S 45`17'24'W a distance of 222 09 feet:o a point Thence S 44'42'36'E a distance of 178.87 feet to a point. Thence S 45'17'24'W a distance of 30 54 feet to a point Thenoe S 0'12 45'YV a distance of 904.29 feel to a point along the southerly boundary of sa,d Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Suodiviwn. Theno N 89'59'02'W a distance of 1177 00 feet to a 5/8'diameter rebar wdh cap*4998 being the southwest corner of said N h of the SW'/.of Section 4 IS 1116 corner). Thence N 0'12 45'E a distance of 1326 71 feet:o the POINT OF BEGINNING This parcel contains 35.72 acres and is subject to any easements existiN of in use R-42o Commencing at a-)Aluminum Cap monument marking the northwest comer of said N'/,of the SW '/.of Sect,on 4 from vonich an Alvninum Cap monument marking the southwest corner of said SWI. bears S 0'12'45'W a distance of 2553 35'ce: indSolutions Sonr9 Raq�suDOrnJob _ 2149 No oseIaI City of Meridian I Department Report V1I. Exhibits F135] I herce S 89'48 13'E a distance of 1229 54 feel to a Y:'diameter rebar with cap 94998 being the nc-treast comer of Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivrson as shown in Book 80 of Pests on Pages 8575 through 8576.records of Ada County.Idaho, Therce along the easterly boundary cf said Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Suhd vision S 0'1 1 47'W a distanoe of 56 29 feet to I-A' d ar e+ter rebar with cap 04998 being the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence continuing along the easterly bounca y o1 said Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subd.vision the fc lowing described courses Ihence a distance of 100 61 feet along the arc of a 100 00 foot radius curve fight Sad curve njv'ng a central angle of 57.38'43'and a long chord gearing S 60'S8'S2'F a distance of 96 42 feet to a 518'diameter rebar with cap*4998 brng a point of tangency: Thence S 32'09'30'E a distance of 68 90 feet to a 5W diamete•rebar%ith cap 94998 being a point of curvature. Thence a a stance of 171.03 feet along the arc of a 170.0 foot radius curve left.said cu ve rtav rg a uentral anglu of 57'38'38' and a long chord bearing S 60'58 52' E a distance of 163.91 keel to a 5M'diameter rebar vnth cap fr4998 being a pant of tangency Thence.S 89'48'13'F a distance of 15 00 feet to a point Thence S 0'12'52-W a distance of 52 33 feet to a point. Thence S 27'41'49'E a distance of 172 02 feet to a 5l8'diameter rebar with cap 94998 Thence S 56'09'30'E a distance of 23 85 feet to a"'diameter teow vnth cap rr499h 1 hence N 81'50 30`E a distance of 135 14 feet to a 112 diameter rebar with cap$4998: Thence N 89'55 06'E a distance of 206 00 feet to a 172'diameter rebar with cap 27612: Trence N 88'31 55"E a distance of 183 25 feet to a 112 a ameter rebar with cap 1117612, Thence S 37'29'07'E a distance of 81 09 feet to a 1!2'diameter rebar w,th an illegible cap. 1 hence S 0'37'03'W a distance of 160 02 feet to a point. Thence S 17'36'23'W a distance of 133 25 feet to a point. Thence S 62'28'31'E a distance of 273 2' !eel to a pant of curvature: Thence a distance of 26 76 feet along the arc of a 20.00 foot radius curve right saia curve having a central angle of 76'3927' ana a long chord bearing S 38'5647'W a distance of 24 81 feet to a point of reverse curvature. Thence a distance of 131 50 feet along the arc of a 45 00 foot radius curve left.said curve having a central angle of 167'26 04 and a long choro bearing S 6'26'31'E a d stance of 89.46 feet to a 117 d!arreter rebar with an illegible cap. Thence S 0'09'30'E a distance of 68 61 feel to a point Le'1ndSolutions Su rrq 0.0pe SjbdwnXt Rcc-49 Pape 2 cr] City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits 136 Then:*S 42'09'30'E a distance of 16 09 feet to a point. Therce S 76'09'38'E a distance of 238.87 feet to a point Thence S 0'37'03'W a distance of 150.97 feet:o a point being the southeast comer of said Lc:2 n Block 1. Thence along:he southerly boundary of said Lot 2 in Block 1 of Vantage Pointe Subdivision N 89'59'02"W a distance of 1446 32 feet to a point. Thence N 0'12'45'E a distance of 904 29 feet to a point Thence N 45'17'24'E a distarce of 30 54 feet to a port Thence N 44'42'36'W a distance of 178 87 feet to a point Thence N 45'17'24'E a drstarce of 222 09 feet to a po nt Thence N 0*11'4r E a distance of 57.39 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING This parcel contains 25.62 aces and is subject to any easements existing Cr in use Clinton W Hanson.PLS Ht,L LA,j� Land Solutions.PC �O S REVISED March 10,2026 vt,rf F G94 P M a 11118 z N to F ,0T 5o ylOnr W. N�� l c7n d$OlutlOnS SWIM ROWS LCC.+sor-ne:YL` rrj.;-01 City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits F137] STARLING RIDGE SUBDIVISION - RE-ZONE EXHIBIT PORTIONS OF THE N1/2 OF THE SW1/4 OF SECTION 4, T2N R1E• BM, ADA cPhf NST to t?' " COUNTY, IDAHO 2019-09 022 5 a E. UU(E HAZEL ROAD t2vE TABLE OJRK TABLE uNE LENGTH OWINGOAVE LENGTH RAOUS DELTA BEAF04 OICRD POINT OF Cl 10061' 100.00' 5738'43- S60'S6'52'E 9642' OOMMWEMENT LI 5629' S011'47b R-4 ZONING^ R C2 171 03' 1MCC' 57*3836' S60.38'52'E 16191' POINT OF BEGINNING ��' S32T39'30 u +s.oa' se9'4e'+3'E'E < C3 2676' 2007 76'39'2r S38S6'47Y 2481' = � R-8 ZONING I C4 131 SO 4&00 11I M'04- S11-All e9 46' E4 s233 so 12 s2'w cp46 NST - POINT OF BEGINNING NO 111OW775 4 S89'487WE 12291/4 b .54 `� _ R-4 ZONING 1/4 SECTION LIE E VANTAGE POINT I.N. (PRIVATE) VAMTAM PONTE 9.60wSKM `PROWL ROAD 9 a ea PUS e5»-M 730'RoEASIDWEXT: (2.11 AC.) 57E. VANTAGE POINT LN _ (0.91 AC) ^ PARED.11197071CM d 1 '��,`� 1. 18 1.9 N 0 S.EAU ROAD �� (► CLOT 2.eU 1 VANTAGE POND _ P aP „ ` N 0 S EASE t10A0 •,•�• : (LOT 2.aX I VANTAGE PONIL) ARt—35. 22 Ad1ES G r, AREA-25.62 AMS ! 114yyI Z ?eBEl 60'FARR LATERAL p, . titL ROI70)Wlt`- cr(Aaf AM EASE]VENT PER VANTAGE { PONTE 9"%fSON RAT !/ +11g ti o 4h PGIVT) 1177.00' = 1446.32' N89'59.02'W N89'S9'02"W Q No 9?M3 +/1 SECTION UNE Sw 1116/ W" UI[Ml ESTA1rS CPRF 1%,T Su1DM9ON Sum.T90N 3M SADNTSDN NO, '0001'oJ] S 1/16 +A"COJASA OWFTS 9./014" eA 54 KS BK'19•PLS ��KS S56S- CS tiff + 9N 5&PCs 5613-5614 5655- 5%6 y4}4_1" SSS6 a �wAN$PI EIM LINE 'ABLE LIE TAB:[ Ig EASNt PER �+� E�VANTAGE POIN'E LINE LENGTH BEARING IIIE LENGTH BEAFINO bl 91 nON AND PARR COLUMBIA BLUFFS 88 E9 18J 25' N71'S5'E US 1609 S4It7➢'301 i SJBD+nON PLATS 1.10 ST.09' S37.29'07'E u6 23ae7* S76ro9'3W`E s 4 e 9 E COLIMA ROAD u+ 16002' S0'3r03-R L17 30.54' 4&5-1724'E 0 CPAf IVST.NO E12 133,25' S'T3623'w 118 17887 N44-42-36-8 201 8-0551 6 9 U} 27},2t' S62Ze'3''E L19 222.C9' va51724 E LINE TABLE Eta 6e61' SOb9'30C E20 1136N NO11'4rE LINE IENOTN I BEAPoNG L5 172-02' S27.41.49*E 0*OIL LAND A 23 es s56v9.3Dt Q �f�!o 9� , 0106"r 55,061 0 LAndsolutions l8 206 00' Ne9 W36'06t a �1 � 1 1�C a 0' 250' 500' 1000, n� ,r C' 23, ST of 9ft A.nd coF6.Erel>g N W.NP o04.746r.4e ilOP,7M34C%. n�MoimaN n a City of Meridian I Department Report VII. Exhibits Fl 38 VIII. ADDITIONAL NOTES & DETAILS FOR STAFF REPORT MAPS,TABLES,AND CHARTS (link to Community Metrics) A. One-Mile Radius Existing Condition Notes This data is automatically derived from enterprise application and GIS databases, and exported dynamically. Date retrieved notes generally reflect data acquired or processed within the last 30- days.Analysis is based on a one-mile radius from the centroid of the identified parcel.Parcel based data excludes certain properties and represents land as it exists now. Properties considered are only those with a total assessed value greater than 0(i.e. excludes most HOA area,transitional development, government, and quasi government facilities). The following values also constrain included property acreage to reduce outliers and non-conforming instances from distorting averages: R-2 < 5.0; R-4 < 2.0; R-8 < 1.0; R-15 < 0.5; R-40 < 0.25. Conditional Use Permits and Preliminary plat data likely include duplicate project submittals as they may be for the same project, approved at different times through multiple application types. Consider each independently or review prior application approvals. Some approved entitlements, and particularly older ones,may be constructed. Decennial population counts and household counts are based on the most recent Decennial Census. Current population and current household values are COMPASS estimates,usually for the year previous, and are based on traffic analysis zone boundaries (TAZ's). B. Service Assessment Notes This data represents existing conditions derived from our enterprise application and GIS database, exported through dynamic reporting. The system references the most recent available data from various sources,including sewer main lines, sewer trunk sheds,floodplain,fire service areas and response times,police crime reporting,pathway information,existing and planned transit, roadway improvements, school and park proximity, and other resources. The tool provides context for project review,using multiple indicators consistently. Data from similar topics may vary based on different levels of review. The overall score is based on weighted criteria(not a ranked order), and the percentile score compares the parcel to others in the city(higher is better). This tool was developed as a City Council priority and outcome of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Scores,whether high or low, are just one data point and should not be the sole basis for decisions. C. ACHD Roadway Infographic Notes The Ada County Highway District utilizes a number of planning and analysis tools to understand existing and future roadway conditions. • Existing Level of service(LOS).LOS indicator is a common metric to consider a driver's experience with a letter ranking from A to F.Letter A represents free flow conditions, and on the other end Level F represents forced flow with stop and go conditions. These conditions usually represent peak hour driver experience. ACHD considers Level D, stable flow,to be acceptable. The LOS does not represent conditions for bikes or pedestrians, nor indicate whether improvements: are possible; if there are acceptable tradeoffs; or if there is a reasonable cost-benefit. • Integrated Five Year Work Plan(IFYWP).The IFYWP marker(yes/no) indicates whether the specified roadway is listed in the next 5-years. This work may vary,from concept design to construction. • Capital Improvement Plan(CIP).The CIP marker(yes/no)indicates whether the specified roadway is programmed for improvement in the next 20-years. City of Meridian I Department Report VIIl. Additional Notes &Details for Staff Report Maps,Tables, and Charts 139 Development Application Transmittal Link to Project Application: Starling Ridge Subdivision AZ, PP H-2026- 0009 Hearin Date: May 28, 2026 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: 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 request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. 140